Free Speech Debate

Thirteen languages. Ten principles. One conversation.

Log in | Register | Mailing list

Loading...
1We – all human beings – must be free and able to express ourselves, and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas, regardless of frontiers.»
2We defend the internet and all other forms of communication against illegitimate encroachments by both public and private powers.»
3We require and create open, diverse media so we can make well-informed decisions and participate fully in political life.»
4We speak openly and with civility about all kinds of human difference.»
5We allow no taboos in the discussion and dissemination of knowledge.»
6We neither make threats of violence nor accept violent intimidation.»
7We respect the believer but not necessarily the content of the belief.»
8We are all entitled to a private life but should accept such scrutiny as is in the public interest.»
9We should be able to counter slurs on our reputations without stifling legitimate debate.»
10We must be free to challenge all limits to freedom of expression and information justified on such grounds as national security, public order, morality and the protection of intellectual property.»

What’s missing?

Is there a vital area we have not addressed? A principle 11? An illuminating case study? Read other people's suggestions and add your own here. Or start the debate in your own language.

Home | Audio/Video | Freedom of speech for anti-abortion protesters?

Freedom of speech for anti-abortion protesters?

A pro-life campaigner and a pro-choice activist go head-to-head in this debate about the rise of US-style anti-abortion protests outside clinics in the UK.

Peter Williams, executive officer of Right to Life, and Kate Smurthwaite, vice chair of Abortion Rights UK, go head-to-head in this debate about the rise of US-style anti-abortion protests outside clinics in the UK. Williams kicks off the debate by explaining that while he disagrees with the use of graphic images of aborted foetuses by groups such as Abort67, he stands by their right to use them. (Warning, graphic images: click here to see a selection of the recent displays used by Abort67.) For Williams, the intentions of such groups “isn’t to harass but show them [the women] the reality of what they’re going to go through”. Smurthwaite says that protesters filming and “chasing after women going into these clinics” should be arrested for harassment. She says: “For me there is a line and that line has to be drawn well this side of harassment for people who are exercising their legal right to seek medical treatment when they want it.” On the use of images, she adds: “People have the right to choose whether or not to see those images.”

Print
Published on: June 6, 2012 | 2 Comments

Comments (2)

Automated machine translations are provided by Google Translate. They should give you a rough idea of what the contributor has said, but cannot be relied on to give an accurate, nuanced translation. Please read them with this in mind.

  1. MarielG says:

    I found this very sad. I am a Christian who believes in pro-choice and I found this discussion alienating and uncomfortable.

    I was generally on Kate’s side until she began making these comments about praying. That praying implied a belief in someone as evil. In the middle of her discussion of harrassment, which I agree people should be protected from, she then made wide, insulting suggestions about Christians. As Peter pointed out, suggesting that prayer should only exist inside of a church fundamentally misses the point of a belief in God -it also displays a hypocrisy on her very point about harrassment. Sneering at Christians in the middle of the debate which was then ignored as standard is part of on-going ‘harrassment’. If this was Jews, race or any other group at which this kind of insulting prejudiced was used it would be given more attention.

    As one commenter said, this debate does not exist outside of the right or wrongs of the abortion, or any other pre-conceived opinions it seems.

Leave a comment in any language


Free Speech Debate is a research project of the Dahrendorf Programme for the Study of Freedom at St Antony's College in the University of Oxford. www.freespeechdebate.ox.ac.uk