Why let police wrongly use Public Order Act to allow Muslims to stop Christians

[Boyoboy0]

defending faith in quiet chat? The purpose of that Act was to deal with street violence, say the Christian Institute, not to stifle freedom of speech in peaceful conversations, yes?

Did you see Mail on Sunday @ those nice hotel owners' shock @ such false charges?

Christian hotel owners ... hauled before court after defending their beliefs in discussion with Muslim guest
By Jonathan Petre

A Christian couple have been charged with a criminal offence after taking part in what they regarded as a reasonable discussion about religion with guests at their hotel.

... were arrested after a Muslim woman complained to police that she had been offended by their comments.

They have been charged under public order laws with using ‘threatening, abusive or insulting words’ that were ‘religiously aggravated’.

The couple, whose trial has been set for December, face a fine of up to £5,000 and a criminal record if they are convicted.

Although the facts are disputed, it is thought that during the conversation the couple were challenged over their Christian beliefs.

It is understood that they suggested that Mohammed, the founder of Islam, was a warlord and that traditional Muslim dress for women was a form of bondage.

They deny, however, that their comments were threatening and argue that they had every right to defend and explain their beliefs.

Mrs V..., 54, who has run the Bounty House Hotel near Aintree racecourse in Liverpool with her husband Ben, 53, for six years, said: ‘Nothing like this has happened to us before. We are completely shocked.’

She added that the episode had damaged their business and they had been forced to lay off staff and run the nine-bedroom hotel by themselves, leaving them exhausted.

Sources said that a number of guests staying at the hotel, which charges £92 a night for a double room, were having breakfast in its restaurant on March 20 when comments were made about religion.

One of those involved was the Muslim woman, who was staying at the hotel while she received treatment at a hospital nearby.

The couple, who are members of the Bootle Christian Fellowship, and their solicitor, David Whiting, said they could not discuss the content of the conversation for legal reasons.

But the independent lobby group, the Christian Institute, which has seen both the prosecution and defence legal papers, is supporting their defence.

Mr Whiting, who last year successfully defended street preacher Anthony Rollins in Birmingham, said: ‘There is a dispute as to the facts of the allegations, but Ben and Sharon do not accept they were threatening, abusive or insulting.

‘They are committed Christians and it is the defence’s contention that they have every right to defend their religious beliefs and explain those beliefs to others who do not hold similar views.’

I know that couple & they are 2 of the warmest, kindest friendliest & most thoughtful folk that anyone could wish to meet

It's hardly the first time that police have so misused the clear intentions of various laws to deprive Bible believing Christians of the freedoms afforded to others, is it?

Today's http://www.700club.TV said that a Florida district judge far exceeded his authority by attempting to criminalise public prayer via a court order


He is not a Supreme Court Judge & has no right to do that, yes?

The program contrasted how, even in Guatanamo Bay, much care is taken to allow terrorists to pray together 5 times a day, yes?

Do you recall similar rcent cases in EU, Canada & Australia?

Wanna google?

What countries seem to encourage police to misuse laws to persecute Christians?

Any experiences?

 

[icarus62]

Don't believe anything you read in the papers.

 

[Ranging]

When it comes to Islam gov't's have no balls.

 

[aladdinwa]

You don't even know the particulars of what everybody said. Until you know that, there is no way you can determine if the Public Order Act was violated or not.
.

 

[Super Jesus]

In Chile, if you insult someone religiously, people will just laugh at you. This is a "Catholic country", but I believe it's the lack of muslim and jewish population that religious tolerance is not such a big issue here.

 

[space monkey]

Because those countries are showing us what the true face of Islam is, if it is allowed to get a hold.

And if we don't resist- our children will be next. (as the song says)

 

[CindyComesBack]

You know what? Britain, Europe, Australia, Canada, etc. have all been allowing Sharia Law fundamentalist Muslims to immigrate to their countries in MASSIVE numbers.

Not only are these Muslims NOT integrating into their host societies, their purpose is to take over those host societies and implement Sharia Law there.

Many banks in these countries are already Sharia Law compliant, even in the USA this is happening. Here is a list of Sharia Law-compliant banks in Europe, the USA, etc.:

http://www.shariahfinancewatch.org/blog/shariah-compliant-banks/


Here is some explantion of Sharia Law and banking:

http://www.rightsidenews.com/200807211501/homeland-security/shariah-banking-and-the-list-of-compliant-banks.html



Furthermore, the court and justice system in Britain, Europe, and elsewhere are now passing laws that make it illegal to make offending remarks about religion. This law was instigated by Muslims. They try to have in every country, anyone who is found guilty, to be tried in front of a MUSLIM Sharia Law court for it. No matter if it is in England or Europe or if the person is not even a Muslim.


I would say that if you live in one of the countries that is importing Muslims by the tens of thousands, that you will get the results of this and it is your own fault.

People want to be so "politically correct" and remain silent or refuse to face the facts of what is happening. This means that the Sharia Law Muslims will take advantage of that, and this is what you are seeing with this court case and others like it around the world.

It is the Muslims teaching everyone else that your court systems are now Muslim compliant, your banks are now Muslim compliant, and you WILL behave according to Muslim Sharia Law or you will face the consequences.

 

[Shasiti]

Oh STOP right there! We have all been cornered by do good er Christians and beat about the head with the bible. Sometimes they are not very nice and they should have never told Muslim guests that Mohammed was a war lord and Muslim dress was a form of bondage. No matter what that was wrong!!!!!!!

 

[Cjac]

Why don't we wait and find out what *actually* happened before you go wailing about persecution?

 

[Fireball]

iran does..

 

[scip779io]

*freedom of speech*

 

[Chariot]

While I believe criticism of religion should never be stifled, it's downright tacky to do it at work, in front of customers of the faith you're criticizing. Keep religious talk out of the workplace, folks.

And last I checked, Muhammad and Muslim clothing have nothing to do with Christian beliefs, so no, they weren't just discussing their own beliefs.

Though I hope the lawsuit isn't for too much, as this isn't THAT big a deal, it was a bad move on their part and they should've known it would be offensive to their guests.

As for the public prayer being banned thing, I'd need an article link or some decent context to comment on that one.

 

[flippendo]

can you be more brief?

 

[Pavlovs Dogma]

Oh furball, you have no idea. Neither does the couple who believe that Muhammad was a warlord. It is historically documented (unlike the existence of Christ) that Muhammad was an orphan who became a successful trader. He actually avoided conflict wherever possible and believed that the only justification for war was self defence.

During Muhammads time, Muslim women were not reqired to dress as they do today however, Muhammads wives wore veils for privacy and modesty because their house, being the mosque, had constant streams of visitors. The Quran commands ALL people to dress modestly, and that includes men. You could equally say that western dress is a form of bondage because people are required to cover certain parts of their bodies for modesty. If you do not wish to be considered a hypocrite in this manner, you should go naked.

In other words, your friends are ill informed and hypocrites

 

[martinrcota]

sadly they aren't going into enough detail of what happened and won't talk until the trial, so, as of right now, it looks like a lame lawsuit, but other evidence might come up. But if what is said all that has happened, the muslim lady should be ashamed to try to take away rights to just talk about differing views and it will never stand up in court (hopefully)

 

[Thomas]

It seems like this is an abuse on the liberty of the Christians involved. Of course there may be facts in the case that would modify this. However I think if we see religious liberty as a Christian vs. Muslim issue we are bound to lose. We should find common ground with Muslims to expand religious liberty for all.

 

[1Oᴄᴀᴎᴇ ④①⑤]

Dude! You are talking all over the place. First you mention some ongoing case (for which NOBODY in the public has the facts as they're sealed) in the UK, then you move onto the 700 club and a Florida district judge, and then you start talking about the police?


ETA: Since I actually enjoy using the brain God gave me, I went and searched for this Florida case rather than just swallowing whatever the 700 club says.

Is this the case they're talking about? http://news.aol.com/article/florida-school-officials-wont-go-to-jail/676619 Where the judge ruled that the school officials' prayer did NOT violate the previous court order?

More much ado about nothing from the "persecuted majority".

 

[Acts 17:11 guy]

Persecute?

If the Muslim woman had a real complaint, then she is justified in reporting it. It will go to court and if they find it's a load of baloney then it will be thrown out, or they will be found not guilty.

That is fair trial and justice.

LOL you know The Mail is right wing facist press?

And gutter press at that.


Not persecution.

Or are you saying that anyone who may have a real complaint against a Christian should keep quite because, oh noes we are being persecuted!?

Having said that, if the story is baloney, then I hope they sue the Muslim woman for making a false claim and get damages.

And also even as a Christian, I do not want to see the likes of some lunatic screaming his head off on a street corner, that just makes Christians look like mad people.