U.K. Lords retain free speech amendment in gay hate crimes bill

Despite fierce efforts by the Labour government and some homosexualist activists to abolish it, a clause protecting the rights of religious believers in an upcoming "gay hate crimes" bill has been sustained by a vote in the House of Lords. Under the bill, the offense of "stirring up hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation" carries a sentence of up to seven years' imprisonment, reports Hilary White, LifeSiteNews.com.

The Lords voted 186 to 133 to retain Clause 61 on "Hatred against persons on grounds of sexual orientation." The bill will now go back to the House of Commons where the Ministry of Justice said it would seek to overturn the Lords' vote.

The clause pertains to those who might counsel persons to abstain from homosexual acts: "For avoidance of doubt, the discussion or criticism of sexual conduct or practices or the urging of persons to refrain from or modify such conduct or practices shall not be taken of itself to be threatening or intended to stir up hatred."

Critics have charged that, as with many such laws, the wording of the bill allows too much latitude, essentially making the judgment of whether an offence has occurred dependent upon the perceptions of the alleged victim. But the Labour government has lobbied heavily in favor of the bill and insisted that the bill's existing clauses, combined with "guidance" for police, will cover legal expression of objections to homosexual behavior.

But the government's assurance was countered by Lord Dear, a former chief constable and inspector of constabulary, who said in the July 9th debate in the Upper House, "Prior to this House approving the Waddington amendment a year ago, the police regularly received complaints from homosexual groups that exception was taken to remarks that homosexuality was deplored on religious grounds. They were forced to act."

"With the Waddington amendment the police are released from a virtual strait-jacket that was imposed on them before," he added.

The chief sponsor of the clause, Lord Waddington, agreed, saying that without specific protections for freedom of speech, ordinary Britons were at risk from zealous "gay rights" campaigners.

Lord Waddington, said, "If ever there was a time when events required the Government to make clear their commitment to free speech, it is right now when everyday free speech is assailed. They must surely know that if the safeguard is removed it will be taken, as Tom Harris MP said, 'as a green light to all those who believe they can silence anyone who disagrees with them'."

He cited as "abuses" some of the many UK cases in which Christians and other homo-skeptics have run afoul of police for voicing concerns about the homosexualist movement's goals. "These abuses," he said, "have happened while the police have been furnished with guidance ... Unfortunately, that guidance is so erroneous that one is tempted to conclude that the police acted not in spite of it but because of it.

"The guidance does not suggest that there may be legitimate comment on sexual practices; instead, it makes the bold assertion that homophobia does not necessarily mean hatred of gays but includes mere dislike of a person's behaviour."

Waddington pointed out that it is not only Christian groups who have supported the insertion of a freedom of speech clause in the bill. Television comedian, "Mr Bean" Rowan Atkinson, spoke to a committee urging government to protect freedom of speech in the bill. The clause was also supported by several prominent homosexuals, including journalist Matthew Parris, comedian Christopher Biggins and homosexualist activist Peter Tatchell.

In 2007, Ben Summerskill, a spokesman for the homosexualist political lobby Stonewall, told the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill Committee that Stonewall, "would have no objections to any indication in the Bill that there was a mindfulness of the importance of free speech."

SALE! 40% OFF! How to Be Happier 7 Days a Week

TAGS: United Kingdom House of Lords gay hate crimes bill free speech amendmen

[07/14/2009]

Print Version