Christians arrested for defending their beliefs

[Sparkle]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

Do you really believe that is all that was said?

I have no idea what was said, and neither do you. As you suggest, we will just have to wait and see.

Originally Posted by nomadking

Isn't this thread meant to be about an actual arrest for expressing opinions. So if I stood up and said that I wanted to have the same rights as immigrants, I wouldn't be arrested like in this example. It's not paranoia on my part, but 'head in the sand' syndrome on yours.

And that's not bullying/oppression?

erm, no - this thread is about an arrest for

They have been charged under public order laws with using ‘threatening, abusive or insulting words’ that were ‘religiously aggravated"

[Sparkle]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Isn't this thread meant to be about an actual arrest for expressing opinions. So if I stood up and said that I wanted to have the same rights as immigrants, I wouldn't be arrested like in this example.

Taken from the link above:

His opening remark was: "If you are a black, vegetarian, Muslim, asylum-seeking, one-legged lesbian lorry driver, I want the same rights as you."

No one present expressed any concerns at the time but a letter of complaint was later received by police, and another person wrote to say he disagreed with the remarks made.

He was arrested the next month, and a further five months later was contacted at his farm in Cambridgeshire and asked by two officers from Gloucestershire to attend an interview at a police station.

At the station he declined to answer questions without a lawyer and was arrested.

He was put in a cell and told that he would have to stay overnight if he wished to wait for his solicitor, but after 40 minutes agreed to be interviewed without legal representation.

Mr Page said: "I was told I had committed a 'hate crime', interviewed under caution and given police bail."

That comes as no surprise, as the PC brigade have been in charge of this country for far too long.

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Isn't this thread meant to be about an actual arrest for expressing opinions. So if I stood up and said that I wanted to have the same rights as immigrants, I wouldn't be arrested like in this example. It's not paranoia on my part, but 'head in the sand' syndrome on yours.

And that's not bullying/oppression?

I remember hearing about this at the time. I also remember thinking, "well...serves him blooming well right, ignorant git."

[Sparkle]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

I remember hearing about this at the time. I also remember thinking, "well...serves him blooming well right, ignorant git."

I agree that it was an ignorant thing to do. But would you really consider it a "hate" crime?

We have laws for everything these days, and in the future there will be even more. What really gets my goat is that once laws are passed, rarely are they enforced in a manner keeping in line with the spirit in which those same laws were passed in the first place. In other words, regardless of what caused a law to brought into effect, once any given law is in place - it can and will be enforced to the letter. The underlying problem is, this isn't why we pass laws - we pass them to deal with a specific problem.
Sheeple have bl**dy short memory spans.

My feeling is that when laws were passed to deal with alleged "hate" crimes, the spirit of such laws didn't have anything to do with cracking down on people voicing their, abeit rather ignorant, opinions.

His opening remark was: "If you are a black, vegetarian, Muslim, asylum-seeking, one-legged lesbian lorry driver, I want the same rights as you."

I have always been uneasy about this so called "hate crime" thing as i feel it gives a rational reason to an often irrational act but then thats what makes some people more comfortable being able to rationalise everything rather then accepting there are just some unpleasant people about for no other reason then they prefer to be unpleasant.

[nomadking]

Actually it gives undue power to bully/oppress people. Hitler, Stalin etc would have liked to have though of it.

Originally Posted by nomadking

Actually it gives undue power to bully/oppress people. Hitler, Stalin etc would have liked to have though of it.

Excellent comparison - what next - gulags, death camps, invasion with tanks?

[Sparkle]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

Excellent comparison - what next - gulags, death camps, invasion with tanks?

Not to sound too pedantic - but I'm quite sure Hitler/Stalin already thought of those things.

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Actually it gives undue power to bully/oppress people. Hitler, Stalin etc would have liked to have though of it.

That is is exactly what will happen if these laws are ignored. The bullies and oppressors will just continue to get away with it. We do not have the freedom to bully people; no matter how much you scream "free speech."

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

That is is exactly what will happen if these laws are ignored. The bullies and oppressors will just continue to get away with it. We do not have the freedom to bully people; no matter how much you scream "free speech."

There's no such thing as free speech. it's seen as abuse/racist/offensive/distruptive/anti-everything/terrorism now.

you can still tell Tesco's that you think they stink. I think.

From Article 10 of the European Charter of Human Rights

The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or the rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary

With rights come responsibilities - free speech does not include shouting "fire" in a crowded cinema.

Originally Posted by foreverwar

erm, no - this thread is about an arrest for

Foreverwar, are you aware of the purpose of the act that the couple had been arrested under?
Because if you did this whole thing should not be now costing ( a ) the tax payer for upcoming court proceedings and ( b) imo a complete waste of police resources.
You asked if someone believed that all that was said was what has been quoted in the press.
So, are you suggesting that far more offensive words were used than the couples feelings about the islamic religion?
The act that the couple were arrested under, imo, was not brought in to deal with personal conversation or debate with views firmly expressed, if someone is in a discussion they can at any time say " Do you know what? I do not like what is being said here " and walk away.
What has to be remembered also, is the police have a duty to defend free speech, and they may be ignoring that.
My own thoughts are when this case does hit the court it will be thrown out, if there is any sense left in this country it will be.
Just a final thought, a christian may say " I would die for my belief "
A muslim may say, " You will die for my belief "
Before people jump on what I have said, please note the use of the singular.

[papa smurf]

up date

They all but called me a terrorist ... Muslim woman hits back over race row with hotel couple

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz0SI9Fg2FH

[Russ]

The Muslim woman whose complaint about two Christian hoteliers led police to charge them with a religiously aggravated offence is a British-born convert who turned to Islam a year ago.

Guess this means she can't "go home" then.