This story popped up on a friend's wall yesterday, and I ended up getting drawn into the debate:
Idiot : "They have every right to distribute their fantasyland BS, and you have every right to rip it up and chuck it in the bin.
Yeah, it's crass and is the product of the backward element of belief that hasn't been forced to change by secularism, but then I dislike the legislation of thought and expression. Lefties often want to throw a law at any problem, but I don't think that would work with these tools."
Me : "It's not 'legislation of thought', it's legislation of incitement to violence. When you get past all the minority top-trumps, the key to this story is very much in the detail."
Idiot : "Is it clearly incitement to violence? It's a campaign for a change iin the law - not asking subjects to do it. Whether a campaign for capital punishment, for whatever cause, is incitement under the law, I don't know"
Me : "The question you just asked is pretty much the precise remit of the court case now taking place"
Idiot: : "Well I'm a reporter, I ask the questions, but was never trained to give the answers"
Well if he's a reporter then at least that explains the sketchy knowledge of the case, used to prop up a wheezy stereotype of 'lefties' throwing a law at a problem. The Leveson Enquiry really cannot go far enough with this bunch of pricks.