Being an interfering busybody is certainly a choice. You can choose to mind your own business, and not concern you self with other people’s private affairs that in no way affect you.

Why not focus on your own damn family for a change?

Hilarious.

“I’ll be writing to my Tory M.P to ask him why race is considered a protected class but not our community . . . ”

comment 2.

How can you compare race to sexual preference? You can’t help the colour you are born, but you can help to whom, how and where you put your John Thomas. You can be born with any coloured skin, but sexual preference is a choice.

I don’t see why special interest groups should have special legislation. I don’t condone violence of any kind , but the way to stop it is certainly not by gagging everyone who disagrees with where you put your John Thomas.

Grow up! get over it! move on.

Paul writes that it is an abomination: any preacher quoting that at a young teen is protected, even when that teen suicides.

THAT can be the affect of this “free speech” protection.

Bob (62) said:
“Have you noticed that when Lord Waddington mentioned Ms Pauline Howe during his speech in the House of Lords, he conveniently forgot to mention that she described gay people as sodomites in her letter? I wonder what he would do if her letter to the council contained words such as niggers/pakis/yids/dirty jews etc.”

If you’re asking me whether I think it should be a criminal offence to use any of the words above, or any other words; my answer is categorically no.

If you’re asking whether using the word “sodomite” in that place equates with the other words you listed, yes – for sure. She should be shunned from polite society, perhaps called to resign her position, roundly condemned. But that’s not a matter for the law.

I think that I profoundly disagree about what hate speech is. If somebody says “I hate Islam”, “I hate Americans”, “I hate homosexuality”, etc, it uses the word “hate”, but I don’t believe it’s “hate speech” – it’s expressing an opinion. Only because people are free to express such opinions can they feel society’s revulsion. But if somebody calls for death to Muslims, or death to homosexuals that is hate speech. If someone targets abuse at a person because they are gay, as long as we establish the “hate” motive, that is hate speech.

I don’t buy this notion that hate is extinguished by making a law banning hateful opinion. It’s not. Very likely even the opposite is true.

However, why is it that those who argue the freedom of speech stance ignore the “Massive Anarchism and Anomaly” here?

How can an unelected “House of Lords” ever represent or purport to represent freedom of speech.

I rest my case; a chamber which has a right to include a representative figure head from all the major religions does not represent the predominantly secular UK society.
Consequently, any proscribed amendment will automatically have a element which serves to protect, preserve and propagate religious sensibilities.

I find it a little odd that the massive anarchism and anomaly is some what ignored by some.

Does the archaic really have a place in 21st century UK.

The House of Lords
*Unelected
*Unrepresentative
*Unneccessaty . . . in the 21st century

. . . so are really surprised at the outcome

I can just see pope ben16 having new outfits tailored for his official visit to the UK.

And of course, he’ll have to have his toilet tissue printed with the Union Jack on it.

But I ain’t bitter.

Oh and Evan, why don’t you put a lid on it for awhile.

Religion’s a choice, sexuality isn’t. Sexuality, gender, race and disability need more protection than ‘beliefs’.

The whole idea of an opt out clause in discrimination law is ridiculous to the extreme.

As in all areas of life . . . You cannot have your cake and eat it.

I don’t give a crap what you guys think about freedom of speech and “thought police”: equality FIRST, freedom SECOND.

The same laws should be in place for both race and sexuality, WHATEVER those laws are.

Also, bullying is what made me change my mind about freedom of speech. I used to be such a big proponent of free speech, but I changed my mind when I realised how much bullying hurts people who are less bull-headed than me. Unlike some callous bastards, I don’t think being thin-skinned makes someone worthless, I think kindness and compassion are the greatest traits a human being can possess and I want to protect those who have these traits. Their lives mean far more to me than any hysterical paranoia about thought police ever could.

I still support free speech, I’ve just come to realise that it doesn’t mean saying whatever the hell you want. Hate speech is never free speech – it is the very antithesis of free speech, devoid of logic and rationality. Hitler never made it into power with sound reasoning and solid arguments, he made it into power by manipulating people’s fear and hatred. This is NOT free speech, this is propaganda. Free speech is about the free dissemination of ideas and of the freedom to argue about these ideas. It is not about giving people the right to shout epithets at people they don’t like.

Pro-free speech.
Anti-bullying.

Yes, the line between the two is fuzzy, but we should bloody well try to find it. It is fairly important. Find me on person whose life has been ruined (not merely inconvenienced) by limits on freedom of speech and I’ll find you a dozen whose lives were ENDED by bullying.

Obviously too whiney to live”

Mihangel, I was bullied mercilessly at school and I go through it. No, it wasn’t pleasant, and there were times I wished I was dead, but those are growing pains and unfortunately some of us are dealt a harsh card in life. But you know what? It made me the strong-willed person I am today, and now I do not suffer fools gladly. Would I have wanted thought police looking out for me at every turn? Heck no! In life you tale the rough with the smooth.

http://tinyurl.com/yklqmku

A familiar tale.

Professor of psychaitry Philip King(UCL)has conduct many studies which highlight reparative therapy attitudes are still alive and kicking in the two main UK professional bodies for therapists – the BACP and the BPC (British association of counselling and psychotherapy, and the British psychoanalytic council).