Christians arrested for defending their beliefs

Well at least that pesky immigrant not accepting our ways thing is going to be used .

[Reedy]

Having browsed this thread, taking religion into a British court is making a mockery over our legal system. What next, someone gets sued because they insist the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Thor didn't exist!

[Russ]

You haven't browsed it very well then - the issue isn't with taking religion in to court, it's whether or not the couple said something that broke the law.

[Gary L]

Or to look at it another way. taking people to court at the expense of tax payers. where it gets decided if one upset another enough over something they believe in.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Gary L

Or to look at it another way. taking people to court at the expense of tax payers. where it gets decided if one upset another enough over something they believe in.

with no actual proof to back up there religion/beliefs

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Gary L

Or to look at it another way. taking people to court at the expense of tax payers. where it gets decided if one upset another enough over something they believe in.

Religious people pay tax too....

Originally Posted by papa smurf

with no actual proof to back up there religion/beliefs

Any further off-topic posts will be removed and infracted.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Gary L

Or to look at it another way. taking people to court at the expense of tax payers. where it gets decided if one upset another enough over something they believe in.

A lot of laws result in someone being taken to court because they offended someone else. Libel/Slander for instance.

Originally Posted by papa smurf

with no actual proof to back up there religion/beliefs

They don't need proof. The court is not there to decide if one or other religion is correct, merely to decide if some comments would cause offence.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

with no actual proof to back up there religion/beliefs

Careful now, those that are religious might take offence at that comment.

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Russ B

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

Well, they can, it's just that she wouldn't have very far to go.

This is nothing whatsoever to do with religion. It is to do with the standards of behaviour that we all insist on when in public. The couple are being prosecuted within laws designed to punish yobbish behaviour. Obviously the police and CPS decided that there was enough evidence to set out a prosecution that these people behaved in an antisocial manner. They may even have interviewed the witnesses who corroborated the victim's statement.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Russ B

Religious people pay tax too....

I know. they come under the term 'tax payers'

[Russ]

Not much point in posting that it's at "taxpayer's expense" then.

[Gary L]

Why? unless you want there to be an issue over what race/colour/religion they may be, then 'taxpayers expense' is just what it is.

[Russ]

Just don't see why you felt the need to point it out when any case like this would be at the "taxpayer's expense".

[Gary L]

I didn't point it out really. it's money that taxpayers pay. it's said all the time for various court expenses?

[nomadking]

If you wanted to make a formal complaint, but it was totally at your own expense, would you more or less likely to make a formal complaint than if taxpayers are paying for it instead.