fpb: (Default)
fpb ([personal profile] fpb) wrote2011-05-22 09:01 am

"I am Spartacus"

Right. This is a bit late, now that Wikipedia is in on the act, but I still want to do it:

Ryan Giggs, the Manchester United football star, committed adultery with Imogen Thomas and then tried to forbid anyone from hearing about it by the use of a "super-injunction" - one of the corrupt British judiciary's worst outrages against freedom of speech. Now sue me, you spoilt, overindulged, cowardly little bully.
PhotobucketPhotobucket

[identity profile] stigandnasty919.livejournal.com 2011-05-22 12:10 pm (UTC)(link)
However, they do exist and their behaviour is an issue. I say again, my concern is not for the 'scum-on-top' but for their kids who are innocent of any crime but who suffer. Change the bahavious of the tabloids and the need for protection is not justified in any ay. You can claim that they have a right to know certain information, but they then have a responsibility not to abuse that information.

[identity profile] stigandnasty919.livejournal.com 2011-05-22 12:11 pm (UTC)(link)
In my view rights should almost always come with responsibilities and that is true in this case.

[identity profile] fpb.livejournal.com 2011-05-22 12:37 pm (UTC)(link)
Your argument seems to be that rights cease to exist if they are used irresponsibly.

[identity profile] stigandnasty919.livejournal.com 2011-05-29 07:36 am (UTC)(link)
I'd put it very differently, I'd say tht we have to recognise that sometimes rights are in opposition. It isn't possible to have complete freedom of speach and a complete right to privicy. The two are incompatable.

The reason for this fudge in the Uk is that we try to have both, in the USA freedom of seach is protected under the constitution. In Ireland the right to privacy is enshrined in the constitution. In the UK we try to find a balance and use 'Public Interest' as the fulcrum.

[identity profile] fpb.livejournal.com 2011-05-29 09:02 am (UTC)(link)
I did not realize that Ireland had such a bad a law. But it is to be expected in a country which was long, whatever it is now, cradled in the worst kind of clericalism, with the inevitable corollary that the image of the Church and of "good" Catholics, whatever the reality, must be shielded. I find it strange that you should find it acceptable.

[identity profile] stigandnasty919.livejournal.com 2011-05-29 09:24 am (UTC)(link)
I don't. I think the struggle to find a balance between two competing rights is probably the best position to take.

And that is the Republc of Ireland, not Northern Ireland - just to be quite clear.

[identity profile] fpb.livejournal.com 2011-05-29 10:51 am (UTC)(link)
Exactly. What "Church" and good Catholics in inverted commas did you think I was talking about?

[identity profile] fpb.livejournal.com 2011-05-22 12:35 pm (UTC)(link)
To repeat myself (for the third time): the children wouldn't suffer if their father had seen fit to keep his genitalia to himself. Once he has done otherwise, thanks to old man Murphy's law, sooner or later the matter will get around to his children. It makes no difference if it is tabloids, "candid friends" or surprise discoveries in old drawers; the pain is the same. And anyone who thinks they can do the one and not cause the other is also guilty of wishful thinking - a fool as well as a knave; and stupidity is the one sin that God punishes, and punishes always, right here on earth.