Why Are Labour Trying To Shield The...
News1 min ago
Franklin Graham Uk Tour Venues Cancelled ….
114 Answers
… under pressure from LGBTQ+ campaigners who say statements Graham had made were incompatible with their values, and that his appearance would be divisive, could be disruptive or lead to a breach of the peace. His lawyers are trying to reverse the decision.
Franklin Graham is the son of US evangelist Billy Graham.
https:/
Should he be allowed to speak? Your thoughts?
Franklin Graham is the son of US evangelist Billy Graham.
https:/
Should he be allowed to speak? Your thoughts?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Haha! And you’d say exactly the same if the LGBTQ community was prevented from speaking. Course you would. You’re never one to stop people you disagree with from speaking are you, Jim. The term ‘no platforming’, straight from a student union (says it all!), has been compared with book burning (are you really happy with that?) and is right up there with words like ‘woke’ and organisations like the Me Too brigade.
I’ve seen that pathetically puerile cartoon before. Picture 5 says it all. ‘The people listening’ appear to assume they’re the only people listening and the only people who matter. Their arrogance knows no bounds but with a bit of luck they’ll grow up one day.
Defend the demise of freedom of speech at your peril, Jim. Today him, tomorrow it could be you.
I’ve seen that pathetically puerile cartoon before. Picture 5 says it all. ‘The people listening’ appear to assume they’re the only people listening and the only people who matter. Their arrogance knows no bounds but with a bit of luck they’ll grow up one day.
Defend the demise of freedom of speech at your peril, Jim. Today him, tomorrow it could be you.
The freedom to speak is not threatened by taking away the freedom to speak *here*. The day we all have the right to go on a lucrative public speaking tour whenever we wish is the day this means anything.
That's the point. Graham can still say what he wishes -- he'll just have to find somewhere else. What is so hard to understand about that?
That's the point. Graham can still say what he wishes -- he'll just have to find somewhere else. What is so hard to understand about that?
// I’ve seen that pathetically puerile cartoon before. Picture 5 says it all. ‘The people listening’ appear to assume they’re the only people listening and the only people who matter. //
Of course you react that way, to a cartoon with a point that you clearly don't understand.
Free Speech is an oft-abused phrase, is its point. Nor is it even remotely true that the 5th panel assumes that the people listening are "the only people who matter". But they *do* matter in the sense that nobody is obliged to listen, and nobody is obliged to host you, if they so choose. If they *do* so choose, of course, that is their right too. But the choice of whether you get a tour venue or not is independent, completely independent, of the right to freedom of speech.
As I said earlier, I wouldn't have called for his tour to be cancelled -- I would have been happy ignoring it -- but I don't see it as a violation of any basic rights, because there is no basic right to go on a lucrative public speaking tour.
Of course you react that way, to a cartoon with a point that you clearly don't understand.
Free Speech is an oft-abused phrase, is its point. Nor is it even remotely true that the 5th panel assumes that the people listening are "the only people who matter". But they *do* matter in the sense that nobody is obliged to listen, and nobody is obliged to host you, if they so choose. If they *do* so choose, of course, that is their right too. But the choice of whether you get a tour venue or not is independent, completely independent, of the right to freedom of speech.
As I said earlier, I wouldn't have called for his tour to be cancelled -- I would have been happy ignoring it -- but I don't see it as a violation of any basic rights, because there is no basic right to go on a lucrative public speaking tour.
Jim, //nobody is obliged to listen//
Precisely, but these people aren’t content to ignore him. They want him silenced. And why should he be forced to find an alternative simply to assuage their foibles? Apart from the likelihood that the LGBT crew would do likewise wherever he went, those venues had accepted his booking.- they had no problem with him speaking. It’s only under pressure from the bigoted and precious that his bookings have been cancelled.
As for not understanding, I understand completely. The cartoonist, whose vulgar work you appear to admire and find appropriate, describes people he and his cronies want to silence as ‘assholes’ and that says it all. As for you refusing to see this as a violation of any basic right, were the situation reversed you would say differently. You warned me I would be in for a slap for referring to a bloke in drag as ‘he’. That speaks volumes about the mentality of the LGBT brigade. Their way or no way - completely devoid of all common decency and principle. A dangerous path for society to embrace. Be careful what you wish for, Jim.
Precisely, but these people aren’t content to ignore him. They want him silenced. And why should he be forced to find an alternative simply to assuage their foibles? Apart from the likelihood that the LGBT crew would do likewise wherever he went, those venues had accepted his booking.- they had no problem with him speaking. It’s only under pressure from the bigoted and precious that his bookings have been cancelled.
As for not understanding, I understand completely. The cartoonist, whose vulgar work you appear to admire and find appropriate, describes people he and his cronies want to silence as ‘assholes’ and that says it all. As for you refusing to see this as a violation of any basic right, were the situation reversed you would say differently. You warned me I would be in for a slap for referring to a bloke in drag as ‘he’. That speaks volumes about the mentality of the LGBT brigade. Their way or no way - completely devoid of all common decency and principle. A dangerous path for society to embrace. Be careful what you wish for, Jim.
Also, *when* the situation is reversed, then we can judge if I'd see differently or not. I'm capable of appreciating that sometimes the principles i espouse can affect me personally, but that does not undermine my support for them. They wouldn't be principles otherwise.
The simple fact is that I have no right to speak at a public venue on a speaking tour. Neither does anyone else. The choice of who speaks at a venue is down to the hosts. Yes, maybe under pressure that they could have chosen to ignore, but it is their choice all the same and the fact that they have withdrawn the invitation is in no way an assault on free speech.
The simple fact is that I have no right to speak at a public venue on a speaking tour. Neither does anyone else. The choice of who speaks at a venue is down to the hosts. Yes, maybe under pressure that they could have chosen to ignore, but it is their choice all the same and the fact that they have withdrawn the invitation is in no way an assault on free speech.
He has *not* been silenced. He just had an invitation withdrawn to speak at a certain public venue. Since there was no right to that invitation in the first place, then there has been no loss of rights.
That's more or less the same as I've already said but it clearly bears repeating. Franklin Graham has a right to speak. The protesters have a right to protest. The hosts have a right to invite him, and a right to disinvite him, as they so choose. Nobody has lost their rights.
That's more or less the same as I've already said but it clearly bears repeating. Franklin Graham has a right to speak. The protesters have a right to protest. The hosts have a right to invite him, and a right to disinvite him, as they so choose. Nobody has lost their rights.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Again, you're confusing the freedom to speak with the freedom to speak *here*, which has never existed. No-one on AB has the freedom to act outside the parameters of the Site Rules, which -- as you well know -- you were deliberately breaking.
Latest Posts
Crosswords2 mins ago
News6 mins ago
Gun To Your Head - If You Had To Choose...
Music15 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles23 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.