Blasphemy laws.
Posted by D
Bracks has put up his blaspehmy `law’ and Heroc. The British govt has made further regression, leads the way quite well.
Telegraph has a a good law report, and has : Hammond versus Director of Prosecutions, Divisional Court ( appeal court).
In a lower court, Hammond was found guilty of breach of section 5,Public Order Act ( 1986 ). The appeal cited some sections European Convention of Human Rights as ground of appeal.
His offence, Hammond is a christian, earnest from what can be gleaned, who bore a sign in public declaring `homosexuality and lesbianism is immoral’. $0-50 onlookers gathered, some were hostile.
Under the P.O. Act , it is an offence, apparently, to display any sign in public in the hearing (?!) or sight of anyone offended, harrassed or distressed by the sign.
The appellate judge upheld the lower court’s judgement.
Common law overthrown, caprice and stupidity reign. For irrespective of whether Hammond’s sign is or is not offence to anyone, opinion has no bearing upon neither rule of common law no general civil order (consequently).
Ludicrous also. One finds the opinions of the poltically correct offensive but also offensive would be to use an Act to stop them putting it in public, no matter that it distresses and harrasses one sorely. The line is drawn, however, at using class rooms to indoctrinate children in to their beliefs , which applies no less to Hammond if he were to do the same, a breech, a serious breech, of trust is involved.
The Act makes not only a mockery of the rule of law, but reacts against the very liberty of the individual which makes a civilsed world possible.
Post a Comment