Comments:UK to ban Islamist group

Anti islam.

Do you agree with the UK's move or not?
I think under law anyone has every right to a public space, so a lawfally behaved march is allowed. It might be a insensitive to feelings but it's not unheard of that Islamist feelings have also been hurt in the past by demonstrations etc under the same principle of democracy; and no doubt pointed demonstrations by both groups will continue in future.

That a theocracy of Islam would likely ban outright any demonstrations against Islam in some hypothetical equivalent scenario of government is beside the point: the UK is a democracy, and so to ban the march would compromise that democracy and free speech/right to assemble peacefully. (even though a theocracy would ban free speech, that is also beside the point).

It might not sound fair, but the only way to have a strong democracy is not to compromise it, otherwise the non-democratic will have gained an equal voice in government affairs. Seperation of church and state as the constitutional Americans might say, allows the state to safely indulge conflicting points of view for its citizens while protecting them all equally under the umbrella of unprejudiced secular law.
 * Should what you and I apparently consider appropriate secular law and democracy, permit the legal existence of an organisation that uses religion as a front to challenge that democracy and system of secular law? These morons would, by force, impose Sharia law on the country. You'd be faced with "convert or die". Should the government allow an organisation like that to recruit, to waste the resources of of the public purse to work towards the overthrow of democracy? Even in America, the Nazi Party has to go through the ballot box, not just skip straight to the ammo box. --Brian McNeil / talk 23:34, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


 * One thing that has been lacking in the media coverage is that the group isn't just peaceful talk. They have links back to the real deal; a number of members have been convicted of rather more serious offences than the recent public order ones (bomb plots and whatnot) and I saw somewhere a(n official, I think) quote from the group talking about how wonderful 9/11 was. I'm not comfortable about the ban, but it isn't as excessive and nasty as most of the antiterror kneejerk stuff round here. I wouldn't be comfortable leaving Islam4UK either; although now I suppose they will simply disappear underground. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 23:39, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you mentioned that, Sandman. I started to get a suspicious feeling when the article didn't address their peaceful front with anything other than a claim by a spokesman. I don't doubt that there are some peaceful Islamic movements out there, but those aren't the groups being banned. --67.174.131.145 (talk) 00:45, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

While Britan tends to be more...I Dunno...Orwellian, Than most of the world, you cant really trust peaceful intentions when the only guy saying that, is the PR guy. 164.116.47.180 (talk) 16:25, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Do you agree with the UK's move or not?
GOOD

Do you agree with the UK's move or not?
Yes. Islamists should be kicked out of the European union.--91.138.247.108 (talk) 12:28, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes
Yes Islamist groups are not true to Islam and disgrace their religon and should be banned in Europe and America