OllyK

I was just reading about a Swedish Pastor who had claimed that the homosexual way of life was a tumour on society.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4477502.stm

It seems the Swedes are in a bit of a quandary as they hold both tolerance and free speech very dearly. Some are saying it is a great day for freedom of speech and yet others say it promotes intolerance and may open the door for more extreme views.

I thought about this for a while and I'm not sure you can "legislate" for tolerance. You can certainly educate people to try and help them become tolerant of others, but curbing freedom of speech so intolerance is not expressed does not remove the underlying issue. If anything it drives it underground and breeds further hostility.

So with our parliament bringing in new laws to restrict free speech and outlaw the preaching of racial hatred or support for terrorism are they actually making the extremists more tolerant or forcing them underground and making things even worse? Would these views, while repugnant, not be better in the open where they can be discussed, debated and countered, giving the impressionable the opportunity to hear the other side?

SJ_Skyline

my 2p...

I think banning won't make anything better and to be honest it will just drive the feeling underground.

The only way to tackle problems like this is through educating people. By understanding others points of view people are more tollerant.

Reality

Gagging the IRA in the eighties failry sorted them out - I mean they're now running the country in NI.

I would think that the current terrorists getting gagged now will just be thinking - 15 years to go and we'll be in charge .

Brendan Hughes

Unfortunately, there is the (lack of) distinction between "educating" and "preaching".

BTW your last sentence, read in a certain frame of mind, suggests that Abu Hamza should be allowed free reign and free speech in the UK. I got the impression that most of SN is against this

JTaylor

This is a subject I've debated in the past and I now have a firm opinion on - it's a catch 22.

Preaching intolerance - unacceptable
Surpression of freedom of speech - unacceptable

OllyK

My last sentence was actually a question

Leslie

Freedom of speech is vitally important of course, if we are to maintain the way of life that we want.

Sedition is another matter altogether and anyone who is attempting to undermine our security by persuading others to commit atrocities or to break our laws etc. deserves the order of the boot-in spades!

Les

mart360

No body objects to freedom of speech, what most people object to is the crass way in which the law is applied.

Abu bazar was persistantly allowed to preach his offending crap as

"its was his right to freedom of speech"

or was the fact that abu is a) Of a different race or b) Of a different faith?

you decide?

yet anyone else who criticised his regime and homeland, was branded a little englander, and god forbid the R word!!

Time and time again accross all forms of media both paper and electronic we are seeing divisions occur.

one one hand our govstapo preaches equality and freedom of speech, and on the other it subjects "some" of his citizens to draconian legislation (remember the conference!!)

Unfortunatly any of our govs have never been able to take a middle line. they either favour one and exclude the other (as this current mob do) go all out and hit everyone regardless ( seen by previous gov) or they totally ignore the populous and do there own thing, which is contemptious to say the least.

we should have free speech, and that right must be upheld.

however until we address the other issues, which people cloud and get super emotive about, we will never have either freedom of speech, human rights, or a democracy

Mart