h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

The Westboro Baptist Church are planning to come to Scotland and protest, in their own inimitable way, the ordination of gay ministers.

I fail to see a single positive side to their being allowed to do so. Should we just say "Thanks, but keep your weird opinions to yourself" and refuse them entry?

http://www.thecourier.co.uk/News/National/article/16345/sick-and-twisted-handful-of-self-publicists-westboro-baptist-church-s-dundee-plans-condemned.html

We've said "no thanks" to plenty of other religious nutjobs who wanted to come here and preach hate so I don't see why we should make an exception and let tht lot in.

I think one might consider allowing them entry on condition they post hefty peace bonds to cover the costs of maintaining the peace in their vicinity. Also sufficient to cover the cost of trial and possible imprisonment for the anticipated insulting behaviour and disturbing the peace.
Failure to post such bonds should result in their escort on to a return flight home.

There is probably no standing law to exactly preclude them. But some communities have found that an appropriate "welcome committee" is helpful. Say accidental over-parking at their motel accomodations, or a boisterous bunch of good ol' boys who'd be pleased to chat them up ... at their hotel

Nick, there is a law which allows the Home Secretary to deny entry to certain undesirables, if s/he so chooses. I can't remember what the criteria are, but iirc the head of the Nation of Islam was denied entry a few years back.

We have such laws as well, but it often takes a pretty high level of government to invoke it. And atleast with our folks, unless there is literally mounds of security info behind them, they'll sit back and hope for the best.

Now if a certain troupe is being well 'interviewed' by local curious folks, and miss their flights home ... Such an inconvenience sure hits a pocket-book.

I'm so glad that that church is called Queen's Cross

Yes, they should be denied entry into the UK. If their purpose is to come to Scotland to specifically promote discrimination that is against UK law, isn't that enough reason? (I'm assuming you have laws against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation).

I don't think there is any amount of bond that could be paid that would be enough to cover the damage done to people who that church hates, especially people who are not heterosexual, but the general community too though.

I will personally be disappointed if Scotland
allows these radicals to enter the country to
spread their ignorance and hate.

There is no good can come of it.

It would be very un-Scottish to consider it a 'rights' issue.
Or be emotionally blackmailed into denying self interests.

It would be very weak to cave in for fear of being called
discriminatory. Discrimination is sometimes a good thing, like
choosing s good wine or avoiding the poisonous mushrooms.


~jwf~

Yes but why can't they just be ignored? Surely a robust society would have nothing to fear from such hate filled people. If they aren't ignored it shows up things that need to be faced within the society.

There seems to be a few on these boards who would suggest all forms
of religious ministery, gay or otherwise, are "extremist".
It would be interesting to hear their views on this matter.

Good point tarantoes. I don't know so much about 'extremist' but just irrational..and it gets tiresome that they don't understand the importance of ritual and stuff which binds communities. I've argued about that a lot on the Dawkins thread in the past..but have now completely lost interest and patience with that thread.

>>It would be interesting to hear their views on this matter.

I have to disagree

I would propose a good, healthy Scots choir that outnumbered them five or ten fold. Surround them facing inward and *out religion* them at top melodious volume.

Seriously no I think they should be ignored.

There was a big thing here to do with extremist Islamists attending the funerals of returning soldiers from Afghanistan at Wooten Basset. Taff made the point that those soldiers died for freedom in a way..and the best thing people could do was just turn their backs on them. And I agree with him.

Any invasion is a bad invasion!.
Yet whose to say it is one?
If what! turns up on your doorstep is alien to those beliefs or historical practises that the majority who currently reside there hold or engage in ,then it could be noted as being so .
Problem is what was once a green and pleasant land is becoming a waste land occupied by the dross of such unruly types that take what they call refuge in our great land but some how seem to miss out ever other country as a potential safe heaven on their way.
Maybe there on a mission to slowly take over ?,whilst those who have ever right to declare what is law either break it , avoid it or just leave so as not to face the impending dome.

I don't know how it works under English law..but I hope we would always allow them in. For goodness sakes many many people died fighting for these freedoms. We've enough laws already banning things. You have to TRUST people.

This isn't about banning anything. Nation states have the right to decide who visits their land. It's not a free for all. Everybody who wants to visit the UK has to get permission to visit*, it's not a right to do so. I think the British govt in this case should refuse permission.

*not sure if you've changed that for the EU though?

It's also not about disagreeing with someone's views. It's about refusing entry to people who are going to actively seek to undermine core human rights as established by British law.

But such people already are here..We shouldn't be scared of extremists..unless they do actual *violence* Just having views we don't like isn't a good enough reason to exclude people in my opinion.

Oh and being respectful to British people who died for the right of free speech is a good enough reason to me to let them in.

>> Just having views we don't like isn't a good enough reason to exclude people in my opinion.

That's right. That's why my previous post explained that the problem isn't that they have views we don't like, it's that they're actively promoting the undermining of human rights that legal rights in the UK.

Besides, I think you have enough issues with extremists without adding that lot into the mix.