Hate preacher in Kilkenny

Annasopra

Hey all

GCN has highlighted this hate preacher is to speak in Kilkenny

http://theoutmost.com/news/angus-buchan-ireland/

He has been banned from a similar event in Scotland

http://www.kaleidoscot.com/scotland-says-no-to-homophobic-pastor-angus-buchan-7725

Local Kilenny lgbt people are urging action. Please sign their petition.

https://my.uplift.ie/petitions/stop-angus-buchan-speaking-in-kilkenny

Ten of Swords

Buchan also runs “Mighty Men” conferences where he teaches men to “remedy” their masculinity and command their family.

In one Mighty Men’s Conference speech to a mixed-sex audience, Buchan urged wives in the audience to submit to their husbands and be more “feminine” and not to criticises their partners. In addition, he demanded that husbands physically discipline their children without their wives “interfering”.

Wow, what a tool :eek:

bonyn

I really hate these petitions.

He has a right to preach. You have a right to protest or ignore. You do not have the right to stop him from speaking.

Safe zones. Jailing people for their beliefs and opinions. Censorship. what's going on right now in Europe is like something not out of place in the soviet union or nazi germany.

Edit: fyi, here's the event you're trying to get cancelled. An event which seems to be promoting traditional Christian values.

Angus Buchan - Together for Ireland
Wednesday, 24. Aug 2016, 18:45 h
Angus Buchan, a man of humble farming background, comes to share the good news of how Jesus can change your life.

Set in an environment of worship and where prayer will be available to all. Angus' clear and direct way of sharing the Gospel, is an ideal opportunity to bring family and friends who are searching for more. This event will no doubt be an encouragement for all on their jounrey with God.

A evening not to be missed!!!

bonyn

Joey, did you research this man before posting? You did describe him as a hate preacher, but apart from a 2008 interview where he described homosexuality as curable through prayer (a belief shared by many protestants) he seems like a decent skin. Hardly affiliated with the westboro Baptist church.

Don't criticise your husband is particularly excellent advice. Similarly a man shouldnt criticise his wife publicly or to his kids either.

Here's a video of him in action.
https://youtu.be/tlGfJIQ8mWs

L1011

That 'belief' is not shared by the medical community and is extremely dangerous for people to go around preaching as fact.

bonyn

L1011 wrote: »

That 'belief' is not shared by the medical community and is extremely dangerous for people to go around preaching as fact.

It's his religious belief. And we've no evidence to say he's preaching it at his current show. All i can find is the 2008 article that quotes him as saying "I cannot ever agree that homosexuality is right, I cannot bless it. I love them though, but they need help. We have prayed for them and God has changed their hearts."

And what does "change their hearts" even mean? That they became heterosexual? Or that they ceased to engage in acts contrary to bible teachings?

J_E

bonyn wrote: »

Joey, did you research this man before posting? You did describe him as a hate preacher, but apart from a 2008 interview where he described homosexuality as curable through prayer (a belief shared by many protestants) he seems like a decent skin. Hardly affiliated with the westboro Baptist church.

Don't criticise your husband is particularly excellent advice. Similarly a man shouldnt criticise his wife publicly or to his kids either.

Here's a video of him in action.
https://youtu.be/tlGfJIQ8mWs

This guy is one of these bull**** missionaries who are loud and unwanted on the street by about 90% of people he attempts to preach to. A total nuisance and at worst, pretty upsetting to be around. I don't know how you could defend this ****e, you have the right to think what you want, but people have the right to not want it on their doorstep. If he wants to talk about homosexuals 'struggling' with their affliction and he has an audience in a venue or whatever, so be it, but I won't act like that's grand.

bonyn wrote: »

And what does "change their hearts" even mean? That they became heterosexual? Or that they ceased to engage in acts contrary to bible teachings?

What exactly are you arguing here, because I'm really not seeing it?

Fleawuss

This man may have the right to stand up with like minded bigots and whatever supernaturalists he can find to condemn me. I regard him as a vile hate monger and a deluded fool.

Nokia6230i

Expect the Druid/Homophobe/Islamophobe/Xenophobe/Right Whinger himself to be front & centre in the Hub cheerleading for Mr. Buchan if this proceeds.

Unsure if KCLR via KCLR Live from 10am-12pm Nooon or "the Way it is" from 6 to 7pm or Kilkenny People've covered this yet?

People comes out of a Wednesday so too late for this week & it's on day of event next week.....

As part of YE Carlow & who was in Cilliin Hill during the historical announcement it's quite the turnaround regarding being a positive day for Ireland & our LGBT Brethern to this event next Wednesday.

Unsure if any point protesting/picketing it but would be curious to know how many tickets'll sell for it.....enough for it to go ahead or too few for it to proceed......is there a tipping point that might result in its cancellation.

People go on about incitement to hatred & Hate Preachers like Anjem Choudary & rightly so so what's the difference here?

Do Right Whingers like to pick & choose their battles; that it's open season on Islam but opposing a Right Whinging Christian Evangelist is not on their agenda...........?

Nokia6230i

Just a quick update; his "Booking Agent" a woman called Geraldine (Tallent may be her surname; that's part of her e-mail address anyway).

Very iffy on the old information; did say the event is FREE to go to/attend......I inquired re might donations be expected in lieu given the evangelical nature of it & she declined to answer instead encouraging me to e-mail her on any questions/concerns which she will put to/discuss with "the committee".

This is his only appearance in Ireland. Unsurprisingly perhaps?

The event is called "Together for Ireland" & here's how you too can contact Geraldine > http://www.thehubkilkenny.ie/whats-on/events-calendar/event/36-angus-buchan-together-for-ireland

endacl

L1011 wrote: »

That 'belief' is not shared by the medical community and is extremely dangerous for people to go around preaching as fact.

Ah, sure that lot preach all sorts of nonsense. Those who don't believe it will never believe it. Those that do are cognitively fcuked anyway. It's not as if he'll be drawing a large influential crowd. Same old barmy noise coming out of a different ignorant mouth in a rather limited echo chamber.

Evangelicals schmelicals...

Nokia6230i

Couldn't think for a minute of who he reminded me of - apart from aforementioned Druid/Islamophobe/Homophobe/Xenophobe*, (*except when it comes to taking money from those whose great etc. grandparents weren't/aren't Irish when they're making their 1st Holy Communions/Confirmations etc. for photos etc.)

Now I remember; Tony O'Neill.

Who he?

Leader of yet another "Political Party" whose name I won't be mentioning here for I don't want to give it oxygen.

KKkitty

I really hope he's not allowed to even say one word. I'm from Kilkenny and even though I'm heterosexual I know of a few homosexual/lesbian people from Kilkenny and beyond. Homosexual, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people have been treated disgustingly enough throughout many decades as it is. To give a delusional bigot like this a soapbox to spout his nonsense would be appalling. If he's allowed to speak on behalf of all from Kilkenny I apologise. The vast majority of Kilkenny people do not hold his nonsensical views I hope. If being gay/lesbian/bisexual or transgender makes you happy and you're doing no harm to anyone else I fully support you.

bonyn

KKkitty wrote: »

I really hope he's not allowed to even say one word.

Just seems to reek of facism.. a different version of hate and intolerance.

People do want to see him, and there's no evidence to suggest he's going to preach hate. There's little evidence he is preaching hate apart from an honest answer to a question asked of him, where he said loves gays and prays they change their ways to follow the teachings of the bible.

So you are basically hoping so left wing lunatics get their way and ruin the event. Maybe show up with airhorns, shout slogans, throw glitter over peoples hair and clothes, cover themselves in paint representing menstrual blood and shove and threaten attendees, all the time claiming to be victims? (This is the way events organised on college campuses in the US have gone)

Kkkitty, why don't you go with an open mind, and report back on how it went?

bonyn

And folks, here are some other hateful quotes from 2008.
Any ideas what hateful, evil, right wing nutjob said them?

“I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian — for me — for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”

I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage. But when you start playing around with constitutions, just to prohibit somebody who cares about another person, it just seems to me that’s not what America’s about.

Just proving a point here. You're not going to go around saying your grandmother was a xenophobic, hateful, evil, racist just because she had more conservative views and values and god forbid chose to express them at times.

A_Sober_Paddy

bonyn wrote: »

It's his religious belief. And we've no evidence to say he's preaching it at his current show. All i can find is the 2008 article that quotes him as saying "I cannot ever agree that homosexuality is right, I cannot bless it. I love them though, but they need help. We have prayed for them and God has changed their hearts."

And what does "change their hearts" even mean? That they became heterosexual? Or that they ceased to engage in acts contrary to bible teachings?

Well its religious so it's OK...not a hope the fact his using religion is enough to have him banned in my opinion.

J_E

bonyn wrote: »

And folks, here are some other hateful quotes from 2008.
Any ideas what hateful, evil, right wing nutjob said them?





Just proving a point here. You're not going to go around saying your grandmother was a xenophobic, hateful, evil, racist just because she had more conservative views and values and god forbid chose to express them at times.

Why do I get the feeling you only seem to post in this forum to try and provoke argument and are against the LGBT community? Just purely an impression I get from your post history. This argument is so thin on ice. Just because someone has the intelligence to dress a disgusted opinion in polite and reasoning language does not mean it is a balanced view. I have no doubt that the Hope Church is another one of these evangelical organisations that would have no problem sending all gay people to conversion therapy camps if they had more influence. They're more dangerous than they appear on surface level, we're still at the tail end of what happens when a bad religious institution has too much influence over a country.

bonyn

J_E wrote: »

Why do I get the feeling you only seem to post in this forum to try and provoke argument and are against the LGBT community?

Not at all.

Not all topics interest me. the threads i reacted to often pushed liberal viewpoints which i disagreed with.

In this case, first i feel the speaker's goals are being misrepresented.

The main problem i have is that people want to censor the guy, not because he's planning on inciting hatred, but rather because in the past he expressed an opinion that they disagree with.

Censorship is bad. Free speech is good. That's my view.

Besides, while I'm against conversion therapy, it is extremely beneficial for gays questioning their sexuality to receive therapy. Whether such therapy comes from a church group or lgbtqqi group, or perhaps a bps/psi certified therapist, is not set in stone

Ps , not going to bother commenting on your view that the RCC is a bad religious institution, other than to say other predominantly catholic countries haven't had such a negative experience with the church. And that before it became fashionable to bash the church we blamed the brits for everything. Think we'll blame tge bankers for the next 100 years. Thanks goldman sachs!. Blame everyone but ourselves for our problems.

L1011

bonyn wrote: »

Besides, while I'm against conversion therapy, it is extremely beneficial for gays questioning their sexuality to receive therapy.

Proof for this statement, please?

bonyn wrote: »

Whether such therapy comes from a church group or lgbtqqi group, or perhaps a bps/psi certified therapist, is not set in stone

The "therapy" provided by religious organisations is pseduo-scientific and accepted as bollox by the medical profession. It is never beneficial.

J_E

Besides, while I'm against conversion therapy, it is extremely beneficial for gays questioning their sexuality to receive therapy. Whether such therapy comes from a church group or lgbtqqi group, or perhaps a bps/psi certified therapist, is not set in stone

Mortified. Thanks for proving my previous post in crystal clear terms. If I heard the same in person, I would be fuming. I can't articulate that enough on text to even go there.

bonyn

J_E wrote: »

Mortified. Thanks for proving my previous post in crystal clear terms. If I heard the same in person, I would be fuming. I can't articulate that enough on text to even go there.

I'm sorry, but huh? Many irish people take counselling or psychotherapy for a wide range of issues.
Churches too may provide pastoral counselling and many people choose to discuss personal problems with a priest or attend confession. I think that's what strikes a nerve with you but I'm just stating a fact.
As for counselling for people "questioning" their sexuality. gay people can suffer bullying and are at a higher risk of suicide and mental health issues. If the questioning phase involves anxiety, feelings of inferiority, or impacts negatively on their daily lives, of course I'd recommend speaking to an expert.

L1011

bonyn wrote: »

of course I'd recommend speaking to an expert.

So, not a religious 'therapist' going outside all medical knowledge, then?

If you recommend an expert, quacks and "pastoral counselling" are out.

Nokia6230i

Cllr. Paddy McKee currently on Liveline with a Robt. Harper one of the Together for Ireland organisers of Angus Buchan appearance at the Hub.

Event hosted in same room as where Mar Ref (and Pres Ref/Bye-Election) count & announcements occurred.

Robt. was also on KCLR FM Live on Tuesday in the 2nd Hr.; organiser of Uplift e-Petition, Enya Kennedy, Leader of YE Kilkenny ---- the real & actual one!-- was on in 2nd Hr. in reply on Wednesdays show.

Worth catching all 3 on Podcast......

brightspark

He also encourages women to be subservient to their husbands and for husbands to administer corporal punishment to their children.

Chromosphere

Corporal punishment is now illegal in Ireland btw, including by parents.
Calling for its use is actually calling for people to do something illegal.

Also legally, the state it's constitutionally bound to protect marriage and the family, which now includes gay marriage ; and a gay couple are legally regarded as a family in exactly the same way that a straight couple are.

"3 1° The State pledges itself to guard with special care the institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded, and to protect it against attack."

Just saying...

These rights and protections exist in Ireland at Constituional level. They're not up for debate.

NIMAN

imho, the man is entitled to his opinions. You may not agree with them (and I don't btw) but I still think banning him from speaking is not the way to go.

We can't campaign for freedom of speech then decide to allow only those things that don't offend us. Its ok to be offended by someone's words, you'll not suffer any lasting damage. You don't have to listen to his views, but I don't think we have the right to say no-one else is allowed to.

brightspark

NIMAN wrote: »

imho, the man is entitled to his opinions. You may not agree with them (and I don't btw) but I still think banning him from speaking is not the way to go.

We can't campaign for freedom of speech then decide to allow only those things that don't offend us. Its ok to be offended by someone's words, you'll not suffer any lasting damage. You don't have to listen to his views, but I don't think we have the right to say no-one else is allowed to.

Maybe you won't suffer any damage from his words, but the children subjected to corporal punishment will!

Freedom of speech can't be unlimited.

But perhaps it's pointless anyway, those attending are probably already followers of his views.

suicide_circus

People on this forum have suffered long and hard from things being "banned", be very careful with your desire to shut people down when you don't like what they have to say Joey, your moderator powers don't extend to real life. Let this fool speak and his ideas will be exposed to the just contempt they deserve.

Annasopra

NIMAN wrote: »

imho, the man is entitled to his opinions. You may not agree with them (and I don't btw) but I still think banning him from speaking is not the way to go.

We can't campaign for freedom of speech then decide to allow only those things that don't offend us. Its ok to be offended by someone's words, you'll not suffer any lasting damage. You don't have to listen to his views, but I don't think we have the right to say no-one else is allowed to.

Yeah I suppose the people Angus Buchan claimed to cure from homosexuality havent suffered any lasting damage.

You're right yeah no lasting damage on mental health at all

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/young-gay-people-more-at-risk-of-suicide-1.1553106

https://seanduke.com/2013/04/01/gay-people-in-ireland-seven-times-more-likely-to-attempt-suicide/

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/rates-of-lgbt-self-harm-suicide-are-horrific-says-mcaleese-1.2583054

http://www.irishhealth.com/article.html?id=24224

http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/gay-people-at-highest-risk-of-suicide-warns-support-service-29942495.html


https://www.irishhealthpro.com/content/news/show/name/one-third-of-lgbt-teens-have-attempted-suicide

http://www.livescience.com/50453-why-gay-conversion-therapy-harmful.html

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3354253

Chromosphere

NIMAN wrote: »

imho, the man is entitled to his opinions. You may not agree with them (and I don't btw) but I still think banning him from speaking is not the way to go.

We can't campaign for freedom of speech then decide to allow only those things that don't offend us. Its ok to be offended by someone's words, you'll not suffer any lasting damage. You don't have to listen to his views, but I don't think we have the right to say no-one else is allowed to.

I'm in two minds about this.

If you were to get up and start preaching that black people could be reformed into white people and needed to be civilised or having a religious belief that left handed people or red heads should be reformed by prayer, you wouldn't get a merely hand wringing response.

To me the half-hearted response says that a lot of people still think that being gay is a lifestyle choice rather than something intrinsically part of a person. It isn't and the state and legal system recognises this fully.

I find that a lot of homophobic issues still get treated as if they're some kind of topic that is up for debate when in reality it is ultimately is about people's right to exist as gay people. You can't really have a discussion about whether a significant % of the Irish (or general human) population should or shouldn't exist in an open manner.

There's freedom of speech, but there is also an attempt to use that freedom to undermine people's established rights as citizens.

The Irish state recognises that gay people have a natural right to exist and to be offered the same protection in law as all other people in this state.

Would someone have a right to have a public debate about the possibility of ethnic cleansing for example? Why is a discussion about rolling back gay rights any different?

Ireland's become a very progressive, developed, modern, forward looking, post enlightenment, rights based society that is increasingly capable of seeing past these dogmas. We have been dealing with our own past and progressing. This is why it is very important to protect that situation by openly criticising these kinds of speakers.

The endless anti-gay rhetoric that still goes on (more so in other countries but, still to a degree here) and the physical attacks and curtailments of freedoms of gay people in more than a handful of states that still get to be treated as if they're civilised places worthy of respect, does horrendous damage to gay people. It's long overdue that we (and I mean gay people and straight people who support gay rights - i.e. probably most of Ireland's population) actually stood up a lot more than we do.

The simple fact is that you can't really have a debate about someone's right to exist, which is fundamentally what any debate about a rollback of equality for gay people is.

It's not a discussion about a political organisation or a religious grouping, it's a discussion about an aspect of someone's self that is very much hardwired and part of them in the same way as having a particular eye colour, hair colour, skin type or any other characteristic you care to list. I would equate homophobia directly to racism and misogyny. It's right up there with the worst forms of discrimination and oppression possible and needs to be called out as such a lot more.

The reality is that people die because of homophobia - suicides and attacks in liberal countries and by direct state attacks in other countries. That is still an absolutely insane situation and it shows how far we still have to go!

marienbad

Freedom of speech isn't free when it is only applied to stuff you agree with .

NIMAN

Exactly.

Let the idiot speak and show himself up for outdated views that the majority see as stupid and wrong.

We as a country have made the step to make being gay and being a gay couple perfectly normal, as normal as mixed sex couples. This guy isn't going to change a thing, and the world will gradually come along to our way of living.

Of course you will always have those who think things are sick, that people shouldn't live a certain way, that you can 'cure' things that don't need curing, but they will be in the minority, a minority that will continue to get smaller in generations to come.

But I would still say this guy has the right to express his views. We are getting into dangerous terriority to attempt to ban him, as this is also a thing that has the potential to get out of control in the future. We don't want everything being open to censorship.

brightspark

There is an assumption being made here that everyone wants "free speech".

Extremist viewpoints need to be restricted.

Religious fanaticism of any type is dangerous and often led by highly charismatic individuals.

I'm not aware of any current charismatic atheists, though undoubtably it may have been the case for the former U.S.S.R. (Whilst Dawkins has followers I doubt if they could be called fanatics).

My point is that extremists need to be controlled.

brightspark

brightspark wrote:

There is an assumption being made here that everyone wants "free speech".

The mind boggles

marienbad

brightspark wrote: »

).

My point is that extremists need to be controlled.

You don't do irony I see

Chromosphere

Technically, freedom of speech in Ireland isn't absolute anyway and in many cases will cost you dearly legally.

Try publishing an article maliciously damaging someone's name and you'll see the limits of free speech and a very empty bank account very quickly indeed.

But constitutionally, freedom of expression here isn't unlimited by quite a long shot. (There are a fair few implied rights though that extend this - constitutions like ours or the US one aren't just the written text.)

Art 40:

6 1° The State guarantees liberty for the exercise of the following rights, subject to public order and morality: –

i The right of the citizens to express freely their convictions and opinions.
The education of public opinion being, however, a matter of such grave import to the common good, the State shall endeavour to ensure that organs of public opinion, such as the radio, the press, the cinema, while preserving their rightful liberty of expression, including criticism of Government policy, shall not be used to undermine public order or morality or the authority of the State.

The publication or utterance of blasphemous, seditious, or indecent matter is an offence which shall be punishable in accordance with law."

I don't agree with the limits placed on it by that as they have allowed for fairly extreme censorship in the past and could be abused in the future too.

Just bear in mind though that Irish free speech protection (and actually most European countries) is far from absolute.

NIMAN

brightspark wrote: »

There is an assumption being made here that everyone wants "free speech".

Extremist viewpoints need to be restricted.

Religious fanaticism of any type is dangerous and often led by highly charismatic individuals.

I'm not aware of any current charismatic atheists, though undoubtably it may have been the case for the former U.S.S.R. (Whilst Dawkins has followers I doubt if they could be called fanatics).

My point is that extremists need to be controlled.

Of course we all want free speech.

Personally I would let anyone say anything they want to, no matter how extreme it is. I only think this because words cannot hurt anyone. Its when people decide to go beyond words and carry out extremist acts that I think we need to step in and take some sort of control.

Let people say the Holocaust never happened.
Let people say being gay is an abomination.
Let people say whatever they want.

The vast majority of right-thinking people will treat these people like they deserve to be treated, with pity, disdain and zero credibility. As I said before, its only a very very tiny minority who actually listen to and believe these people. No matter whether you stop these people speaking, they will always have their followers, mainly due to how connected the world now is.

But overall, they will become more marginalised as time moves on.

brightspark

NIMAN wrote: »

Of course we all want free speech.

Personally I would let anyone say anything they want to, no matter how extreme it is. I only think this because words cannot hurt anyone. Its when people decide to go beyond words and carry out extremist acts that I think we need to step in and take some sort of control.

Let people say the Holocaust never happened.
Let people say being gay is an abomination.
Let people say whatever they want.

The vast majority of right-thinking people will treat these people like they deserve to be treated, with pity, disdain and zero credibility. As I said before, its only a very very tiny minority who actually listen to and believe these people. No matter whether you stop these people speaking, they will always have their followers, mainly due to how connected the world now is.

But overall, they will become more marginalised as time moves on.

Holocaust denial is a crime in 14 European countries!

lottpaul

NIMAN wrote: »

Of course we all want free speech.

Personally I would let anyone say anything they want to, no matter how extreme it is. I only think this because words cannot hurt anyone. Its when people decide to go beyond words and carry out extremist acts that I think we need to step in and take some sort of control.

Let people say the Holocaust never happened.
Let people say being gay is an abomination.
Let people say whatever they want.

The vast majority of right-thinking people will treat these people like they deserve to be treated, with pity, disdain and zero credibility. As I said before, its only a very very tiny minority who actually listen to and believe these people. No matter whether you stop these people speaking, they will always have their followers, mainly due to how connected the world now is.

But overall, they will become more marginalised as time moves on.

I don't agree that words cannot hurt anyone.
A young and/or vulnerable person, e.g. one questioning their sexuality, with no one they can talk to and bombarded by the sort of negative and hateful expressions that come from some people - often cloaked with the respectability of religion - can be in a very dark and lonely place indeed. If you're not LGBT it's easy to miss the casual but often deliberate references to "condition", "suffering from", "abomination", "unnatural", "disordered" etc etc etc - and those are some of the milder terms. Throw in ******, queer and worse and I think words can be very very hurtful indeed!

People do listen to extreme speech and carry out violent actions. A quick read of sectarian violence in Northern Ireland in the '60s and '70s in particular will provide plenty of evidence.

How or why would anyone deny the Holocaust? It's a crime to do so in many European countries, and presumably with good reason.

A quick dictionary definition of Abomination is "a disgusting vice, a despicable act". No hurt intended there so.

I'd also love to think it's only "a very very tiny minority" who share these views but if anything negative came from the Marriage Referendum it was that some people took the opportunity to give voice to their homophobia. And you know, there were more around than I'd like to have thought.

This is a huge topic and I would have changed my own views down the years and I might again. It's good to discuss it though.

marienbad

lottpaul wrote: »

!



I'd love to think it's only a very very tiny minority who share these views but if anything negative came from the Marriage Referendum it was that some people took the opportunity to give voice to their homophobia. And you know, there were more around than I'd like to have thought.

.

And now you know the scale of the problem instead of living in some bubble where everything is rosy in the garden .

In a similar way both the Trump campaign and the Brexit campaign have given license to some vile and spurious rhetoric . But it is better to know that a significant portion of the population either believes this stuff or are open to it.

Just because it is 'politically incorrect 'to not say something doesn't stop people from thinking and saying it privately .

We need as much freedom of speech as possible so we can challenge and refute this stuff and win over any waverers instead of pretending it doesn't exist

Annasopra

marienbad wrote: »

And now you know the scale of the problem instead of living in some bubble where everything is rosy in the garden .

In a similar way both the Trump campaign and the Brexit campaign have given license to some vile and spurious rhetoric . But it is better to know that a significant portion of the population either believes this stuff or are open to it.

Just because it is 'politically incorrect 'to not say something doesn't stop people from thinking and saying it privately .

We need as much freedom of speech as possible so we can challenge and refute this stuff and win over any waverers instead of pretending it doesn't exist

Speech isn't done in a non consequential bubble either. The Brexit debate has unleashed a huge amount of vicious attacks religious and ethnic minorities in the UK.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-hate-crime-racism-reports-eu-referendum-latest-a7106116.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/race-hate-crimes-uk-railways-increase-brexit-vote-eu-referendum-a7202121.html

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jul/11/police-blame-worst-rise-in-recorded-hate-on-eu-referendum

Annasopra

Hate speech is not free speech. The human right to freedom of expression can and often does clash with the human right to freedom from violence and discrimination. The absolute right to free speech doesnt really exist even in America. Here in Ireland speech/expression is limited (and quite rightly so in my opinion) by Irish Law (Prohibition of Incitement To Hatred Act, 1989) and also by the European Convention on Human Rights.

The idea that speech is always done in a vacuum and has little or no violent or hurtful consequences is frankly absurd. Hate speech is dangerous both at the point it is made when it calls for immediate harm but also when it develops over time and creates a culture where it creates conditions to become socially acceptable to persecute minorities. (For example the facebook page "Promote the use of knacker babies as shark bait")

As an ideal absolute freedom of speech sounds good but when it is used in a destructive manner and its consequences threaten the human rights of minorities then its not so great (genocide, discrimination, persecution) - here on this Island for example we would have seen some of those consequences with the violent rhetoric from both sides in the Northern Ireland.

Emme

bonyn wrote: »

Joey, did you research this man before posting? You did describe him as a hate preacher, but apart from a 2008 interview where he described homosexuality as curable through prayer (a belief shared by many protestants) he seems like a decent skin.

Tell that to David Norris. He's Protestant.

bonyn wrote: »

Hardly affiliated with the westboro Baptist church.

Maybe not now, but he'd certainly agree with a lot of what they go on about.

I couldn't understand a word the man said in the video link. He needs to learn to talk properly.

learn_more

I'm just dumbfounded that ppl think anyone can just say whatever they like in public and justify it my saying they have a right to their opinion.

Actually, I don't agree that anyone can just set up camp on any street corner and shout what they like whether it hate speech or even love speech.

There was the case recently where some baptist church members protested at the funeral of the victims of the Orlando shooting. I can't believe ppl think it's okay for this to occur. It's all the same right to their point of view cr*p.

marienbad

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Speech isn't done in a non consequential bubble either. The Brexit debate has unleashed a huge amount of vicious attacks religious and ethnic minorities in the UK.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-hate-crime-racism-reports-eu-referendum-latest-a7106116.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/race-hate-crimes-uk-railways-increase-brexit-vote-eu-referendum-a7202121.html

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jul/11/police-blame-worst-rise-in-recorded-hate-on-eu-referendum

We all know this . I don't see what point you are making here or how it is related to what I posted .

learn_more

marienbad wrote: »

We all know this . I don't see what point you are making here or how it is related to what I posted .

You know this? So you know that hate speech has consequences. Sometimes violent consequences. But your fine with that cause the wider issue of free speech for everyone is more important to you ? :eek:

marienbad

learn_more wrote: »

You know this? So you know that hate speech has consequences. Sometimes violent consequences. But your fine with that cause the wider issue of free speech for everyone is more important to you ? :eek:

We already have plenty of limitations on free speech , our libel laws and practice are draconian , we have legislation covering incitement ,hate crime etc , we have even recently enacted blasphemy laws .

Just out of interest what do you suggest on top of all that ?

Jellybaby1

bonyn wrote: »

Joey, did you research this man before posting? You did describe him as a hate preacher, but apart from a 2008 interview where he described homosexuality as curable through prayer (a belief shared by many protestants) he seems like a decent skin. Hardly affiliated with the westboro Baptist church.

Don't criticise your husband is particularly excellent advice. Similarly a man shouldnt criticise his wife publicly or to his kids either.

Here's a video of him in action.
https://youtu.be/tlGfJIQ8mWs

Who told you that this is a belief shared by many Protestants? And, how many protestants do you actually know and have discussed this with? I've never heard such rot in all my Protestant life!

learn_more

marienbad wrote: »

We already have plenty of limitations on free speech , our libel laws and practice are draconian , we have legislation covering incitement ,hate crime etc , we have even recently enacted blasphemy laws .

Just out of interest what do you suggest on top of all that ?

Prevention.

NIMAN

brightspark wrote: »

Holocaust denial is a crime in 14 European countries!

Yes, I know that but I would honestly question as to why its a crime.

If someone wants to say it never happened, when we all know it did, why should we charge that person and put them in jail?

They have only made a statement, they haven't killed anyone or caused physical damage.

If someone was to say to me "the holocaust never happened", I would simply say they were talking nonsense and are wrong, but I don't believe they should be in prison.

Then again, I am not Jewish so maybe they would think differently.

NIMAN

Can I ask all those who think this preacher shouldn't be allowed to speak in Ireland if they agree that Charlie Hebdo should continue printing cartoons that a large section of Muslims find offensive?

Many do, and at the time of the famous cartoons, they said that we should have the right to do it. But if your neighbour asks you to stop doing something because they find it highly offensive, but you continue to do it anyway, aren't you just being a knob?