<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Writers&#8217; reactions to free expression victory</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mediawatchwatch.org.uk/2006/02/01/writers-reactions-to-free-expression-victory/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mediawatchwatch.org.uk/2006/02/01/writers-reactions-to-free-expression-victory/</link>
	<description>Watching. Pointing. Laughing.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 13:09:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Dean</title>
		<link>http://www.mediawatchwatch.org.uk/2006/02/01/writers-reactions-to-free-expression-victory/comment-page-1/#comment-5699</link>
		<dc:creator>John Dean</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2006 14:36:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mediawatchwatch.org.uk/?p=363#comment-5699</guid>
		<description>Shaun Hollingworth says: &quot;Now they should take a good look at ALL laws which restrict freedom of expression, keep only those which are absolutely necessary and comply with the Human Rights Act.&quot;

Wrong, Shaun.  The last thing we should be doing is complying with the Human Rights Act - we should be abolishing it.  Why should a bunch of unelected judges be free to interpret a vaguely-worded stature in whatever way they see fit?  The wq

Of course we should get rid of patronising laws (like the Race Relations Act and the Blasphemy Act) that restrict our ability to debate issues.  And getting rid of the HRA at the same time will prevent judges second guessing us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shaun Hollingworth says: &#8220;Now they should take a good look at ALL laws which restrict freedom of expression, keep only those which are absolutely necessary and comply with the Human Rights Act.&#8221;</p>
<p>Wrong, Shaun.  The last thing we should be doing is complying with the Human Rights Act &#8211; we should be abolishing it.  Why should a bunch of unelected judges be free to interpret a vaguely-worded stature in whatever way they see fit?  The wq</p>
<p>Of course we should get rid of patronising laws (like the Race Relations Act and the Blasphemy Act) that restrict our ability to debate issues.  And getting rid of the HRA at the same time will prevent judges second guessing us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: marc</title>
		<link>http://www.mediawatchwatch.org.uk/2006/02/01/writers-reactions-to-free-expression-victory/comment-page-1/#comment-5625</link>
		<dc:creator>marc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 23:33:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mediawatchwatch.org.uk/?p=363#comment-5625</guid>
		<description>Yeah. That (3) was fairly predicatable. In fact, I was among those that predicted it. Harmless of him to claim a victory: when it&#039;s clear to the vast majority that he&#039;s a dickhead.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah. That (3) was fairly predicatable. In fact, I was among those that predicted it. Harmless of him to claim a victory: when it&#8217;s clear to the vast majority that he&#8217;s a dickhead.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alberto Enriquez</title>
		<link>http://www.mediawatchwatch.org.uk/2006/02/01/writers-reactions-to-free-expression-victory/comment-page-1/#comment-5624</link>
		<dc:creator>Alberto Enriquez</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 22:55:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mediawatchwatch.org.uk/?p=363#comment-5624</guid>
		<description>Thanks to all involved in upholding freedom!  Are we going to walk away from a 2,500-year history of free-thinking dating at least to inspired religious satire of Aristophanes?  Hell no!

Of course, freedom of expression is FUNDAMENTALLY the right to offend!  Speech acceptable  to all – if such a puerile thing even exists – would require no such protection.  Religion in particular demands critical inquiry as it is so often abused by despots to deny others life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

I was not aware of Britain&#039;s blasphemy law, but it is, on its face, an attempt to compel the conscience of the individual.  I hope the British people will rise up and demand that Parliament repeal it and uphold freedom of expression.  Thanks again to all who helped put the kibosh on this latest example of political correctness run amuck!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks to all involved in upholding freedom!  Are we going to walk away from a 2,500-year history of free-thinking dating at least to inspired religious satire of Aristophanes?  Hell no!</p>
<p>Of course, freedom of expression is FUNDAMENTALLY the right to offend!  Speech acceptable  to all – if such a puerile thing even exists – would require no such protection.  Religion in particular demands critical inquiry as it is so often abused by despots to deny others life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.</p>
<p>I was not aware of Britain&#8217;s blasphemy law, but it is, on its face, an attempt to compel the conscience of the individual.  I hope the British people will rise up and demand that Parliament repeal it and uphold freedom of expression.  Thanks again to all who helped put the kibosh on this latest example of political correctness run amuck!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve</title>
		<link>http://www.mediawatchwatch.org.uk/2006/02/01/writers-reactions-to-free-expression-victory/comment-page-1/#comment-5611</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 20:43:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mediawatchwatch.org.uk/?p=363#comment-5611</guid>
		<description>How foolish of the writers to think it was down to the good judgement of MP&#039;s. Stephen Green kows it was his prayers and God that stopped the bill.

http://www.christianvoice.org.uk/hate9.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How foolish of the writers to think it was down to the good judgement of MP&#8217;s. Stephen Green kows it was his prayers and God that stopped the bill.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.christianvoice.org.uk/hate9.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.christianvoice.org.uk/hate9.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shaun Hollingworth</title>
		<link>http://www.mediawatchwatch.org.uk/2006/02/01/writers-reactions-to-free-expression-victory/comment-page-1/#comment-5598</link>
		<dc:creator>Shaun Hollingworth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 19:11:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mediawatchwatch.org.uk/?p=363#comment-5598</guid>
		<description>To little, too late, though I am glad of it.
Now they should take a good look at ALL laws which restrict freedom of expression, keep only those which are absolutely necessary and comply with the Human Rights Act.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To little, too late, though I am glad of it.<br />
Now they should take a good look at ALL laws which restrict freedom of expression, keep only those which are absolutely necessary and comply with the Human Rights Act.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Craig</title>
		<link>http://www.mediawatchwatch.org.uk/2006/02/01/writers-reactions-to-free-expression-victory/comment-page-1/#comment-5590</link>
		<dc:creator>Craig</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 16:27:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mediawatchwatch.org.uk/?p=363#comment-5590</guid>
		<description>YAY! i feel all warm and fuzzy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>YAY! i feel all warm and fuzzy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

