Poppy Burners Banned

[GommeInc]

Why don't we simply invite them onto Question Time and then we can all rationally debate their points and come to our own conclusions? isn't that much more grown up and sensible rather than having the government decide what we all think or should think?

I'm amazed they didn't give up when they were questioned on that programme Jordan posted (I think it was him at least). They got mocked by the Muslim community and virtually all sides were against their protest. That isn't to say everyone agreed the protest should be banned, they just thought the protest was senseless and purely ignorant because 11/11/11 is about remembering all who have died, and that includes those who were killed in Afghanistan and Iraq wars on both sides. To protest about it is like saying no-one should be remembered. They should be openly mocked and convinced their actions are irrational, rather than outright banned as that only adds fuel to the fire, rather than puts it out.

[Catzsy]

What day they choose to protest, what they choose to protest about, what they choose to use as a symbol of their protest and what we think of their protest - none of this matters because the whole point in freedom of speech and freedom of expression is freedom. We have freedom of speech and freedom of expression (or we used to have) in order to protect unpopular speech because popular speech doesn't need protecting.

As much as I disagree with the protestors, they should have that right always in a free society.

Interesting analogy. What do you think would happen if the Koran was burned in front of the Taliban or Al Qaeda? In this country they are only banned. Your freedom speech goes to rediculous lengths. What about the freedom of the majority of people in this country who feel it is downright disrepectful and want the FREEDOM to participate in the remembrance day activities without harrassment from these idiots. There is nothing stopping them protesting in a country where somebody cared. They would probably still get media attention.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Interesting analogy. What do you think would happen if the Koran was burned in front of the Taliban or Al Qaeda? In this country they are only banned. Your freedom speech goes to rediculous lengths. What about the freedom of the majority of people in this country who feel it is downright disrepectful and want the FREEDOM to participate in the remembrance day activities with harrassment from these idiots. There is nothing stopping them protesting in a country where somebody cared. They would probably still get media attention.

Because what I like about this country is the fact that we have ancient civil liberties which gurantee our freedom before they were subverted, thats why I defend them constantly from the Bill of Rights to the Magna Carta, to habeas corpus - if the time ever comes I ultimately die to defend those values, not a sovereign or a flag because those values are above everything.

..and thats why your analogy with other despotic regimes is wrong, interestingly you are suggesting we be intolerant like they are.

[Catzsy]

Because what I like about this country is the fact that we have ancient civil liberties which gurantee our freedom before they were subverted, thats why I defend them constantly from the Bill of Rights to the Magna Carta, to habeas corpus - if the time ever comes I ultimately die to defend those values, not a sovereign or a flag because those values are above everything.

..and thats why your analogy with other despotic regimes is wrong, interestingly you are suggesting we be intolerant like they are.

It is not intolerant of us, it is respecting the rights of those participating not to have to put up with them and if they did burn the Koran in front of extremists that they would probably be executed. The majority of the people in this country are absolutely outraged by the poppy burning. Interestingly though you would deny the right for women to have abortions or gays to marry in church. You have a very funny idea of freedom.

[Chippiewill]

It is not intolerant of us, it is respecting the rights of those participating not to have to put up with them and if they did burn the Koran in front of extremists that they would probably be executed. The majority of the people in this country are absolutely outraged by the poppy burning. Interestingly though you would deny the right for women to have abortions or gays to marry in church. You have a very funny idea of freedom.

So true.. +rep

I'm not exactly sure what I'd achieve in burning the koran other than being shanked anyway..

[HotelUser]

What day they choose to protest, what they choose to protest about, what they choose to use as a symbol of their protest and what we think of their protest - none of this matters because the whole point in freedom of speech and freedom of expression is freedom. We have freedom of speech and freedom of expression (or we used to have) in order to protect unpopular speech because popular speech doesn't need protecting.

As much as I disagree with the protestors, they should have that right always in a free society.

I think it should be upto the courts who have partly a mindset like this one, as well as one to preserve the ethics and best interests of society as a whole to determine if the ideas associated with their protests are to be outlawed or not.

[-:Undertaker:-]

It is not intolerant of us, it is respecting the rights of those participating not to have to put up with them and if they did burn the Koran in front of extremists that they would probably be executed. The majority of the people in this country are absolutely outraged by the poppy burning.

Because you don't have a right not to be offended, thats why we can't phone the police up and have people arrested who have an argument with us.

Or maybe you would welcome this suggestion?

Interestingly though you would deny the right for women to have abortions or gays to marry in church. You have a very funny idea of freedom.

With abortions, this involves the killing of an innocent human being - so no, thats a breach of individual liberties.

On gay marriage, of course I do - provided the Church wishes to allow it (freedom, yeah?).

[Chippiewill]

With abortions, this involves the killing of an innocent human being - so no, thats a breach of individual liberties.

Marriage shouldn't really be dependent on the church (Or god...)

[-:Undertaker:-]

I would post a picture of an aborted child in response, but I doubt i'd be allowed because its clear what is being destroyed is not 'a bundle of cells'.

Abortion

We are talking about human beings here and not animals or trees, but if your so keen on abortion why don't you go on Google for around an hour and just have a look at the abortion methods (such as cracking open a skull with a pair of metal grippers and then sucking out the 'fetus' which has human DNA and human functions) along with how abortions are performed (for example abortion doctors do not refer to the body parts because that would make it plain as to what they are doing, instead they refer to body parts as 'a' and 'b' etc).

Oh and you can also read accounts of how babies (oh sorry I forgot my Latin, a fetus) are pulled out screaming and tossed in the bin and left to die.

Marriage shouldn't really be dependent on the church (Or god...)

Agreed, or the government - so remove both out of marriage and let Churches/places of registery decide what they want to call 'marriage'.

[Catzsy]

Because you don't have a right not to be offended, thats why we can't phone the police up and have people arrested who have an argument with us.

Or maybe you would welcome this suggestion?

Well actually you can if they are being downright offensive. It is called breach of the peace.

With abortions, this involves the killing of an innocent human being - so no, thats a breach of individual liberties.

On gay marriage, of course I do - provided the Church wishes to allow it (freedom, yeah?).

But you believe in capital punishment? Also you are far too melodramatic by calling an embryo or unformed feotus 'an innocent human being'. Do you believe in vascetomy or sterilisation because they with your definition sperm or ova could be called 'innocent human beings'. Do you believe that a gay person has the right to be married. No I don't think you do. It would be fair enough if you said that you believed in some things not others but blanketing in 'freedom' as you do is bizarre as it is only freedom when it suits you.