• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Six British Men Arrested After Quran Burning

I suspect Wildcat knows this, but is just trying to gloss over an example where the US doesn't enjoy the same freedom as UK citizens/subjects.




(cough) home nations (cough)

You know the correct term is actually Cantons :D
 
I suspect Wildcat knows this, but is just trying to gloss over an example where the US doesn't enjoy the same freedom as UK citizens/subjects.




(cough) home nations (cough)
I don't know how it works in the UK, but civil unions do not convey the same legal rights and privliges that marriage does in the US.

At any rate, I expect that gay marriage will be the law of the land within 5 years maximum. Probably by judicial ruling.
 
Last edited:
Are you finished in the playground boys?

WildCat, it was no more Architect's 'mess' than your emancipation.
 
Ah, so that explains it. You're bitter that America chose to speak murder our language instead of yours. ;)

Corrected that for you.

Not that it's my language, but if you're going to speak that terrible Saxon tongue then you might as well do it right.... ;)
 
Corrected that for you.

Not that it's my language, but if you're going to speak that terrible Saxon tongue then you might as well do it right.... ;)
Jesus Christ man, you're bitter. You got some hangups, seriously.
 
Well obviously it proves we're cretins, you fool. We haven't moved on in 200 years. We still execute the mentally retarted, lock-up the untried and unloved in offshore bases, blow an airline with 266 people out of the sky and give the trigger happy dolt who ordered it a medal......

...ah, no, wait a minute....

Reification
Red Herring
Well-Poisoning
Cherry-picking

Any other fallacies you could cram into one post?
 
Now if our American posters want to claim that the US Constitution is some God-given, super-duper document that trumps all other claims to freedom then feel free to cling to your mistaken belief. Just don't be surprised when the Europeans, Australians, Kiwis, and Canadians all point out that you're talking rubbish.
This is called a strawman argument.
 
This is called a strawman argument.

You might find it easier to read the thread before commenting next time. Take a look at the post from one of your countrymen about the UK being cretins, interspersed with a Biblical faith in the US Constitution's supposed protection of freedom of speech, and work forwards from there.
 
Last edited:
Is it still illegal to upload cash via credit card to poker sites in the US. Why this action taken? I never understood it.
 
Freedom isn't free
It costs folks like you and me
And if we don't all chip in
We'll never pay that bill!
 
Oh sorry, "inciting anger". Huge difference, and crystal clear legally I'm sure... :rolleyes:
I posted a link to the statute itself, and the word "anger" is not in it. It's "hatred". If you really think this is a clear-cut issue, don't misquote the law.

I understand that this may seem like nitpicking, but the way you're writing about the law suggests you interpret it in a way I believe it's not meant to be interpreted. You seem to believe that the law is written to protect people from feeling hatred themselves. It's not. It's meant to protect people from the hatred of others.

While this may seem like a insignificant distinction, it means that if muslims are the ones who are being protected here, the men are being accused of stirring up hatred against muslims, not amongst them. Thus the "threatening behaviour" part. Behaving threateningly against muslims to stir up hatred against muslims.

This does not sound a whole lot like what these men were doing, which is why I don't believe they will be convicted.

Finally, this part of the law hasn't been quoted here yet, and since people opposed to it seem determined not to actually read it, I'll quote it here.
29J
Protection of freedom of expression
Nothing in this Part shall be read or given effect in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents, or of any other belief system or the beliefs or practices of its adherents, or proselytising or urging adherents of a different religion or belief system to cease practising their religion or belief system.

If I am the one who has misinterpreted the law, feel free to correct me.
 
So they might say, "I INTEND to burn a Koran BECAUSE it will piss people off BECAUSE killing people because your god says so is a bad thing, and I want to mock it in this way."

Government should do its job and protect them.

Fail.
 
Incitement, clear and present danger.

Not even close to the thought crime these guys are charged with.

Try this again.

As a gay could I serve freely and openly in the US military right now?

My missus can walk about the beach with her boobies out.

I can gamble online.

I can drink in bars and buy drink at 18

I can be a passenger in a car with a drink in my hand

I can burn a koran legally

Land of the free!!
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom