Six British Men Arrested After Quran Burning

[Bob Blaylock]

How is it a lie? We value freedom of speech, but place necessary limitations on it, exactly as is the case in the US.

So far, nobody has provided any credible support for this being any kind of “necessary limitation” on these men's right to free speech. Nobody has demonstrated any plausible way that these men, in the act for which they were arrested, created any danger, harm, or threat to anyone else, or violated anyone else's rights.

This certainly is not “exactly as is the case in the US”. In the US, as in any civilized nation, these men would not have been arrested or otherwise legally prosecuted.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Do you think the Westboro baptists are just exercising free speech or are they deliberately trying to incite hatred or unrest?

Some of their activities, in my opinion, come close to the line, possibly crossing it. I'm particularly concerned about their protests at funerals, which to me seem sufficiently disruptive of the funerals and of the rights of others to conduct and attend these services in peace, to justify some action being taken to reign them in.

But for the vast major part, the activities of these cretins is entirely within their rights to free speech, as any civilized nation would recognize and protect.

 

[Rufo]

This certainly is not “exactly as is the case in the US”. In the US, as in any civilized nation, these men would not have been arrested or otherwise legally prosecuted.

You've been talking about this "civilized nation" criteria for a while now. I fail to see why you consider the exact level of freedom of speech the US allows as the level required for a civilized nation, beyond that you live there and are happy with it.

Is it the arrests that make the entire difference for you? If people were arrested for defamation in the US, would that make it an uncivilized nation?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Is it the arrests that make the entire difference for you? If people were arrested for defamation in the US, would that make it an uncivilized nation?

Yes, it would. But that's irrelevant here. There is nothing defamatory about burning some religion's “holy book” as an expression of disrespect toward that religion.

 

[Rufo]

Yes, it would. But that's irrelevant here. There is nothing defamatory about burning some religion's “holy book” as an expression of disrespect toward that religion.

No, but although it's clearly very rare, that has appearently happened.

My point was just that you are using the word "uncivilized" carelessly.

 

[Beerina]

You've been talking about this "civilized nation" criteria for a while now. I fail to see why you consider the exact level of freedom of speech the US allows as the level required for a civilized nation, beyond that you live there and are happy with it.

Is it the arrests that make the entire difference for you? If people were arrested for defamation in the US, would that make it an uncivilized nation?

The US level is more about stopping government from abusing censorship. "Sorry, government. You've universally proven over and over again you will abuse this power to maintain your own positions in government."

 

[funk de fino]

Some of their activities, in my opinion, come close to the line, possibly crossing it. I'm particularly concerned about their protests at funerals, which to me seem sufficiently disruptive of the funerals and of the rights of others to conduct and attend these services in peace, to justify some action being taken to reign them in.

But for the vast major part, the activities of these cretins is entirely within their rights to free speech, as any civilized nation would recognize and protect.

I note you cut the rest of the post. Too much for you to cope with?

 

[funk de fino]

Yes, it would. But that's irrelevant here. There is nothing defamatory about burning some religion's “holy book” as an expression of disrespect toward that religion.

It was a deliberate attempt to stir trouble. The same clowns were all over the news again for attacking the police today. Trying to reach some Anti facist protestors to give them a pasting.

 

[Delscottio]

The US has its own problems when someone can be locked up for failing to say the 'pledge' upon command.

 

[Rat]

It was a deliberate attempt to stir trouble. The same clowns were all over the news again for attacking the police today. Trying to reach some Anti facist protestors to give them a pasting.

In my city, no less. And you can see a (disordered and too long) slideshow of images of these delightful chaps at the local paper's website.

 

[Rufo]

The US level is more about stopping government from abusing censorship. "Sorry, government. You've universally proven over and over again you will abuse this power to maintain your own positions in government."

I understand the ideals behind the first amendment of the US constitution, and I appreciate its effort to maintain democracy. I think section 29J of the statute behind this case is important for the same reason, which is why I've kept quoting it.

What I was addressing in the post you quoted was the idea that this whole issue is somehow a matter of absolutes, where the UK is "uncivilized" and the US is not. This kind of dichotomy of civilized/uncivilized, free/not free, respecting/not respecting runs through the whole thread, and I don't think it represents either nation well.

 

[Rat]

...
What I was addressing in the post you quoted was the idea that this whole issue is somehow a matter of absolutes, where the UK is "uncivilized" and the US is not. This kind of dichotomy of civilized/uncivilized, free/not free, respecting/not respecting runs through the whole thread, and I don't think it represents either nation well.

That was rather my feeling too. If the thread had been started saying something along the lines of "Look here, chaps. This looks like a potentially worrisome case for free speech should it go on to trial. Perhaps we should keep an eye on it", I would have fully agreed, perhaps with some reservations. Instead it was presented as evidence that we have no respect for free speech, are slipping into wholesale surrender to censorship, and are uncivilised cretins for doing so. Instead of being a stimlating discussion as to where the limits of free speech lie (for they exist both here and the US), the thread has merely caused me to lose respect for one or two posters who seem to be capable of little more than aggressive chauvinism.