• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Wow, UK has lost freedom of speech

sphenisc said:
Met Police and investigation of non-crime hate incidents

www.bbc.com

Met Police says it will no longer investigate non-crime hate incidents

The move comes as an investigation into Father Ted creator Graham Linehan is dropped, after his arrest over a post on X.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
Click to expand...
And about time

The Metropolitan Police says it will no longer investigate non-crime hate incidents to allow officers to "focus on matters that meet the threshold for criminal investigations".​
​
The announcement came as the Met confirmed it was dropping a probe into Father Ted creator Graham Linehan after he was arrested at Heathrow Airport on suspicion of inciting violence in posts on X.​

So they will again start policing streets instead of Tweets.

"This decision means that no charges will be brought against Graham Linehan in relation to this allegation," a detective wrote in an email to the comic on Monday.​

Mr Linehan was arrested by five officers on 1 September after arriving on a flight from the US, sparking a backlash from some public figures and politicians.​

Mr Linehan and the Free Speech Union (FSU), an advocacy group, vowed to sue the Metropolitan Police for wrongful arrest and interference with his free speech rights.​

Never should have arrested him in the first place. I hope the do ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊-well sue the bastards. Seriously, in this age of the speech and thought police, anyone who comments publicly online and is not a member of the FSU is mad.

This is great win for free speech in the UK. The public are beginning to find their voice, and realizing the power of the vote is indeed a strong one - when they use that power to put pressure on the little tin-pot Napoleons who call themselves politicians, they fold - their authoritarian bent evaporates. Sure, it was the Met Police that announced this, but we can be pretty sure this came from the top.... from the most unpopular prime minister in the history of Britain. The ultra conservative Reform party are surging in the polls - and Starmer is running scared.

ETA: The next thing they need to do is expunge all data recorded in non-crime hate incidents from the public record. If you are arrested or investigated and not charged, or charged but found not guilty, or if you ever had a non-crime hate incident recorded against you, only the police should be entitled to see that information. No member of the public should ever be able to access that information. A DBS check on any individual should only ever find actual convictions.
 
Last edited:
www.theguardian.com

Proposed UK Islamophobia definition allows for right to criticise religion, source says

Source says working group stuck to requirement that definition must not interfere with freedom of speech
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
A source said: “This is a non-statutory definition and anybody who bothers to look at the terms of reference will that see that it is explicitly made clear that it must not interfere with freedom of expression and that it must not be a blasphemy law through the back door.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
And I'm sure that if the 'protesters' would stand at abortion clinics kindly offering women to adopt the babies the women themselves, for whatever reason, do not want while offering to ensure they will be able to keep an income during their pregnancy and paying all medical costs associated with that they'd be welcome.

And perhaps they could also spend a large amount of their time campaigning for mandatory sex ed in all schools (including homeschooling) and free access to contraceptives.
But somehow their behavior thus far has been so appalling that the exclusion zones were needed, so they can still express their freedom of speech, just not close enough to harass those wanting to use a legal service.
 
smartcooky said:
Rare... less than 5% of unplanned pregnancies... but still a significant number. By far the greatest number of unplanned pregnancies some from failure to take contraceptive precautions.
Click to expand...
And? There are multiple reasons for abortions and for most women or girls having them, they would be traumatic.
 
jimbob said:
And? There are multiple reasons for abortions and for most women or girls having them, they would be traumatic.
Click to expand...
The hormonal changes during pregnancy alone often make women far more vulnerable than they would normally be. For some, it's a tragedy, which they nevertheless have to face. To also have to face an antagonistic crowd could very easily be traumatising.

And as for abortions of "convenience", how can you tell? How can you tell if a woman is about to abort a longed-for child, due to medical reasons? How can you tell if a woman has been raped, and is about to abort the result of that rape?

I wonder why this is even a topic for discussion, still.
 
Last edited:
Helen said:
The hormonal changes during pregnancy alone often make women far more vulnerable than they would normally be. For some, it's a tragedy, which they nevertheless have to face. To also have to face an antagonistic crowd could very easily be traumatising.

And as for abortions of "convenience", how can you tell? How can you tell if a woman is about to abort a longed-for child, due to medical reasons? How can you tell if a woman has been raped, and is about to abort the result of that rape?

I wonder why this is even a topic for discussion, still.
Click to expand...
The obvious answer is that any woman going to a healthcare facility (protestors over here protest at hospitals that are general hospitals that offer abortion advice and terminations along with everything else) need to wear a badge stating that they are attending for advice on an abortion and/or for a termination that states why they are seeking such advice, this will mean that protestors can target the correct class of evil child killers they are concerned with harrassing The badge scheme could also be extended to employers at healthcare facilities so protestors again can target the right evil child killing employees, also people who just happen to work in that area and have to pass the entrance to a healthcare facility can wear badges so they won't be inadvertently targeted by protestors, and people who reside near such a place can also wear a "nothing to do with me badge" even though they choose to live nearby to such evil baby killing facilities so they really are asking for it.

Or perhaps we could just set up a zone in which you aren't allowed to protest either in support of or against abortions at certain times but are allowed to protest as much as you want against abortions or indeed for abortions anywhere else in the country, on the internet, in print, on TV and so on.

I really can't make my mind up which is the better proportionate solution...
 
Last edited:
jimbob said:
And? There are multiple reasons for abortions and for most women or girls having them, they would be traumatic.
Click to expand...
I am 100% pro women's choice in all things - that includes abortion on demand (and yes, that extends to women having the right to spaces safe from, and excluding ANY and ALL men).

What I object to is bull-◊◊◊◊ arguments, and @arthwollipot's whataboutism as regards pregnancy via rape is a bull-◊◊◊◊ argument. There is only one valid argument for abortion - and that argument is women should have 100% autonomy over their own bodies... it is exclusively their right to decide whether or not to terminate a pregnancy. End of!
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
I am 100% pro women's choice in all things - that includes abortion on demand (and yes, that extends to women having the right to spaces safe from, and excluding ANY and ALL men).
Click to expand...
I see your transphobic dogwhistle there.

smartcooky said:
What I object to is bull-◊◊◊◊ arguments, and @arthwollipot's whataboutism as regards pregnancy via rape is a bull-◊◊◊◊ argument. There is only one valid argument for abortion - and that argument is women should have 100% autonomy over their own bodies... it is exclusively their right to decide whether or not to terminate a pregnancy. End of!
Click to expand...
Interesting that you call my argument bull-◊◊◊◊ when I am explicitly agreeing with you on that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom