Category Archives: Censorship

Singh-ing In The Rain

I can’t really apologise enough for that title.

As I anticipated would happen, Rabbitpirate beat me to laying the first League blogstone on the subject of Simon Singh and his sudden victory. Since I’m not a petty man/as good as Rabbitpirate, I’d love to see him do a longer musing on the subject without the dilution that my opinions would create. However I just wanted to highlight one thing.

Quoting from the BCA’s press release, “The BCA has considered seeking leave to take this matter to the Supreme Court and has been advised there are strong grounds for appeal against the Court of Appeal judgment. However, while it was right to bring this claim at the outset, the BCA now feels that the time is right for the matter to draw to a close. ”

Isn’t that beautiful? The legal equivalent of saying “I could smash your face in, I could . . . any time I wanted . . . only I’m not going to. Any time. But now I’m going home.” For “been advised there are strong grounds for appeal” read “quick, save face ANY WAY WE GODDAMN CAN.” And what’s the best way to save face? Lie. If there were truly strong grounds for appeal the BCA, an organisation that has happily made a decent, genuine, intelligent and (I’m fortunate to know this from personal experience) really lovely man suffer tremendously for years, would without hesitation appeal to continue. Of course they would. Singh said mean*, hurtful** and unfortunately absolutely true things about them so they responded with petty legality. If there was the slightest chance the case could be pursued, don’t you think the BCA would go for it? Just to hurt Simon?

I love seeing people forced to back down after attempting to use laws to censor dissenting voices. We’ve all had our run-ins with DMCAs on Youtube, but Singh has become the poster boy for hope and reason against the odds. And as the BCA sidles grumbling into the shadows, we can only hope that libel laws everywhere face a swift dissolution.

Rabbitpirate? Over to you, sir.

* “You are all frauds”

** “Your mothers are ladies of questionable moral integrity”

This time victory really is ours

A really quick post as I don’t have any more details than this right now but it seems the BCA have dropped their case against Simon Singh. No doubt this will be on every skeptic and atheist blog for the rest of the week so we will all be inundated with details in no time. For right now I am sure you will all join me in offering our congratulations to Simon and our thanks for having the courage to stand up for rational thinking and good science like he did. We love ya man.

Supporting the Free Speech of “Them” (Guest Blog)

I’m sure most Leaguers (especially those who frequent chat) have heard of my creationist archive project FundieVideoHell or FVH for short. As the name might suppose, FVH is a treasure trove (or virtual hell, depending on the user) of creationist and fundamentalist seminars, presentations and other assorted videos.

While I had anticipated support and thanks from my fellow rationalists, I was surprised to see support from creationists too. It seems that FVH is a common ground for both sides: rationalists can use it as a resource for material to debunk (though, sadly, I have yet to see it used this way), and creationists have a source of entertainment.

So why do I spend my time and hard drive space on the opponents to rationality, freethinking, and science? The answer is simple: as long as FundieVideoHell exists, they cannot (or rather, shouldn’t) claim they are being censored by us. Well, at least they cannot claim all atheists are censoring them.

Now, I have, so far, done this entirely on my own resources. I enjoy finding out what is new and happening from the other side. But when I came across the brochure for the “2010 Creation Supercamp,” which is only a few hours drive away, I realized something. Something that deeply frightened me: I wanted to go to this conference. I want to film creationist conferences. But I also don’t want to be an e-begger like VenomFangX.

So I was wondering, should I start a PayPal so that I can take donations from those who are willing to support FundieVideoHell? And would you (the lucky readers) be able to spread the word about FVH? I think there may be creationists out there who would help support the spread of their message, both by word-of-mouth and monetarily.

Victory is ours…well kind of

So no doubt you have all heard by now that Uber skeptic Simon Singh has won his libel appeal over the issue of whether his statements against the British Chiropractic Association should be treated as “fair comment” or not. Now this doesn’t mean that the case is over, Simon still has to win the libel case against him. However it does mean that he will be able to use the defence of “fair comment” rather than having to justify his statements as facts.

 

This is not only great news for Simon but for those seeking to reform the draconian British libel laws in general. Because of the importance of the judges involved in this decision, the Lord Chief Justice, the Master of Rolls and Sir Stephen Sedley, this ruling carries a lot of weight with it that could be used to help reform the current libel system, especially with regards to science and public health issues. But we still have a long way to go.

 

If you haven’t already get yourself over to the Libel Reform website and sign the petition to show your support. Even if you don’t live in the UK the British Libel laws still affect you as currently if anything you says can be accessed in the UK, which given the internet is pretty much a guarantee, then you can be sued under British libel laws. Scientists, and those of us who blog on science and public health issues, need to be able to present information that is in the public interest without fear of being sued by those who would rather the truth didn’t get out there. Right now the law is very much skewed in favour of those who would silence good science, but working together we can, and I have no doubt will, see this change in the very near future.

 

I’ll end with this great 1994 quote from Judge Easterbrook, chief judge of the US seventh circuit court of appeals, which is still spot on today. Easterbrook stated that those claiming they had been libelled:

 

“cannot, by simply filing suit and crying ‘character assassination!’, silence those who hold divergent views, no matter how adverse those views may be to plaintiffs’ interests.

 

“Scientific controversies must be settled by the methods of science rather than by the methods of litigation. More papers, more discussion, better data, and more satisfactory models – not larger awards of damages – mark the path towards superior understanding of the world around us.”

 

I couldn’t agree more.

When the Truth won’t set you free

I generally don’t follow politics, it just depresses me, and I definitely don’t follow the politics of non-English speaking countries. As such I was completely unaware of this legal case in Holland involving Dutch MP Geert Wilders who appears to be on trial to the truly heinous crimes of offending people and telling the truth. But then I can be forgiven for not noticing what some people are already calling “the most important trial of the century” as it seems that, for the most part, the UK media has completely ignored this case. So what exactly is this all about and why should we care about something happening in Holland?

 

Continue reading When the Truth won’t set you free

UK Government target cover up to no avail

A French parliamentary committee has recently recommended that a partial ban be put in place regarding women wearing Islamic face veils in public places. Over at the BBC website they have raised the question as to whether a similar ban should be implemented in the UK. I have to say that I am of two minds on this one. As such I thought I would lay out my current thinking on the issue and leave it up to you lot to sway me one way or the other.

 

Continue reading UK Government target cover up to no avail

I’m offended, so I can attack you now then Nancy, right?

As you are no doubt aware on New Years Day Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard and his granddaughter were attacked in his house by an axe-wielding Islamic extremist intent on murder. The reason for the attack, well Westergaard was one of the people behind the now infamous Danish newspaper cartoons that depicted Muslims and Mohammed in a less than favourable light. Clearly justification for bloody axe based murder. Thankfully the attack was not successful and the would be killer himself was shot and unfortunately only wounded in the attempt.

 

Of course no sane person would see Westergaard as the bad guy in this story or the attack on him as justified…would they? Enter Nancy Graham Holm and her article at The Guardian Online website.

 

Continue reading I’m offended, so I can attack you now then Nancy, right?

Happy New Censorship!

Firstly, let me welcome you to the new year, 2010 CE, which promises to be a great one here at League of Reason. We have some exciting plans, and the growth of our community shows no signs of stopping.

Sadly, something awful, just… shameful and absurd has happened in Ireland today, and our Irish friends who wish to live in the year 2010 are now in a battle for their freedom of speech, which has been dealt a critical blow by censorship-loving religious tyrants, completely out of touch with the prerequisites for a fair society.

The following article, by Michael Nugent, is reposted from blasphemy.ie – an excellent blog documenting and opposing blasphemy laws. Bloggers are invited and positively encouraged to spread it far and wide. You can read it here, or click on the title to go straight to the original post.

Atheist Ireland Publishes 25 Blasphemous Quotes

From today, 1 January 2010, the new Irish blasphemy law becomes operational, and we begin our campaign to have it repealed. Blasphemy is now a crime punishable by a €25,000 fine. The new law defines blasphemy as publishing or uttering matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby intentionally causing outrage among a substantial number of adherents of that religion, with some defences permitted.

This new law is both silly and dangerous. It is silly because medieval religious laws have no place in a modern secular republic, where the criminal law should protect people and not ideas. And it is dangerous because it incentives religious outrage, and because Islamic States led by Pakistan are already using the wording of this Irish law to promote new blasphemy laws at UN level.

We believe in the golden rule: that we have a right to be treated justly, and that we have a responsibility to treat other people justly. Blasphemy laws are unjust: they silence people in order to protect ideas. In a civilised society, people have a right to to express and to hear ideas about religion even if other people find those ideas to be outrageous.

Continue reading Happy New Censorship!

Down with this sort of thing

Now I know that every skeptic and freethinker on the blogosphere, and I am ashamed that I had to look up how to spell that, has mentioned this already and I am pretty sure that I have done so myself in the past. However this is an issue that I feel strongly about and which, to be honest, anyone who cares about free speech should feel strongly about as well.

As you no doubt know the libel laws in the UK are a joke. Not only are they around 150 times more expensive than else where in Europe but, unlike most laws, they also seem to operate on a guilty until proven innocent basis. Combine this with the fact that the UK libel laws can be brought to bare against anyone anywhere in the world if the thing they are commenting on has so much as looked in the general direction of the UK and you have a pretty effective tool for people of questionable scruples to use for silencing those who, often quiet legitimately, speak out against them. No where are these issues clearer than with regards to skeptical hero Simon Singh and his on going battle against the forces of evil the British Chiropractic Association.

Continue reading Down with this sort of thing

…and do you have to call his name while we’re doing it?

I have to say that this one made me smile. A billboard with the aim of “challenging stereotypes” with regards to the Biblical story of Jesus’ divine conception was put up in Auckland, New Zealand and was promptly defaced with brown paint. Ok so that’s not exactly unexpected news. However the fun part of this story is that the billboard was put up by St Matthew-in-the-City church rather than a group of unwashed, hairy, furious, heathen atheists scum. And on top of that it is actually funny.

 

Mary and Joseph billboard from St Matthew-in-the-City church in Auckland

 

But, surprise surprise, it appears that the Catholic Church can’t see the funny side and have condemned the billboard as “inappropriate” and “disrespectful“. Ok, so I kinda get that but I have to say that the main complaint they are making really doesn’t make any sense to me. Lyndsay Freer, spokeswoman for the Catholic Diocese of Auckland, made this rather confusing comment:

 

“Our Christian tradition of 2,000 years is that Mary remains a virgin and that Jesus is the son of God, not Joseph,”

 

I…well I don’t really know what to say to that other than that Ms Freer obviously doesn’t get it. The billboard is clearly implying that Joseph is getting himself some immaculate ass after God had already been there and as such in no way suggests that Joseph was the father of Jesus and not the big guy. Also this idea that “Mary remains a virgin” confuses me. The Bible clearly states that Jesus had siblings and yet the Catholic Church seem to have this weird idea that Mary somehow remained a virgin for these pregnancies as well, or am I missing something here?

 

Either way this is yet another example of good Christians and their aversion to free speech. Nothing too shocking or original there, it just made me smile.