Fascists to Invade Sheffield. £500K Bill For Policing

[unbeliever]

Freedom of speech doesn't give you the right to be offensive and if it does then why did the poppy burners get done?

Why the fuss over some guy in Lndon wearing the Isis flag?

The hypocrisy stinks IMO,

 

---------- Post added 06-07-2015 at 04:45 ----------

 

 

You go off as if what you have said is worthwhile, stop deluding yourself.

How would you or other EDL supported feel if Muslims demonstrated and chanted anti non Muslim slogans every other weekend?

Would you accept it as freedom of speech or would you be frothing at the mouth claiming the Muslims are taking the **** etc?

Opposing the EDL doesn't mean you condone or make excuses for the Rotherham abusers like your post insinuates.

It seems that non Muslims being offensive is freedom of speech and Muslims being offensive is not according to the EDL types.

I have no problem with peaceful demonstrations but EDL protests with inflammatory and offensive remarks and chants about Muslims is not peacefull as I see it.

Offensive and dangerous things get banned, the EDL should have been banned a long time ago but because they are mostly white non Muslims they are seen as representing freedom of speech by those of a similar ilk, the hypocrisy stinks.

 

---------- Post added 06-07-2015 at 04:47 ----------

 

 

There is a difference between disagreeing and being offensive.

 

I'm sorry mafea, but I can agree with little of this.

People do have the right to be offensive. They do not have the right to be violent, abuse, or threatening. That's the standard that most of us apply.

 

Almost anything can be attacked as dangerous and offensive by those who strongly disagree. I offer as examples:

Gay pride marches are considered dangerous and offensive by traditionalist Christians.

Anti-war marches have been considered dangerous and offensive by the government.

 

By asserting that anybody who supports the EDL's right to march supports the EDL, you're quite wrong and you're on very dangerous ground.

Groups of Muslims routinely take to the streets to protest cartoons they don't like or something somebody high profile said which they find offensive. It's not unusual for such protests to catalyse violence or criminal damage. Nobody is stopping them, and I for one would not attempt to do so.

[mafya]

I'm sorry mafea, but I can agree with little of this.

People do have the right to be offensive. They do not have the right to be violent, abuse, or threatening. That's the standard that most of us apply.

 

Almost anything can be attacked as dangerous and offensive by those who strongly disagree. I offer as examples:

Gay pride marches are considered dangerous and offensive by traditionalist Christians.

Anti-war marches have been considered dangerous and offensive by the government.

 

By asserting that anybody who supports the EDL's right to march supports the EDL, you're quite wrong and you're on very dangerous ground.

Groups of Muslims routinely take to the streets to protest cartoons they don't like or something somebody high profile said which they find offensive. It's not unusual for such protests to catalyse violence or criminal damage. Nobody is stopping them, and I for one would not attempt to do so.

 

The poppy burners were being offensive and many people were up in arms about it, if they had a right to be offensive then why were they charged over it?

The point I'm making is the double standards that seem to be applied

Gay pride marches don't have banners or people chanting comments insulting non gay people do they?

[scottf]

"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it"

 

Voltaire

[mafya]

Yes it does. Deal with it. Preferably in an adult way without intimidation or violence unless you want to get the same in return.

 

 

 

I'd be very happy for that statement to be on the front of every school exercise book but you might think that it is really offensive. Who gets to decide if some or all of it should be suppressed? By rights I should win because your religious position is based on a known work of fiction and I'm at least open to discussion in an adult way. Go the whole hog and show me a miracle and you've got me for life!

 

Suppressing ideas because you personally don't like them is a very dangerous path to go down. Your intentions might be honorable but other people's might not be, especially if they can earn a few quid (elders / priests / warlords) or keep you under control to maintain their position in society (elders / priests / warlords)

 

My bold=

I don't see the EDL protesting in an adult way without intimidation and violence so by your standard they should expect to get the same in return?

[Guest sibon]

"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it"

 

Voltaire

 

Evelyn Beatrice Hall, actually.

 

You can't trust those French philosophers, they'd rob their granny for a decent quote:)

[unbeliever]

The poppy burners were being offensive and many people were up in arms about it, if they had a right to be offensive then why were they charged over it?

The point I'm making is the double standards that seem to be applied

Gay pride marches don't have banners or people chanting comments insulting non gay people do they?

 

A £50 fine is hardly the end of the world. Still the whole episode was an abuse of the a law which is supposed to be used against those who send poison pen letters.

The government really should have confined themselves to stating that the poppy burning was wrong and offensive and left it at that.

The same law has previously been used on multiple occasions to fine non-muslims who disrespect remembrance day.

There was a substantial outcry from non-muslim libertarians, which I support, saying very much what I and others have said on here; that this was an unacceptable infringement of the right to free speech.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/nov/12/teenager-arrested-burning-poppy-facebook

 

For the record, I think that one who publicly disrespects something of such deep emotional significance to others is automatically scum. This apples to the Quran as well as poppies and flags.

[Chris_Sleeps]

The focus of the protest was the child molestations and rapes that took place predominently in Rotherham. Anyone wishing to appear to side with the asian paedophiles is of course most welcome to object to this march.

That's one of top I've read on here, the world of stupid arguments. A false dichotomy taken to the level of idiocy. If you oppose EDL then you support pedophilia. It's stupid.

 

The EDL should be opposed. They're openly racist, even Tommy Robinson admitted so when he left, and don't represent any British values. They're no more than football hooligans with political pretensions.

 

I would also qualify my point in that I wouldn't ban them from marching. I just wish they'd not bother. They've added nothing to the national conversation since Tommy Robinson left. Now they don't even pretend that it's about radical Islam - it's just any Muslim.

This type of pro-pervert attitude apparently held held by some

Be brave - name names. Who is pro-pervert?

Edited July 6, 2015 by Chris_Sleeps

[milquetoast1]

The poppy burners were being offensive and many people were up in arms about it, if they had a right to be offensive then why were they charged over it?

The point I'm making is the double standards that seem to be applied

Gay pride marches don't have banners or people chanting comments insulting non gay people do they?

 

I find that people that complain of "double standards" with respect to the law usually see things from a blinkered position.

 

Just like both my children complain about parenting double standards.

 

People do have a right to be offensive, which is why the poppy burners were charged with threatening behaviour. Quite when offensive behaviour becomes threatening is rather difficult to determine, but I recall the offenders were quite happy with the £50 fine and the additional offence it seemed to create.

 

Didn't somebody else get a £50 for spray painting "Islam will dominate the UK" or something similar on a war memorial? Again the charge wouldn't be offence, but vandalism.

 

Then there was the BNP complaining about "double standards" when their guys didn't just get a fine, they got sent to jail for painting a poppy on a mosque.

 

Boo hoo, get a grip children.

[denlin]

Well we were in town on Leopold St when the EDL came and there was no bother

[mafya]

Have the EDL been protesting about these groomers or is it only the Muslim ones that concern them? = http://metro.co.uk/2015/04/22/paedophile-gang-guilty-of-raping-babies-and-streaming-it-live-online-5162202/