• The post you are reporting:
   
  Alexander essentially I agree with what you say. I think the court case stands as one of the most ridiculous waste of taxpayers money, court time and newspaper space witnessed in many years. It should not have been allowed to get as far as a court case.
  My point was to point out the last line in your previous posting which is going down the same route as the court case - ie. using law to stifle free speech or freedom of assembly which is the logical next step if anyone else takes this case even further.
  I must say I haven't really seen extreme agnosticism or extreme atheism or it's manifestations in fact I'd say it's an extremely small group of people who actively campaign on such issues but of course bring a court case does give good copy and no doubt the group behind the action must be feeling very pleased with itself.
  I do have a problem, however, with the influence of religion of whichever colour having an influence over the lives of those who choose not to believe and an influence on matters which do not pertain to important issues.
  So when, for example, I hear the Archbishop of Canterbury spouting nonsense about environmental issues I really think he ought to shut up. He is not qualified to do so (as is the case with most who warn of impending doom to our planet).
  If anyone should be banned from doing so surely it should be the likes of him who cause great damage to people's lives by standing on a platform and spreading false rumours.

Report Post

Your Name

Reason