VOTE UKIP!-ON MAY 7-2015

&

AT THE REFERENDUM

WHICH MUST BE HELD IN THE FOUR NATION STATES

VOTE TO LEAVE THE UNDEMOCRATIC

NAZI-PLANNED EU.

 

 
 
 
MAJOR ISSUES BULLETIN
 
 
 
 
 
 
     
 

 

FREE SPEECH-RELIGIOUS OPINIONS- TOLERATION -HOW FAR SHOULD WE GO?

 

In the Times on 9th November 2004 an article by Neil Addison a barrister has evaluated an important principle which an Australian case involving an allegation of religious vilification, which if successful will in the words of the author: -

 

The Religious Crime Moderates Will Soon

Loathe.

 

It is wrong-headed to insist that all spiritual ideas are created equal.’

 

 

“Do you believe that Muslims and Christians pray to the same God?” would normally be regarded as a theoretical rather than as a theological rather than a legal question.

 

Yet it was asked of a witness at a recent trial that demonstrates the dangers inherent in David Blunkett’s proposals to create a crime of ‘incitement to religious hatred”.

 

The Australian case involves an allegation of “religious vilification” brought by the Islamic Council of Victoria (ICV) against Catch the Fire Ministries and two of its pastors, Daniel Scot and Daniel Nalliah. It relates to a seminar they presented in March 2002.

 

The event lasted a day and dealt with the concept of jihad, the history of Islam, and its future in Australia and whether it was compatible with Western concepts of democracy.

 

The seminar involved quotations from the Koran and references to the life of Muhammad and the Hadith (traditions)- [That part of it which reports custom and precedent is called Sunna; that which preserves sayings of the Prophet is Hadith, “ in a narrower sense. Tradition”] of the Prophet that together form the basis of Sharia. Present during parts of the seminar were three Australian converts to Islam who reported back to the ICV, which brought the case under section 8 of the Victoria Racial and Religious |Toleration Act of 2001, which came into effect in 2002. That section says: “ A person must not, on the ground of the religious belief or activity of another person or class of persons engage in conduct that incites hatred against, serious contempt for, or revulsion or severe ridicule of, that other person or class of persons.”

 

The claim asked for damages and also that the defendants be ordered to “acknowledge” that remarks at the seminar were incorrect, “retract” the statements, “sincerely apologise” for the offence caused and be prohibited from “further publication or distribution directly or indirectly of any material containing statements, suggestions and implications to the same or similar effect.” If such an order was made, any breach would be contempt of court punishable with imprisonment.

 

In their defence Catch The Fire Ministries argued that seminar accurately reflected Islamic teaching and history, it was an exercise in free speech and reflected their personal religious beliefs. During the case it became apparent that the converts had been deliberately sent to the seminar with a view to bringing a case.

 

Both pastors were known to have strong views about Islam and Sharia but these were based on knowledge and experience. Scot is a Christian from Pakistan who had gone to Australia to escape prosecution, and Nalliah had worked in Saudi Arabia, where the practice of Christianity is a criminal offence. At one point Scot was asked whether he believed that Muslims and Christians prayed to the same God and the question was allowed by the judge.

 

The trial was scheduled to last three days. It actually extended over seven months and the judgment is still awaited- [November 2004]. Meanwhile another case has been launched by a witch who claims that her religious beliefs have been vilified. Whatever the ultimate decision these cases demonstrate the dangers inherent creating a crime of incitement to religious hatred.

 

Proposals to criminalize religious hatred or vilification draw comparisons with existing race crime legislation. However, there is a fundamental difference between being a member of a racial group and being a member of a religion.

 

Race: - is something you are and cannot change

 

Religion: - is something you choose and you can change.

 

A Jew who becomes a Christian still remains a Jew, but a Christian who becomes a Muslim ceases to be a Christian.

 

Jews who had converted to Christianity were still gassed by the Nazis because of their RACE, not their religion. Belief in a religion is belief in an IDEA and in particular historical figures whether Muhammad, Christ, or Joseph Smith. The life of historical figures and the religion they established must be open to examination, to question and indeed to ridicule. To say “all IDEAS are created equal” is idiotic.

 

The danger with creating these special types of religious offence is that they stimulate feelings of divisiveness, create “thought crimes” and lead to show trials where judges, or juries, have to make decisions in areas where historians and philosophers have been unable to agree for centuries. [Or ever].

 

If the Law makes it impossible to argue about religion in any meaningful way then only the extremists on either side of a debate will benefit.

 

Or as Amir Butler, executive director of the Australia Muslim Public Affairs Committee, has said:

 

Who after all, would give credence to a religion that appears so fragile it can exist only if protected by a bodyguard of lawyers?”

 

The author is a barrister in New Bailey Chambers at Liverpool and Preston.

 

[Font altered-bolding used-comment in brackets]

 

ON LIBERTY OF SPEECH

 

 

A Great Poet, a Puritan Parliamentarian, and Secretary to Oliver Cromwell - John Milton, during the Civil War wrote the following lines on Freedom of expression: -

 

‘ Give me liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties. Though all the winds of doctrine were let loose to play upon the earth, so Truth be in the field, we do injuriously to misjudge her strength.

Let her and Falsehood grapple!

Who ever knew Truth put to the worse in a free and open encounter?

Who knows not that Truth is strong next to the Almighty?

She needs no policies, no stratagems, nor licensings to make her victorious:

Those are the shifts and defences that Errors use against her power.

Give her but room and do not bind her when she sleeps.

When God shakes a kingdom it is not untrue that many false teachers are busiest, but yet more true it is that God then raises to his own work men of rare abilities and more than common industry to gain some new steps in the discovery of Truth.’

 

John Milton (1608-1674)

 

* * *

 

*

 

www.eutruth.org.uk

*

www.thewestminsternews.co.uk

*

 

www.speakout.co.uk

*

 

Daniel Hannan - Forming an OPPOSITION to the EU

www.telegraph.co.uk.blogs

 

*

 

 

VOTE

MAY -2007

 

TO LEAVE THE EUROPEAN UNION

WITH THE ONLY PARTY WITH A MANDATE

TO SET YOU

 FREE

 

THE

UK INDEPENDENCE PARTY

www.ukip.org

 

TO RECLAIM YOUR DEMOCRACY DON'T VOTE FOR THE TRIPARTITE PARTIES IN WESTMINSTER

BUT

SMALL PARTIES THAT SPEAK THEIR MINDS WITHOUT SPIN AND LIES.

*

 

ONLY

PRO-PORTIONAL REPRESENTATION

WILL BRING DEMOCRACY BACK TO THE ENGLISH PEOPLE

*

Home Rule for Scotland

WHY NOT

HOME RULE for ENGLAND

[EACH WORD HAS A DIFFERENT BULLETIN]

 

*

MAY/07

 

[All underlined words have a separate bulletin

THE QUESTION THAT THE VOTER MUST ANSWER

 

DO YOU WISH TO BE GOVERNED BY YOUR OWN PEOPLE, LAW AND CUSTOM OR BY THE CORRUPT ,EXPENSIVE UNACCOUNTABLE AND ALIEN BUSYBODY BRUSSELS’

 

-SIMPLE IS IT NOT?

 

 

 

 
 

HOME