It's official the thought police in force in the UK.

>let's say that that in the UK or any country... that abortion was illegal and that the church had a little more power... do you believe that pro-abortion activists who went and SCREAMED for abortion rights outside a church would be arrested? probably not..

Depends on the country. They might. This will certainly likely be true universally in Russia soon given their "childfree propaganda" ban. As for the UK, this is protesting specifically in specific zones in the UK - ie outside specific abortion clinics. Not even all of them.

>Do you think, and you might be able to prove me wrong here... that if a muslim got his prayer mat out and prayed near an abortion clinic he'd be arrested?

Yes he would.

>You might have some news article that proves me wrong, but what tells me i'm not wrong is i remember reading various stories about an elementary school in the north of england that began to teach gender ideology, at first some english parents made a fuss and were called "bigots" i think some were arrested, then the muslim parents from not only that school, but from the entire area protested against gender ideology.

No-one was arrested for objecting to the teaching of "gender ideology" in school.

>Thats when the school backed down and listened to the parents, so you see? it seems that one backlash has more weight than another, one opinion from one group trumps another...

I know of no school that did this.

On the flip side: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-68731366

"A Muslim student at a London school has lost a High Court challenge against its ban on prayer rituals.

Michaela School in Wembley was taken to court by the girl over the policy, which she argued was discriminatory.

The non-faith state secondary school previously told the High Court that allowing prayer rituals risked "undermining inclusion" among pupils."

Any comments here?

reply share

add reply

formatting help

the problem is, who defines "hatred" ?

The legal definition of hate speech (that is of sufficient nature to bring about a prosecution) can quickly be found online, although it varies from place to place. In the UK for instance it is "communication that is threatening, abusive, or hateful, and targets a person based on their race, religion, sexual orientation, disability, nationality, or other protected characteristic." The US is probably more forgiving, hence the racist cess pit of X and the rest. I have actually had a long discussion with another on this board about the difference between having a legitimate grievance against someone or a group and the expressing hatred of them. Ultimately that person had to admit they know the difference. So that makes them, the courts, and I all agreeing.

and surely you don't even know you're doing it,

..a defence which rarely wins in the courts, where ignorance of the law is no defence. Also the rule is that usually an offence (hatred, discrimination etc) is committed is recorded by the effect it has on the victim(s) no matter how innocent the actions supposedly felt by the perpetrator are.

you're determining who gets freedom of speech based on your political ideology and person preferences.

As already indicated, it is the courts who decide, not I when freedom of speech is enough, and the US is very tolerant. In the case of weaponised praying, just because someone cannot pray in one small area where it is likely to be intended to intimidate, it does not mean that one cannot pray everywhere else.

you've already said here that you don't believe in God, which is perfectly fine.

That is very kind of you,

But if i said to someone protesting for abortion rights "you have a home, go have your protest there" someone like you would scream"

There is a difference between a prayer and a protest. If a Christian deliberately blurs the difference, then they ought to expect to be subject to limited restrictions on protests. In the case of protests I favour I would still respect reasonable restrictions. For instance as an atheist I would not expect to be allowed to stand in church doorways aggressively haranguing believers every Sunday so that they feel threatened and hated.

reply share

add reply

formatting help