[Acrylic-bob]

First of all I want to say that I have no argument at all with free speech. It is the most precious of the rights we enjoy as British subjects. That includes the right to say things that some sections of society may find hurtful, objectionable or offensive.

How can you engage in debate if a portion of your terms of reference are disallowed or proscribed by law?

"I may disagree with what you say but I will defend until death your right to say it". (Voltaire)

So, as far as I am concerned, Stephen Green and Christian Voice are perfectly at liberty to spout whatever sort of pious claptrap they choose, twenty four hours a day, three hundred and sixty five days a year if they so wish. They may also do it through whatever medium they choose, whether this be from a pulpit, through the press or via the internet. Again, I can have no argument with that. Provided they recognise that the same right exists for everyone else, no sane person could, or would, wish to interfere.

I also do not have any argument against public protest as a means of reinforcing your argument, provided that it is peaceful and harms no one.
And I am sure that this is a position which the majority of members of this board would endorse.

But does Firebombing clinics offering terminations and the murder of doctors and clinic staff involved in those terminations strike you as legitimate peaceful protest?

According to the article in the Times, quoted above, there are links between Christian Voice and the American Christian Fundamentalist, Neal Horsley, who says that he believes that the Ten Commandments justify murder to prevent the deaths of unborn children.

If Christian Voice intends to adopt the tactics of American "Anti-abortionists" in their determination to end the practice of termination on demand in this country, as they say they do, then such action should give us all, Christian, Agnostic and Athiest alike, cause for the gravest possible concern.