Any coincidence that the butt of the jokes that got these two oddjobs sent down were young white females? Young white female victim = more public outrage, more public outrage = higher likelihood of prison term.

May as well wear a t-shirt saying 'F**king Bl*ck C**ts' on it. You'll just get a slap on t'wrist for that.

In the early 90's the Police were threatening to arrest anyone wearing an Inspiral Carpets "Cool As F" (you know the word) T-Shirt though not sure they ever did, before that it was court cases involving Never Mind The Bollocks same crap different decade springs to mind.

The feller with the t-shirt. That sentance is a joke. Who has he harmed? Nobody. He is a knobrash but he hasn't done anything to warrant a custodial sentance. Same with the facebook guy.

A few years ago a fan of the heavy metal band Cradle of Filth was arrested for wearing one of their T-shirts bearing the logo "Jesus is a c***". Can't remember whether they did him for a public order offense or blasphemy.

I remember a guy getting prosecuted for wearing a Dead Kennedys "Too Drunk to F***" back in the day. Think he got fined

I remember a guy getting prosecuted for wearing a Dead Kennedys "Too Drunk to F***" back in the day. Think he got fined.

Nick Griffin getting in trouble for tweets this morning, though in this case the police might have a point.

Nick Griffin is a fat silly racist and bigot whose own party don’t even care what he is saying anymore.

His attempts to get back in the news and stay relevant by publishing the home address of a couple and promote retribution through an idiotic ‘british justice team’ is laughable.

The response from one of the couple who were discriminated against pretty much completely pricked the pomposity of Griffin’s crusade to protect the right of bigots to be bigots, and treated it with the seriousness it deserves

"We've been told that Nick Griffin is threatening to come to our house and hand out leaflets outside," Mr Black added.
"But, we live in a village where it wouldn't be easy for him or many people to come and gather.
"There's nowhere to park for a start and very few people walk past apart from school children.
"If anything happens it would be a damp squib."

Whilst I disagree with the judgement (and eagerly await the Bulls' SC case), I think you've summed him up perfectly there.

You can't go about inciting vigilante action, and, in any case, the only people who will be outraged by the judgement are people like me, and I would never dream of doing such a thing.

Why don’t you agree with the decision, it seems eminently sensible. You cant go around discriminating against people, that much should be self-evident.

If you want the freedom to live out your life choice however nonsensical and offensive it is to me, why cant they do the same?

Without getting into the same tired debates I've had over and over again on here, this is my view: reasonable adjustments should be made so that everyone is happy.

In this case I admit there is a clash of rights. The rights of the gay couple to live openly and freely ought to be respected, but likewise the Christian couple should have the freedom to manifest their sincerely held beliefs, even in the workplace.

The law is quite clear that, in cases like this, the Christians lose. I accept that decision, and can understand why the judges reached such a conclusion. However it is my view that the law is wrong and favours sexual orientation over religion. If you have a look at the Bulls' judgement, even the judge could see that this is a delicate legal balancing exercise and that a higher court might want to offer some clarity on the matter. That is why the Bulls were given permission to appeal.

You could say that the B&B owners shouldn't be running a business if they want to act in this way. However when they started their B&B business the UK did not even have civil partnerships. Why should they be forced out of business because the law now views civil partnerships as equal to marriage (even though the concept was never sold as such when it was being introduced)?

I'm sure some compromise could be reached whereby both parties are satisfied.

But the relentless, vindictive and unforgiving gay complainants refuse to turn the other cheek. Instead, they want revenge. How tolerant.

You mean like the relentless, vindictive, hate filled christians?

indeed, how tolerant

remind me, doesn't one of the commandments say "do unto others", or did you miss that page in your comic?