Rev. Phelps Banned in the UK

[Texas]

I think they should be allowed in and left without protection for a day.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25082251-12377,00.html

Font Size: Decrease Increase Print Page: Print From correspondents in London | February 20, 2009
Article from: Agence France-Presse
BRITAIN has barred entry to two members of a US church for inciting hatred against gays and others, the government said on the eve of a planned protest by the radical group.

The Westboro Baptist Church, based in Kansas, has been planning to stage a protest against a play being put on by a gay youth group in southeast England.

But the Home Office, Britain's interior ministry, said Fred Phelps and Shirley Phelps-Roper have been told they cannot travel to Britain because of their views.

"The Home Secretary has excluded both Fred Phelps and his daughter Shirley Phelps-Roper from the UK," a spokeswoman told AFP.

"These individuals have engaged in unacceptable behaviour by inciting hatred against a number of communities," she said, adding: "They have been notified of their exclusion."

 

[Jackalgirl]

I'm of two minds. Of course, Great Britain is free to do whatever is legally-allowable according to its laws, and I don't blame it one bit for excluding these hateful, evil people.

The article goes on to say that these creatures will be traveling to Australia to mock Australians' grief over the deaths caused by the brush fires. I would blame Australia one bit for turning them away, also.

I support freedom of speech, though. I just am not sure I support this kind of freedom of speech. It is calculated to be hurtful. Is that not some form of assault and abuse, and therefore legally actionable?

 

[Texas]

I'm of two minds. Of course, Great Britain is free to do whatever is legally-allowable according to its laws, and I don't blame it one bit for excluding these hateful, evil people.

The article goes on to say that these creatures will be traveling to Australia to mock Australians' grief over the deaths caused by the brush fires. I would blame Australia one bit for turning them away, also.

I support freedom of speech, though. I just am not sure I support this kind of freedom of speech. It is calculated to be hurtful. Is that not some form of assault and abuse, and therefore legally actionable?

That's why I say let them in but don't protect them. Phelps and crew are so far beneath the label of human beings they should be treated like rabid dogs. I come from an era that would have been made it very painful for Phelps to use funerals to preach his twisted hate.

As to freedom of speech, I would treat them as we do child pornography in the US which is based on simple human decency that denies the first amendment protections to it..

 

[332nd]

That's why I say let them in but don't protect them. Phelps and crew are so far beneath the label of human beings they should be treated like rabid dogs. I come from an era that would have been made it very painful for Phelps to use funerals to preach his twisted hate.

As to freedom of speech, I would treat them as we do child pornography in the US which is based on simple human decency that denies the first amendment protections to it..

I understand (and very much appreciate) those thoughts, but after a few years of thinking about it I have to disagree. Let them spew their attention whore hate. Groups like the PGR (Of whom I'm a proud member) can and are very much willing to protect the families from their idiocy. I'm sure that if there are not similar groups in other countries, they could put one together in less than a day.

Also, when he kicks, no protests, no headlines, no "Ding dong the bastards dead"... Just his carcass in a box with his 20 or so kin babbling about how great he was. The rest of the world not caring enough to even drop by to point and laugh. The only end I can think of as more fitting would be for there to be a god that lets him watch that last mud slide with nary a whimper from the people he wanted to hurt, then giving him a job as towel boy, in a bath house, in heaven's "Boy's Town". (Lakeview in Chicago for those that don't know')

 

[Texas]

I understand (and very much appreciate) those thoughts, but after a few years of thinking about it I have to disagree. Let them spew their attention whore hate. Groups like the PGR (Of whom I'm a proud member) can and are very much willing to protect the families from their idiocy. I'm sure that if there are not similar groups in other countries, they could put one together in less than a day.

Also, when he kicks, no protests, no headlines, no "Ding dong the bastards dead"... Just his carcass in a box with his 20 or so kin babbling about how great he was. The rest of the world not caring enough to even drop by to point and laugh. The only end I can think of as more fitting would be for there to be a god that lets him watch that last mud slide with nary a whimper from the people he wanted to hurt, then giving him a job as towel boy, in a bath house, in heaven's "Boy's Town". (Lakeview in Chicago for those that don't know')

Well Phelps and I are about the same age, I think I could take him.

 

[332nd]

Well Phelps and I are about the same age, I think I could take him.

Don't get me wrong, if he gives you the shot The only reason I'd be mad is if you didn't film it!

 

[FlamingMoe]

I support freedom of speech, though. I just am not sure I support this kind of freedom of speech.

So... it would be more accurate to say you are not sure you support freedom of speech.

It is calculated to be hurtful.

It's also "calculated to be hurtful" when I proclaim that yo momma is so fat she alters tidal patterns. Should we ban "yo mamma" jokes because they could offend someone?

Is that not some form of assault and abuse, and therefore legally actionable?

Not as long as they're not inciting violence or making threats.

 

[thaiboxerken]

I think Phelps should be allowed to speak and protest where he wants to. He is a prime example of the religious mind set and he should be there to remind the moderately religious how sick religion really is.

 

[Jackalgirl]

So... it would be more accurate to say you are not sure you support freedom of speech.

In a way, yes. For example, I understand that it was determined, here in the US, that the First Amendment does not give someone the right to yell "fire" in a crowded theater.

Of course, yelling "fire" in a crowded theater runs the risk of causing people serious physical harm, whereas the Phelps are just making people mad.

They do cause intense emotional distress to other people as well, though. For example, by picketing funerals. I very much appreciate the PGR (thank you thank you thank you Redtail for your service) for their work in that area.

On the other hand, we may all agree on what "decency" means (and what it means in this particular context, being "don't picket a funeral; let the family grieve in peace"), but there's a problem when we try to legislate it. Which is, again, why I appreciate the PGR: instead of creating laws (which may not be enforced anyway), another group exercises its constitutionally-protected rights to create a shield between this hate group and a grieving family.

It's also "calculated to be hurtful" when I proclaim that yo momma is so fat she alters tidal patterns. Should we ban "yo mamma" jokes because they could offend someone?

I think it depends on the context. It what way is it being used, by whom, against whom?

Is it harrassment? Harrassment is illegal. Of course, harrassment is generally done by a person against another person, as opposed to a person against a general group. Can what the Phelps family does legitimately be classed as harrassment?

I imagine that in the US, the answer would be "no" (don't know for sure, but I imagine that if their activities were illegal, they'd have been in jail by now).

(For the record, I think that "yo mama" jokes are ludicrous, and therefore funny, and am not insulted by them. But I imagine there would be people who would be and I see your point: at what point are we being overprotective? How do we apply the "reasonable person" in this case, and should we?)

Not as long as they're not inciting violence or making threats.

I think that they know this line, and they toe it carefully. They're not stupid, sadly. Just evil.

 

[Egg]

I wouldn't be surprised that they planned to come knowing that they might get banned. Banning people from coming into the country is a great source of publicity for them and these Wesboro guys seem to be all about any media attention they can get. One thing I have to give them is that they're quite brilliant at it. I'll bet there are plenty of other small groups around with equally as distasteful views who none of us have ever heard of.

I think I'd have to go along with the notion that if they're not inciting violence, they should probably have just been allowed in.

 

[BPSCG]

Let's get something straight once and for all. Britain has no problem with allowing religious hate-mongers to enter the country and spew their belief that God hates fags and that natural disasters are his retribution against people who tolerate perverts.

Ken Livingstone defended his decision to share a platform with a homophobic Islamic preacher as he and his challenger, Boris Johnson, were neck and neck in the race for the capital yesterday.

Yusuf al-Qaradawi has described homosexuality as an "unnatural and evil practice" and said the Koran permitted wife-beating in certain circumstances.

The Qatar-based Egyptian cleric has also advocated the use of Palestinian children as suicide bombers and once claimed that Asian tsunami victims were punished by Allah because their countries were centres of perversion.

But speaking on BBC1's Politics Show yesterday, the London Mayor insisted he was right to welcome the cleric to City Hall as an "honoured guest" in July 2004.

Link.

The UK has no problem allowing foreigners in so they can voice their repugnant ideas. You just need to belong to the approved religion, that's all. If Phelps converted to Islam and wanted to come in and say God hates fags and causes tsunamis to kill perverts, he'd be welcomed with open arms by the Lord Mayor of London.

 

[Darat]

Do you even know who the "Lord Mayor of London" is BPSGC? Also you really should keep up to date with the news, al-Qaradawi was denied a visa in February 2008...

 

[Mashuna]

Let's get something straight once and for all. Britain has no problem with allowing religious hate-mongers to enter the country and spew their belief that God hates fags and that natural disasters are his retribution against people who tolerate perverts.
Link.

The UK has no problem allowing foreigners in so they can voice their repugnant ideas. You just need to belong to the approved religion, that's all. If Phelps converted to Islam and wanted to come in and say God hates fags and causes tsunamis to kill perverts, he'd be welcomed with open arms by the Lord Mayor of London.

Livingstone isn't mayor, and the government is currently trying to deport a muslim cleric.

 

[BPSCG]

Do you even know who the "Lord Mayor of London" is BPSGC?

Sorry, my bad - should have simply said "mayor."

Also you really should keep up to date with the news, al-Qaradawi was denied a visa in February 2008...

I understand that. Nevertheless, he was allowed in in 2004, and (now former) Mayor Livingstone says he was right to welcome him as an "honoured guest."

How is Phelps any different?

 

[gumboot]

Let's get something straight once and for all. Britain has no problem with allowing religious hate-mongers to enter the country and spew their belief that God hates fags and that natural disasters are his retribution against people who tolerate perverts.
Link.

The UK has no problem allowing foreigners in so they can voice their repugnant ideas. You just need to belong to the approved religion, that's all. If Phelps converted to Islam and wanted to come in and say God hates fags and causes tsunamis to kill perverts, he'd be welcomed with open arms by the Lord Mayor of London.

I don't know why this surprises you. The UK government actively promotes and works with Mosques and Islamic groups that promote Wahhabism and Radicalism.

The Islamists have the wool pulled so far over the eyes of the Brits that it's chaffing their buttocks.

 

[Monketi Ghost]

I'm just shocked that nobody has brained the guy yet. He might have died many times over having insulted so deeply so many people.

 

[Darat]

Sorry, my bad - should have simply said "mayor."

I understand that. Nevertheless, he was allowed in in 2004, and (now former) Mayor Livingstone says he was right to welcome him as an "honoured guest."

How is Phelps any different?

Times change? Also look at why he is being denied entry.

I don't know why this surprises you. The UK government actively promotes and works with Mosques and Islamic groups that promote Wahhabism and Radicalism.

The Islamists have the wool pulled so far over the eyes of the Brits that it's chaffing their buttocks.

What a load of hot air.

 

[BPSCG]

How is Phelps any different?

Times change? Also look at why he is being denied entry.

What, the UK thought religious bigotry and gay hatred was acceptable in 2004 but not in 2009? What changed in those five years?

 

[Darat]

What, the UK thought religious bigotry and gay hatred was acceptable in 2004 but not in 2009? What changed in those five years?

What a strange conclusion to draw from the facts.

 

[BPSCG]

What a strange conclusion to draw from the facts.

You said times have changed. What has changed?