NationStates Jolt Archive

I know nothing is perfect.

Here in the U.K. we are slowly losing our rights to the Politically Correct madness. We are no longer allowed to use the words 'Fat Free' on foodstuffs just incase it offends a 'larger' person. The humble story of 'The Three Little Pigs' has been renamed to 'The Three Little Puppies' in fear of offending Muslims, even tho senior Muslim clerics says it's absurd and you can use the pig word, eating them is not allowed.

I was mildly amused and highly confused by the Phelps family and the Westboro Baptist Church on Louis Theroux's show last night.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6507971.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctwo/noise/?id=louis_theroux

"God is your enemy."
"You will eat your babies."
"God hates fags."
"God hates America"
"God is your Terrorist"
"Fag Troops
"The Lord God Almighty killed [the people who died on 9/11], looked at them in the face, laughed and mocked at each one of them as he cast each one of them into hell".
"The President of the United States gets his jollies masturbating horses"
"This is the hypocritical, fag-infested, fag-run United States of America and we're supposed to respect that fag rag flag?"
"The red on that flag stands for fag rectal blood"


They also preach hate to Roman Catholics, Muslims & Jews.

How does the U.S. and it's citizens tolerate this kind of hate behaviour? Isn't this illegal in the U.S., I know it is in most other countries and would result in arrest and imprisonment.

Doesn't this kind of behaviour bring 'Free Speech' into disrepute? And what happened to the love and forgiveness kind of Christianity I was taught????


Thoughts please.

Free speech protections must be strictly defined. If you try to pass a law that is vague (no offensive speech, no stupid speech, etc.), eventually the law will be stretched to its legal limits and far beyond what was originally intended.

Take flag desecration, for instance. A law banning the practice would be foolish. While most of this law's supporters believe they know what flag desecration is, how do you define it legally? With a vague law such as that, everything from flag bumper stickers to improperly displayed flags could be grounds for punishment.

So, seeing as free speech can be so slippery, I think it's best to err on the side of liberty. Better to live in a society with too much free speech rather than not enough, yes? After all, you can always ignore the stupid ones. No censorship needed.

In the U.S., our Constitution protects almost all speech. We believe that the right to speek is more important than someone being offended. So long as speech does not call for physical harm, cause physical harm (as in, shouting fire in a crowded theater), cause harm to someone's character falsely, or qualify as obscene (you'd have to ask a lawyer how the SCOTUS snuck this in), it is legally protected.

Why? Because we were raised on the political tradition of Voltaire, Locke, and Jefferson. I may believe that Fred Phelps is a hateful, evil man deserving of great scorn, but I will still fight to the death to protect his right to spread his sick, bigoted dogma. After all, if he does not have the right to speak his mind, how do I?

But if it was a Muslim saying those things and spreading hate, he would be picked up straight away!!!!! If he wasn't gunned down on the spot.

Why is this different?

But if it was a Muslim saying those things and spreading hate, he would be picked up straight away!!!!! If he wasn't gunned down on the spot.

Why is this different?
Vigilante-style social censorship ≠ legal, state-sanctioned censorship

Much further.

Vigilante-style social censorship ≠ legal, state-sanctioned censorship

Check.

American hating, Jew, Black, homophobia and Christian hate spreading is fine as long as you're a white American.

We are no longer allowed to use the words 'Fat Free' on foodstuffs just incase it offends a 'larger' person. The humble story of 'The Three Little Pigs' has been renamed to 'The Three Little Puppies' in fear of offending Muslims, even tho senior Muslim clerics says it's absurd and you can use the pig word, eating them is not allowed.

You have got to be fucking kidding me.

Check.

American hating, Jew, Black, homophobia and Christian hate spreading is fine as long as you're a white American.

I'd say the opposite is true, white Americans are the most constrained in what they say

I know nothing is perfect.

Here in the U.K. we are slowly losing our rights to the Politically Correct madness. We are no longer allowed to use the words 'Fat Free' on foodstuffs just incase it offends a 'larger' person. The humble story of 'The Three Little Pigs' has been renamed to 'The Three Little Puppies' in fear of offending Muslims, even tho senior Muslim clerics says it's absurd and you can use the pig word, eating them is not allowed.

I was mildly amused and highly confused by the Phelps family and the Westboro Baptist Church on Louis Theroux's show last night.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6507971.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctwo/noise/?id=louis_theroux



They also preach hate to Roman Catholics, Muslims & Jews.

How does the U.S. and it's citizens tolerate this kind of hate behaviour? Isn't this illegal in the U.S., I know it is in most other countries and would result in arrest and imprisonment.

Doesn't this kind of behaviour bring 'Free Speech' into disrepute? And what happened to the love and forgiveness kind of Christianity I was taught????


Thoughts please.

We don't. There are natural and social consequences to what one says, and these people are most liking facing it, however unlike in the UK (correct me if I am wrong) they would not face legal repercussions. The natural ones are bad enough. Everything from being ostracized, getting fired, getting sued to getting your ass kicked are and can be the consequence of such negative speech.


The law and government is not needed to resolve such issues.

Now the question to ask yourself is why is the BBC reporting such news? Is there a political or financial motive behind it? What could it be?

Why would these people draw attention to themselves and get people to hate them through negative speech and behavior? Is it on purpose or because they plain outside insensitive?

I have my theories yet I hope you will draw your own conclusions.

Check.

American hating, Jew, Black, homophobia and Christian hate spreading is fine as long as you're a white American.

You have obviously never heard of Louis Farrakan. ANYONE has the right to say what s/he pleases in the US -- white, black, green, or polka dotted.

'The Three Little Pigs' has been renamed to 'The Three Little Puppies' in fear of offending Muslims, even tho senior Muslim clerics says it's absurd and you can use the pig word, eating them is not allowed.
so... who wants to eat the three little puppies? i think it would be brilliant if it were the big bad pig. that would be hilarious on so many levels.

[Quote:
Originally Posted by Chingie
We are no longer allowed to use the words 'Fat Free' on foodstuffs just incase it offends a 'larger' person. The humble story of 'The Three Little Pigs' has been renamed to 'The Three Little Puppies' in fear of offending Muslims, even tho senior Muslim clerics says it's absurd and you can use the pig word, eating them is not allowed.

You have got to be fucking kidding me.]

As a citizen of the UK, I know things are going a bit too far - but i have never heard of any of these things happening.

I watched the programme last night - Mr Phelps protests too much - i bet he's receiving a regular bumming every night!!!!!

It did sadden me though - these people have been brainwashed by a bitter old man, not allowed to live their lives and the kids are dragged to pickets where they are put at risk or harm for an argument they have no clue about.

The authorities should take the kids into care - save them from the lunatic family.

Free speach should be protected - hearing the bullsh8t they spoke last night reinforces my own believes - JS Mill advocates this arguement. But I suppose this only works on those who are reasonably intelligent and have been exposed to different arguments and opinions.

You have got to be fucking kidding me.

I kid ye not.....

Three Little Pigs
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54730
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=442555&in_page_id=1770
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258986,00.html

The British Government is bending over and taking Muslim up the arse.

I kid ye not.....

Three Little Pigs
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54730
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=442555&in_page_id=1770
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258986,00.html

The British Government is bending over and taking Muslim up the arse.

Ahhh those bastions of agenda-less reporting - and it's a school not the government, the only government member, a councillor, said it was stoopid

I know nothing is perfect.

Here in the U.K. we are slowly losing our rights to the Politically Correct madness. We are no longer allowed to use the words 'Fat Free' on foodstuffs just incase it offends a 'larger' person. The humble story of 'The Three Little Pigs' has been renamed to 'The Three Little Puppies' in fear of offending Muslims, even tho senior Muslim clerics says it's absurd and you can use the pig word, eating them is not allowed.

I was mildly amused and highly confused by the Phelps family and the Westboro Baptist Church on Louis Theroux's show last night.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6507971.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctwo/noise/?id=louis_theroux



They also preach hate to Roman Catholics, Muslims & Jews.

How does the U.S. and it's citizens tolerate this kind of hate behaviour? Isn't this illegal in the U.S., I know it is in most other countries and would result in arrest and imprisonment.

Doesn't this kind of behaviour bring 'Free Speech' into disrepute? And what happened to the love and forgiveness kind of Christianity I was taught????


Thoughts please.

In my opinion, if you don't allow speech that is offensive and bad as well as that which is good, you don't really have free speech.

He can be sued for libel if he tells vicious lies about people. However, no one bothers, because it's way more fun to watch him make a fool of himself. If he's free to spout whatever ridiculous and horrible things come to his deranged mind, it's quite easy to dismiss him as a crackpot.

I'm personally in favor of greatly reducing all forms of censorship. There is no right to never hear something offensive.

Ahhh those bastions of agenda-less reporting

It was in just about every newspaper in Britain, regardless of stance.

These are the same people that stopped competitive sports day at my childrens school because, the large kids cannot compete.

We've moved now and the school is much better, Anthony Hopkins visited for the Roald Dahl week and he didn't eat the children.

Other recent rows have involved 'Baa Baa Black Sheep' being changed to 'Baa Baa rainbow sheep'

seriously. wtf is a rainbow sheep???

I can say whatever the hell I damn well please without being prosecuted for it. While I'm at work is a different matter though...

Apparently it's not cool to call the old people blue hairs and wrinkly fluid sacks. Nor fat people lard asses and cow people or (mooskies). Nor black children tar babies. Nor Indian people sniper targets. Nor white people gingers, hicks, and my personal favorite "milkmen". :(

I reserve the right to be an asshole!

The Daily Mail is not a source to quote, read or learn from.

The Daily Mail is inherently anti non white, protestant Diana lovers and isn't worth wiping ones bottom with.

The Daily Mail is something that actually makes me agree with limitations on free speech and censorship - its that bad!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

seriousl. wtf is a rainbow sheep???

Dunno, probably the same one you'll see when you take the same drugs these people are taking.

Seriously tho, Britain is becoming a bit crazy with all this 'change it because it might offend' behaviour. It will be the end of us as Herr Blair takes us down this dangerous path.

The Daily Mail is not a source to quote, read or learn from.

The Daily Mail is inherently anti non white, protestant Diana lovers and isn't worth wiping ones bottom with.

The Daily Mail is something that actually makes me agree with limitations on free speech and censorship - its that bad!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well use Google (http://www.google.co.uk/search?num=100&hl=en&safe=off&q=three+little+puppies&meta=) and find one you do like, it was pretty big news.

Well use Google (http://www.google.co.uk/search?num=100&hl=en&safe=off&q=three+little+puppies&meta=) and find one you do like, it was pretty big news.

Apologies as I edited my original post to point out that it had nothing to do with the government - it was one school's choice.

Well use Google (http://www.google.co.uk/search?num=100&hl=en&safe=off&q=three+little+puppies&meta=) and find one you do like, it was pretty big news.

Intrestingly, google also does not provide sources I would rely on.

It's throwing up sites such as the Daily Mail, Christian News, Jihad Watch, of course they are going to highlight the measures people are going to in order to gather some more anti-muslim support.

Apologies as I edited my original post to point out that it had nothing to do with the government - it was one school's choice.

Yes, you're right.

However, I am of the opinion that the Government supports this type of behaviour and is doing us no favours until it tightens up it's immigration and stops giving away resources.

Everybody is going crazy in the U.K. over not offending Muslims. Our local Church was asked to remove the large cross on the outside wall, as was the BA stewardess last year. The rights of the many are being eroded by the rights of a few.

Intrestingly, google also does not provide sources I would rely on.

It's throwing up sites such as the Daily Mail, Christian News, Jihad Watch, of course they are going to highlight the measures people are going to in order to gather some more anti-muslim support.

Um... you know you can also use Google to find articles from say, the Associated Press, the Times and other respectable news sources...

Intrestingly, google also does not provide sources I would rely on.

It's throwing up sites such as the Daily Mail, Christian News, Jihad Watch, of course they are going to highlight the measures people are going to in order to gather some more anti-muslim support.

The fact is, it happened. I didn't read it in any of the tabloids, it was on the news.

Jews do not eat pork, it wasn't necessary to rename the story for the last 150 years, why now???

so... who wants to eat the three little puppies? i think it would be brilliant if it were the big bad pig. that would be hilarious on so many levels.

Have you seen this book:

http://www.amazon.com/True-Story-Little-Pigs/dp/0670888443/ref=pd_bbs_3/103-9750536-4844653?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1175509892&sr=8-3

Um... you know you can also use Google to find articles from say, the Associated Press, the Times and other respectable news sources...

I am aware of this, my examples were from the page Chingie posted for other sources.

The fact is, it happened. I didn't read it in any of the tabloids, it was on the news.

Jews do not eat pork, it wasn't necessary to rename the story for the last 150 years, why now???


The Jews weren't percieved as suicide bombers. This is a problem with the British media not Jews or Muslims. Muslims do not want Brits to stop telling stories about the three little pigs or ba ba black sheep. The media cause this political correctness to feed the anti immigrant arguement.

I am aware of this, my examples were from the page Chingie posted for other sources.




The Jews weren't percieved as suicide bombers. This is a problem with the British media not Jews or Muslims. Muslims do not want Brits to stop telling stories about the three little pigs or ba ba black sheep. The media cause this political correctness to feed the anti immigrant arguement.

What do suicide bombers have to do with it?

And there was me thinking it was the morons at the school creating the issue. Yes, I do understand the Muslims do not mind the story.

What do suicide bombers have to do with it?

And there was me thinking it was the morons at the school creating the issue. Yes, I do understand the Muslims do not mind the story.

The media are basically portraying Muslims to be suicide bombers, anti-british and therefore shouldn't be in Britain.

By Media, i mean the Daily Mail and Express.

Muslims are being viewed as people that will destroy British society. The Jews weren't.

The fact that the school has picked up on this is evidence on the influence of the media.

Here in the U.K. we are slowly losing our rights to the Politically Correct madness. We are no longer allowed to use the words 'Fat Free' on foodstuffs just incase it offends a 'larger' person. The humble story of 'The Three Little Pigs' has been renamed to 'The Three Little Puppies' in fear of offending Muslims, even tho senior Muslim clerics says it's absurd and you can use the pig word, eating them is not allowed.

Your country needs to pull itself out of it's stupid paranoid insanity. If that ever happens in my country. I'm going to do something about it.

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/01/22/124613.php

Off you go then...

I know nothing is perfect.

Here in the U.K. we are slowly losing our rights to the Politically Correct madness. We are no longer allowed to use the words 'Fat Free' on foodstuffs just incase it offends a 'larger' person. The humble story of 'The Three Little Pigs' has been renamed to 'The Three Little Puppies' in fear of offending Muslims, even tho senior Muslim clerics says it's absurd and you can use the pig word, eating them is not allowed.

I was mildly amused and highly confused by the Phelps family and the Westboro Baptist Church on Louis Theroux's show last night.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6507971.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctwo/noise/?id=louis_theroux



They also preach hate to Roman Catholics, Muslims & Jews.

How does the U.S. and it's citizens tolerate this kind of hate behaviour? Isn't this illegal in the U.S., I know it is in most other countries and would result in arrest and imprisonment.

Doesn't this kind of behaviour bring 'Free Speech' into disrepute? And what happened to the love and forgiveness kind of Christianity I was taught????


Thoughts please.

Ever hear the phrase "better the devil you know than the devil you don't?" It doesn't mean (as many seem to think) that you shouldn't try to fix problems because you might end up with a worse problem. It means that if you can't fix a problem, you should at least let everyone know that it's there. If you ban groups like Phleps, you'll just get more of them and not even know about them.

As for Christianity, people tend not to use religion to help them lead a better life. They tend to just use it to sugar coat their beliefs which are pretty much just based on their personalities. The Ku Klux Clan is a Protestant organization. No Christian group thinks that eating lobster or bacon is a problem, but they'll cheerfully point to the exact same chapter to show you that the Bible condemns homosexuality. Clearly the Bible is not the reason that an otherwise tolerant and loving person would hate homosexuality. Otherwise they'd react just as strongly to eating bacon, or shaving, or needing glasses.

This is why hateful angry people who want to bomb everyone they disagree with will tell you that Jesus is a warrior in Revalations, even though he was a man of peace who taught people to live peacefully

It was in just about every newspaper in Britain, regardless of stance.

These are the same people that stopped competitive sports day at my childrens school because, the large kids cannot compete.

We've moved now and the school is much better, Anthony Hopkins visited for the Roald Dahl week and he didn't eat the children.

Large Kids? Is that fat kids? Because bigger children tend to be able to compete quite well. Also, perhaps they wouldn't be so fat if they played more sports.

Have you seen this book:

http://www.amazon.com/True-Story-Little-Pigs/dp/0670888443/ref=pd_bbs_3/103-9750536-4844653?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1175509892&sr=8-3

hehe. i think i had heard of this book...

i wonder if the author is jewish, to vilify the pigs so. that was what i was hoping for in the UK...

Large Kids? Is that fat kids? Because bigger children tend to be able to compete quite well. Also, perhaps they wouldn't be so fat if they played more sports.

Yes, I mean 'Fat' but you're not allowed to say that. It's 'Large'

For some reason teachers think that children will be scared for life because they can't win a foot race and do activities that focus on participation.

The last sports day my boys had, they were all lined up throwing little bean bags into a hoop. "Hooray, well done" the teacher would shout as ALL the children got a bean bag in the hoop, everybody wins. Well life just isn't like that, I'm not going to preach, you know you get winners and losers, just find something you're good at. As a parent I understand you should encourage children, but ffs, you shouldn't hold back the ones that can win.

I don't know what's going on, but it's getting worse. If you're fat, changing the use of words wont stop you from being fat. If the kids are so bothered about being fat, lose weight and stop eating.

This Phelps family. Yes the world ain't that great at times, but picketing soldiers funerals!!! Leave it alone, because you have the right don't mean you should. So much hate and anger, the U.S. just doesn't need people like that, even if they do have the right to be arseholes.

Here in the U.K. we are slowly losing our rights to the Politically Correct madness. We are no longer allowed to use the words 'Fat Free' on foodstuffs just incase it offends a 'larger' person. The humble story of 'The Three Little Pigs' has been renamed to 'The Three Little Puppies' in fear of offending Muslims, even tho senior Muslim clerics says it's absurd and you can use the pig word, eating them is not allowed.

You are not breaking the law if you use the phrases 'Fat Free' or 'The Three Little Pigs'. Some people and institutions might choose not to use them, but that's quite another matter. Those who have a problem with it should talk to the people and institutions responsible, rather than trying to blame it on the government (which has nothing to do with it) or the media (which for very obvious reasons is usually critical of anything which inhibits free speech).

Incidentally, the Westboro mob would be breaking the law if they actually incited violence towards anyone, but they're not dumb enough to do that. Saying: "That fag has been killed, ha ha!" is unpleasant but legal. Saying: "We should go and kill that fag," is not legal.

They could be sued for defamation over claims like: "The President of the United States gets his jollies masturbating horses." However if Dubya sued, that would only give them the opportunity to stand up in court and spout more of their drivel, probably to a wider audience.

Silencing unpopular beliefs today sets precedent that permits unpopular beliefs to be silenced in the future; beliefs that could possibly even include your own.

Here in the U.K. we are slowly losing our rights to the Politically Correct madness. We are no longer allowed to use the words 'Fat Free' on foodstuffs just incase it offends a 'larger' person. The humble story of 'The Three Little Pigs' has been renamed to 'The Three Little Puppies' in fear of offending Muslims, even tho senior Muslim clerics says it's absurd and you can use the pig word, eating them is not allowed.
Alan Partridge, is that you?

Since when was there legislation against the words 'fat free' or 'three little pigs'? As many posters have already said, certain non-governmental institutions have decided, idiotically, not to use the terms, but this in no way means you or I are "no longer allowed" to use the terms. Indeed, at this very moment I am drinking a glass of milk from a bottle with 'fat free' on the side.

Thankfully, the Daily Hate Mail doesn't put forward UK legislation, and, funnily enough, neither does Fox News.

They also preach hate to Roman Catholics, Muslims & Jews.

And swedes, don't forget about the swedes! After all, he's calling the swedes "sodomites, whores, zoophiles and molesters" :)

And this is the horrid result of shameless incest:

http://img239.imageshack.us/img239/2037/madelainesmallwv0.jpg

http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/9615/07madeleine77190atc2.jpg

Strange, silly people, those Phelpsers...

seriously. wtf is a rainbow sheep???A gay sheep?

Has anyone noticed how nothing gets sold in a 'small' sizes anymore. It's either 'medium', 'large' or 'extra large'. It seems companies are so frightened of offending fat people that they've made it seem like large is the norm. Even my smallest TV package that I can buy is labeled 'medium'. :mad:

Useless.

WARNING: There may be a hint of poorly writen sarcasm in this post

I resent the implication that any American, be they Muslim or Christian, would not be able to speak their mind, so long as they did not advocate violence, and did not violate the other rules I layed out earlier in this thread. They would receive the same legal protection from the SCOTUS (even the Bush Court). Their local communities might be different, but that has nothing to do with the law.

And I'm really sick of hearing bullshit about our legal system. Attack our politicians and policies, but if you're going after our system, I reserve the right to return fire (and trust me, Britain has no space to claim superiority on the issue of Free Speech).

These verses express pro-defamation and anti-censorship opinions. I am still working on them. They want to fit together, but it seems too awkward. The second one is certainly not my best writing ever. Someone told me that these poems are more "appropriate" than my other poems have been. I am not entirely sure what he meant by that.

*****

The crudest crap beats lorem ipsum wiles,
Placeholder jumble filling up a slate
That armchair scholars claim are useful tiles
Cohering in mosaic rectitude.
Their lorem ipsum slyly slips to styles
Prolonging time to spend for certitude
To be unraveled. We will all have piles,
And under us our home tectonic plate
Will have displacement of eleven miles
Before we find a word of pulchritude
Inside intentionally cryptic spate.
Wry defamation then becomes a goal,
A plea for everyone to cuddle slurs.
Eventually, edges smear to jest,
And credibility fades out or rips.
We have no soul, and hence no heavy soul.
Reduce us to some painless puddle blurs.
The fiercest propositions to contest
Would be innocuous, unblinking blips,
Like postulations on a palimpsest
Concealing arcane treatments for the yips.

What should be our younglings’ vade mecum,
Screaming night away at pliant, wide eyes?
Show them all anatomy, the scrotum
And vagina. No one's life will capsize.
Our prudish pattern of elegantly
Issuing sweet euphemisms sully
The impressionable. They blatantly
Teach a viral self-shame. See the bully
That is their reflection. Censorship stings.
Banish not the words but the sin anode
Preaching negativity to sex rings.
Galaxies - rest assured - will not implode.

The Westboro Baptist Church is filled with douches and dicks and is generally regarded as a joke. Even my more right-wing friends consider it a parody of the conservative party. It'd be funnier though if they didn't have some amount of political power.

And I'm really sick of hearing bullshit about our legal system. Attack our politicians and policies, but if you're going after our system, I reserve the right to return fire (and trust me, Britain has no space to claim superiority on the issue of Free Speech).

Are you posting on the correct thread?
Unless my brain is overtired from too much time in the office, nobody on this one has attacked the US legal system.
Aside from a few issues concerned with reporting court cases, I don't believe US law on free speech differs from the UK's very much.

Are you posting on the correct thread?
Unless my brain is overtired from too much time in the office, nobody on this one has attacked the US legal system.
Aside from a few issues concerned with reporting court cases, I don't believe US law on free speech differs from the UK's very much.

Did you, y'know, read the first post, and then the poster's later posts?

And in the UK, it is much easier to win a libel suit, often for opinion pieces.

Did you, y'know, read the first post, and then the poster's later posts?

Yes I did. It [the OP] starts by criticising the UK, then asks what the law in the US is. Hardly an attack.
Chingie's later posts suggest a lack of understanding of how free speech law works in the US or the UK. But he still seems mainly concerned with complaining about the UK.


And in the UK, it is much easier to win a libel suit, often for opinion pieces.

I don't really know US media law, but in the UK there are a number of defences for libel. The only ones that are much use are: privilege by statute, fair comment, and (if you are lucky) privilege at common law, aka the Reynolds defence.
[ADD] I forgot 'police appeal for information'. That's the best libel defence, and protects you from contempt of court as well.
Juries decide libel cases, and juries are known to make some pretty odd decisions.

Is it very different in the US? (That's not a rhetorical question - I can see from your posts on the global warming thread that you're not silly, so maybe I might learn something.)

[I've had to edit this post about five times: I need a screen break.]

I know nothing is perfect.

Here in the U.K. we are slowly losing our rights to the Politically Correct madness. We are no longer allowed to use the words 'Fat Free' on foodstuffs just incase it offends a 'larger' person. The humble story of 'The Three Little Pigs' has been renamed to 'The Three Little Puppies'

Bullshit. You are allowed to use those words as much as you like, if an individual company decides to use an alternative phrase for "fat free" then that's their decision, it hasn't been legislated.

'Political Correctness' is the new bogeyman of the English Right, having recently overtaken asylum seekers and pregnant teenagers.

Yes, I mean 'Fat' but you're not allowed to say that. It's 'Large'.

Name even one person who's been prosecuted for using the word 'fat'.

Yes I did. It [the OP] starts by criticising the UK, then asks what the law in the US is. Hardly an attack.
Chingie's later posts suggest a lack of understanding of how free speech law works in the US or the UK. But he still seems mainly concerned with complaining about the UK.

Maybe I misread him, but I read his comments the other way, as sneering at the tolerance of people like Fred Phelps.

I don't really know US media law, but in the UK there are a number of defences for libel. The only ones that are much use are: privilege by statute, fair comment, and (if you are lucky) privilege at common law, aka the Reynolds defence.
Juries decide libel cases, and juries are known to make some pretty odd decisions.

Is it very different in the US? (That's not a rhetorical question - I can see from your posts on the global warming thread that you're not silly, so maybe I might learn something.)

[I've had to edit this post about five times: I need a screen break.]

I'm sure that it is also the case in the UK that the burden of proof lies with the plaintiff. Generally, in the U.S., it is very hard to proove libel. You have to not only proove that the written statement was, in fact, demonstrably false (that is to say, that it was not a statement of opinion, but rather a claim of a false fact), and that it caused tangible harm to your public character (so, if it didn't harm your image, it was not libel).

Edit: I'm no law student, so if you want more specific information, you might ask one of our local lawyers.

Maybe I misread him, but I read his comments the other way, as sneering at the tolerance of people like Fred Phelps.

Well yes, but to me that suggests a lack of understanding of free speech and its downside, rather than an attack on the US' approach to it.


I'm sure that it is also the case in the UK that the burden of proof lies with the plaintiff.

I think you mean respondent. The plaintiff is the one who makes the complaint, ie the one who claims to have been libelled.

In the UK the respondent has to defend their statement, but only on the balance of probability. Meaning that they have to persuade the jury that their statement was probably protected by law - they don't have to prove it beyond all reasonable doubt.
However, a respondent which loses a libel case on that burden of proof issue does have the right to appeal under the Human Rights Act. There's also the matter of privilege at common law (eg 'We had a moral duty to inform/warn the public as soon as possible') - court rulings over the last five years indicate that this might be a very effective defence.

Having said all that, a quick check on the internet just now suggests to me that legal precedent in the US is much more firmly on the side of the media. Therefore you are probably right to claim that freedom of speech is better protected in the US - I hope your nation's journalists are duly grateful.
Mind you, I dread to think what would happen if some elements of the UK media could operate under your laws.

But if it was a Muslim saying those things and spreading hate, he would be picked up straight away!!!!! If he wasn't gunned down on the spot.

Why is this different?

That's BS. There are Muslims spouting off worse than that in mosques all over the US and they don't get picked up.

I think you mean respondent. The plaintiff is the one who makes the complaint, ie the one who claims to have been libelled.

I actually meant visa-versa, shows what I know.

Having said all that, a quick check on the internet just now suggests to me that legal precedent in the US is much more firmly on the side of the media. Therefore you are probably right to claim that freedom of speech is better protected in the US - I hope your nation's journalists are duly grateful.
Mind you, I dread to think what would happen if some elements of the UK media could operate under your laws.

They are. We tend to err on the side of the speaker. That's why, IIRC, burden of proof lies with the plaintiff in the U.S.

And, if you think your journalists are bad, you haven't seen Faux News. :p

American Free Speech - How far???

Pretty far. Not far enough to protect pr0n (technically), but pretty far.

Pretty far. Not far enough to protect pr0n (technically), but pretty far.

Technically, the rule for porn is, "I know it if I see it," and justice is blind, so we shouldn't have a problem.

I know nothing is perfect.

Here in the U.K. we are slowly losing our rights to the Politically Correct madness. We are no longer allowed to use the words 'Fat Free' on foodstuffs just incase it offends a 'larger' person. The humble story of 'The Three Little Pigs' has been renamed to 'The Three Little Puppies' in fear of offending Muslims, even tho senior Muslim clerics says it's absurd and you can use the pig word, eating them is not allowed.



Can we have the source/link for this please. To my knowledge in england you can't really use fat free, because alot of the foods that made this claim, example meat, use in term in a way that is characterised a misdirection. Which is illegal when advertising in most of europe.

In regards to free speach itself except for the laws on racial and religious hatred, most things seem to be legal

Thanks for the responses, it helps a lot.

I don't think my original post was too clear.

In the U.K. we have freedom of speech, there are no laws to prevent us from using the words 'fat' or 'black' but I've found that certain groups or 'do-gooders' are deciding some rather absurd does and dont's in fear of upsetting someone.

But, although we have free speech, we also have a law the Police use called 'Public order'. I believe you have the same thing in the U.S. My question should really have been, 'American Free Speech - How far until it becomes civil disobedience? Anybody know about Siegel (2004)?

For me, interupting and picketing funerals and hurling abuse while people go about their lawful business, is, too far.

Here in the U.K. I'm certain you would be cautioned. Keep doing it and you'll see yourself in court.

We love them ASBO's