The website of Richard Dawkins is full of the story of a pensioner in Lincolnshire who has allegedly been told by police not to display an ‘insulting’ poster rubbishing religion.
The story has also appeared on the website of the National Secular Society.
Atheists have been desparate to find just one case where the police try to use Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 against one of their own, in order to counterbalance the multitude of recorded heavy-handed police actions against Christian preachers.
Now they think they have it. John Richards, of Vauxhall Road, Boston, has been told that if he displays in his window a modest A4 landscape paper with the words ‘Religions are fairy stories for adults’ he could be in breach of the Section’s provisions which state that:
‘a person is guilty of an offence if they display a sign which is threatening or abusive or insulting with the intent to provoke violence or which may cause another person harassment, alarm or distress.’
The Boston Standard makes it clear that Lincolnshire Police have said they will only attend if someone makes a complaint. In a statement, they said: ‘If a complaint is received by the police in relation to a sign displayed in a person’s window, an officer would attend and make a reasoned judgement about whether an offence had been committed under the Act.’
So yet again, Section 5 is not the great bogey-man some are pretending it is. The Police and CPS quite often prosecute Christians under it – this author was prosecuted under Section 5 in 2006 – but to our knowledge, with the exception of Harry Hammond in Bournemouth, and his was a special case, not least because he died before an appeal could be heard – not one person has been convicted.
We need to realise the true reason the National Secular Society want Section 5 amended is that the constant stream of stories of police clamp-downs on freedom of speech against Christians is a thorn in their flesh, garnering public sympathy and publicity for the Christian viewpoint.
Unlike Peter Tatchell, who although wrong is at least honest, It is not remotely because they champion freedom of speech for their opponents.
For most people, and certainly most Christians, the truly laughable aspect of this poster is that it is written by a man who, if he is like every atheist this author has met, believes the fairy stories of abiogenesis and evolution.
If he is true to his preconceptions and if he has actually thought about it, by rejecting the reality of a creator God, John Richards believes that nothing exploded and became everything, that life just happened spontaneously, that fish grew legs and lungs for no apparent reason and decided to walk around on the sea-shore, that whales, fed up with life on land, swivelled their spines round, grew flippers, developed blow-holes and resistance to water pressure and flopped back into the sea, that bats were rats who grew wings (overnight or over millions of years and how did they get around with no front legs and emergent non-functioning wings?), and so on and so on into millions of totally farcical scenarios.
The Bible says: The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction (Proverbs 1:7).
The truth is that the poster is truly insulting. It is an insult to the intelligence. But what do you expect from an atheist?
Join Christian Voice today and stand up for righteousness in the land:
I was listening to this on Radio 2 yesterday. They misrepresented the story, which really is a storm in a teacup. It’s a complete non-event. The impression I get is that Mr Richards is after an argument, having approached the police to check that he wouldn’t have a fatwa on his head for sticking the poster in his window (which, in these paranoid times, is not entirely unreasonable). Their response made the news not because it was unreasonable but because it was poorly phrased: what they meant when asked to clarify was that if someone were to make a complaint, and Mr Richards were to refuse to take down the poster or cooperate, then theoretically he could be arrested. The likelihood of this actually happening is frankly minimal, despite Jeremy Vine clearly pushing that angle in a series of hypothetical ‘what if?’s.
The objective truth is that many atheists (Mr Richards included) may be insulted by the posters outside churches, irrespective of how true the people who put them there may believe them to be – but simultaneously, the likelihood of anyone making a serious complaint about them is again minimal. This was just a provocative response from someone who would wish to ‘open the eyes’ of believers to the Dawkins delusion that because religion is not always wholly good, it must therefore be bad. The argument is ridiculous, and the poster is the sort of gross generalisation that you often find in the comment pages of news websites, but it is – as the Hitch Hiker’s Guide once said of Earth – mostly harmless.
‘The impression I get is that Mr Richards is after an argument’… ‘This was just a provocative response from someone who would wish to ‘open the eyes’’
Precisely my feelings towards Christian zealots who wave placards at Gay Pride events, evangelise noisily in the street, come to your door to offer talks about Jesus…
Interesting to see the sneering reaction when somebody plays them at their own game in the most harmless way.
Yes, fine, I can understand why placard-waving and door-knocking would bother you (and it is for precisely this reason that I do not partake in either; I don’t think it’s the most effective way to evangelise). My point was that this is basically a non-event and there’s no point trying to pretend otherwise. Mr Richards’ argument – even if I don’t agree with it – doesn’t offend me, and I think you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone who really *was* bothered…
Further to my previous comment (and following a little email correspondence with Stephen), I should point out that I was a little unfair towards door-knocking and placard-waving. That’s what comes of scribbling a comment in a hurry. While I’ve never partaken in these things, I’ve always felt that they are a solid declaration of faith that I think the over-cautious mainstream Church frequently lacks. We’re not supposed to hide our light under a bushel and I admire anyone who has the sense of conviction to do it in this manner. I think there’s a time and a place – the actions of the Westboro Baptists appal me, for example, but they’re a minority sect. The open declaration approach also doesn’t work for *me* – I’ve learned over the years that the best way for me to profess my faith is quietly and subtly and as the occasion calls for it. But the very nature of Christianity is one of evangelism, and I maintain that there is a clear difference between professing your faith and picking a fight – which, as I said before, is what Mr Richards seems to be doing here.
People who behave that way are most definitely in the extreme minority; I personally didn’t think you were being unfair actually, as there must be umpteen other ways to solidly declare faith without forcefully admonishing others for their lack of it.
The story of John Richards hardly warrants major coverage but there is no doubt in my mind that had this happened to a Christian pensioner who decided to goad atheists/ homosexuals/ people of other faiths it would be seized upon by certain people as though it were a national scandal.
But Stuart, that is exactly the difference. As reverend61 was pointing out, Christians simply do not go out evangelising or witnessing in order to goad anyone or wind anyone up. We all have different ways of doing it, but our mission is solely to spread the good news of the Gospel. And of course the John Richards story has indeed been seized upon. With all the stories around of heavy-handed police officers from this force and that going beyond their duty in trying to shut up Christians preaching a politically-incorrect message of sin and salvation, at last the National Secular Society thinks it can say ‘Hey, we’ve got a case too!’ But they haven’t, as all of us on this page seem to be totally agreed!
Thankfully here in Scotland whenever me and my boyfriend attend fay pride in Edinburgh or nowadays kirkcaldy anyone causing bother,”preaching ” homophobic propaganda etc is swiftly shut down by the police manning the recruitment stalls.
What is wrong with old fashioned debate without ill feeling and in an appointment setting
Preachers ‘swiftly shut down’ by the police in Scotland? We need to watch that, because freedom of speech applies north of the border.
I’m going to have to use this expression ‘fay pride’. In an appointment setting, of course.
I lived next door to John Richards for many years. He is a kind and generous man who would go out of his way to help anyone. I have never heard him say anything bad about another person. Mr Richards has a right to his opinions and also a right to express those opinions in the same way that a religeon, whatever the creed, has a right to express an opinion. His small sign is no more insulting or provocative than the large posters displayed outside churches, mosques and other religious establishments proclaiming that our respective Gods are saviours and Kings.
I can’t really see anyone being bothered enough to go to this man’s house to peer at his bit of paper. The only person who is remotely likely to be offended is the postman, and these days the poor posties are so overburdened with mail I doubt that any of them would even have time to read it.
The fact people need to be told this is, quite frankly, an intellectual emergency in an educated 21st century society.
Ridiculous stories made up to control, subjugate and extort from middle eastern peasants 2000 years ago have no place in our time.
Time we grew up and abandoned this nonsense – I think that is what Mr. Richards’ message is trying to say.
Absolutely priceless. The historical ignorance of that comment topped off with its cultural, racial, societal and chronological atheist snobbery is absolutely priceless.
I`m a born again Christian and I can laugh at these types of antics Mr. Richards does to get noticed, I`m all for free speech and I think anyone who could possibly get offended by a bit of paper with no specific organization or person mentioned has got to be taken with the humour it deserves. Anyone ratty enough to complain ought to get themselves a dose of cheer-up salts and write a letter to Mr.Richards thanking him for brightening up their day, the Lord knows there is little of that with the general public these days.
“The fact people need to be told this is, quite frankly, an intellectual emergency in an educated 21st century society.
“Ridiculous stories made up to control, subjugate and extort from middle eastern peasants 2000 years ago have no place in our time.
“Time we grew up and abandoned this nonsense – I think that is what Mr. Richards’ message is trying to say”
And as Christians we support his right to say it, regardless or not if he chooses to in believe in 21st century atheist fairy tales such as evolution and socially engineered secular religion. Basically he is saying all religions are fairy stories exept the the 21st century secular religion and philosophy he is a true believer in.
What has time got to do with it? You’re deceived now despite your “education”
I notice that these people are very fond of using ‘word-play’. Your article says this old man lives on “Vauxhall Road”, well, it can’t be a coincidence, that in London, “Vauxhall” is where all the odd-ball homosexual perverts hang out, and where they congregate to pile into their “torture chambers” (literally). Clearly there is an active connection between sodomy, pedastry, paedophilia and atheism.
Thank you for that Christian message
Atheists amaze me in their hatred of the things of God and the people of God, Can they not see that they have their own religion based upon faith and their messiahs and prophets are the likes of Dawkins and their ‘holy book’ by their apostle C. Darwin is no different to religions of today, thank God they may say, we are atheists!
Hmm, i really do wonder.
It is not just the National Secular Society who want to repeal section 5. The Christian Institute are also backing the Repeal Section 5 campaign, because this law restricts free speech whichever side of the fence you’re on.
[…] Atheist pensioner insults intelligence […]