Preacher in UK arrested for preaching against homosexuality

[hordak]

By the way Hordak, there was an article about California (again) enacting a law that you can't sell a meal with a toy in it. Not on the same plane as removing religious freedom of speech, but getting into the same ball park as eHarmony.

Half on topic.

This illustrates one of my pet peeves when it comes to these sorts of issues of eroding freedom (in the public sphere)

No one cares until it is their pet issue.

Government says smoking is bad, sorry RJ Renolds, but you must get rid of your cartoon add man as it might attract kids. No one bats an eye.

Governments says fast food is bad, sorry MCDonalds but you must get rid of your toys as they attract kids and suddenly everyone is up in arms about the government overstepping it's bounds:huh:

If we want to protect our freedoms we need to protect the freedom itself, not just the issues we agree with.

[Jamie123]

Half on topic.

This illustrates one of my pet peeves when it comes to these sorts of issues of eroding freedom (in the public sphere)

No one cares until it is their pet issue.

Government says smoking is bad, sorry RJ Renolds, but you must get rid of your cartoon add man as it might attract kids. No one bats an eye.

Governments says fast food is bad, sorry MCDonalds but you must get rid of your toys as they attract kids and suddenly everyone is up in arms about the government overstepping it's bounds:huh:

If we want to protect our freedoms we need to protect the freedom itself, not just the issues we agree with.

A few years ago a fella in the UK was sent to jail for "creating and possessing indecent images of children" on the grounds that police (who were looking for something else entirely) discovered images of porn models on his computer which he'd used image-editing software on to reduce the breast sizes of, and added school uniforms to. The law takes no account of the fact that (1) no actual children appeared in any of the images and (2) the images were for his own personal viewing and were (before the police forcibly took them) never shown with anyone else.

Though some people were as shocked as I was about this, many took the view that the details of the case didn't matter. A person's right to free speech didn't matter. His rights to his own private thoughts, and the right to do what he wanted in his own home (where he was affecting no one but himself) didn't matter. The merest suggestion of "kiddie porn" meant that - whatever the facts - he deserved jail.

It's rather like what Sir Thomas More (in Robert Bolt's A Man for All Seasons) said about "uprooting the law to catch the Devil". What happens when there's no law left and the Devil turns on you?

It didn't matter then, when it was only "some sicko" who was affected by these draconian policies. Now more mainstream groups are feeling the effects of having their free speech rights eroded, perhaps people will realise what we're in danger of losing.

Edited May 4, 2010 by Jamie123

[Just_A_Guy]

The Catholic charities as i understand it had to make that choice because they take money from the government, and are subject the the government regs,The LDS adoption service, self funded have had no problems.

Therein lies the rub. Government can't dictate to religions what they will and won't do unless government can point to a way that the religion is benefiting from something the government is or isn't doing. That link can be as solid--or as tenuous--as the whims of the administration in power dictate.

How does Mormonism benefit from current federal and/or state policies?

--Students at our educational institutions may obtain federal grants and federally subsidized loans;

--Not-for-profit operations of the Church are not taxed;

--Donations to the Church are tax-deductible to the donor;

--American missionaries and Area Authorities receive passports from the Department of State in order to leave the country;

--Foreign missionaries and Area Authorities need State Department clearance in order to enter the country for missionary service or training;

--LDS written correspondence is handled by the United States Postal Service;

--LDS television and radio broadcasts are made over airwaves regulated by the FCC;

--LDS electronic communications utilize technology invented by (and perhaps patented by) the United States military, and perhaps occasionally go over US military servers as part of their journey on the internet;

--Disturbances on, or crimes against, Church property are investigated by state (and sometimes Federal) authorities;

--At least some Church assets are (presumably) held in banks that are FDIC insured, or are in stocks/bonds that are regulated by the SEC.

The feds have plenty of avenues to come after us, if they ever decide they want to. And it wouldn't be "religious discrimination"; it would simply be the federal government opting not to allow its resources to be used in the propagation of "hate speech".

Edited May 4, 2010 by Just_A_Guy

[Elgama]

Ram: I certainly hope this is simply one side of the story, and wonder what a more liberal media outlet would report (with the truth always being somewhere in the middle, IMHO). Do you know if the Telegraph is usually considered conservative in it's views? Just my curiosity :)

Still, either way, and no matter what happened, I'm certainly glad we live in the US, where freedom of religion and speach is protected by the constitution. I think sometimes we forget that other countries don't hold all of the ideals that the US holds. Fortunately, as long as the constitution is upheld here in the US, nothing like that can happen here. Let's hope it stays that way, for both our sakes!

generally find freedom of speech in the UK is pretty good, I seem to remember it was the US ambassador who complained about freedom of speech exercised by British Muslims on a TV show after 9/11.

I'm willing to bet there is more to the story, Telegraph is a broadsheet but is also very Conservative

[Dravin]

generally find freedom of speech in the UK is pretty good

My understand is this is the case in most of Europe, at least western Europe. I don't think they have quite the fanatical approach to it we do (or at least some of the loudest of us) though. And as pointed out even American fanaticism has blind spots. Doesn't help that we are over here and they over there as the headline, "Guy says something and nothing happens!" isn't a very good one. So of course all you hear about is the egregious, to the American mindset, examples such as holocaust denier laws*.

* My understanding is that the UK doesn't have these, the stories seem to come out of France or Germany.

I'm willing to bet there is more to the story, Telegraph is a broadsheet but is also very Conservative

The truth is probably somewhere in-between a guy spouting hate* concerning homosexuals and refusing to stop when asked by proper legal authority and a poor man stating his belief homosexual relationships are a sin being set upon by the mean cops.

* I do not consider declaring homosexuality a sin to be spouting hate, at least not by definition. One most certainly could declare homosexuality a sin in hateful manner.