Free speech

Taking Boris to Court is Really, Really, Stupid

Gerry Lynch on May 29, 2019, 2:11 pm

| Readers 2863

I can’t believe how many people on my social media feeds are cheering on the unbelievably anti-democratic and morally wrong court case against Boris Johnson over the notorious £350m a week bus slogan. But even for those who can’t see this as wrong, the stupidity of giving a master charlatan and showman like Boris Johnson his day in court should be obvious. I have wider worries than Boris backflipping his prosecutors and using this case as a means to …

“It may seem that writing in icing on a cake is a trivial form of expression…”

Pete Baker on October 25, 2016, 4:46 pm

| Readers 1638

As Alan mentioned in his post on the Court of Appeal ruling against Ashers Baking Company yesterday, noted legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg, describing the ruling as “surprisingly straightforward”, outlined the judges reasoning …if a business does supply a service, it must not discriminate on grounds of sexual orientation — which means it must not refuse to provide a gay person with goods that it would provide to others. In this case, said the courts, the correct comparison was not with …

Pastor McConnell judgement: “It is not the task of the criminal law to censor offensive utterances…”

Mick Fealty on January 5, 2016, 1:47 pm

| Readers 1324

SOFT SANDS: The acquittal of Pastor James McConnell is not the first case of alleged offence to hit to soft sands after a long bout of social media outrage and the deliberation of the DDP’s office, which at the very least suggests there is a substantial difference between public understanding and the law itself.

With ‘Je Suis Charlie’ seeming increasingly distant, is ‘Free Speech’ under threat in Northern Ireland?

Soapbox on August 6, 2015, 2:39 pm

| Readers 1141

It’s easy to support the concept of ‘Free Speech’ in principle, especially when the political winds blow in its favour. Only earlier this year, many united behind the slogan of ‘Je Suis Charlie’, with strong words of condemnation for a media unwilling to show the cartoon for fear of ‘offence’ or ‘retribution’. Yet, when tested within the daily practice of society, this support is prone to waiver. It is unpopular to defend an individual who ‘offends’, or whose speech has …

50 days since 50 lashes – blogging is still not a crime

Patrick Corrigan on March 1, 2015, 10:07 am

| Readers 389

Whatever we may disagree about here on the pages of Slugger, we can all agree that blogging is not a crime. Yet, Saudi Arabian blogger Raif Badawi is still in jail and still due to be lashed another 950 times. On the upside, it’s now been 50 days since he was flogged very publicly 50 times by Saudi officials. In the week leading up to his flogging on 9 January, Raif’s name appeared more and more frequently in news headlines and statements …

Drawing Charlie

Brian Spencer on January 13, 2015, 7:49 pm

| Readers 776

One of my favourite cartoonists has made one of the best cartoons, if something good can come out of all this bad. The above by Dave Brown that is, tomorrow’s cartoon in the Independent. A remix of the first post-attack edition of Charlie Hebdo to be published tomorrow, whose cover I will not divulge here, but you can sneak a peek here. Normally, when a politician and person of power gets cartooned they buy it and hang it on the …

Vegetarian Stalinism Part 2: Ready the Gulags on the South Downs

Turgon on March 15, 2014, 10:34 am

| Readers 84

Last month I highlighted the bizarre suggestion by the Green Party that in response to the flooding all government ministers and advisors who were sceptical of climate change should be sacked. Memorably when given the opportunity to refine and tone down this suggestion the leader of the Green Party Natalie Bennett claimed that even those advisers with no connection to environmental issues should be sacked if they do not accept climate change. The BBC suggested the Chief Veterinary and Chief …

Free speech under pressure or action against inflammatory comments?

Brian Walker on August 20, 2013, 10:54 am

| Readers 60

Ought we to be a mite concerned about protecting free speech from officious prosecutions, even when the comments are “obnoxious”, in the opinion of a district judge? I hold no brief for Ruth Patterson’s “alleged” comments on Facebook which it’s customary not to repeat once someone is charged and for which she has apologised. This Derry case is a sign of changed times. Amazing to learn that a “youth” has been fined in Derry for making “ derogatory remarks” in …

You have the right to be offended.

Pete Baker on March 22, 2011, 1:36 pm

| Readers 12

That would appear to be the upshot of the Belfast High Court ruling which overturned an Advertising Standards Authority ban on a controversial advert by Sandown Free Presbyterian Church. From the BBC report In his ruling on Tuesday, Mr Justice Treacy stressed the context of the advertisement was important. The judge noted that the advertisement contained no exhortation to violence and that it also made clear how violent antagonism towards homosexuals was unacceptable and unjustifiable. He said: “The applicant’s religious views and the …