So it may soon be illegal to link to a website that promotes "hate." This will be the case if the Tories use their newly obtained majority governemnt to pass their omnibus crime bill. While most supporters of the Tory government are happy so see tougher crime legislation, this law causes real concern. A real problem is, "How do we objectively define 'hate,' and who can be trusted to make this judgement?"
Here in Canada, quoting the Bible has been classed as hate speech; does that then make the Bible hate literature? The aforementioned case has been overturned, but not until the pastor who did the quoting spent 7 years and thousands of dollars in legal costs to defend himself.
So, on this blog, there is a link to an online Bible (oops, now I've done it again--I'm a double-hater). But I am probably safe for now, until the Bible is officially declared verboten. Keep in mind, however, if it becomes illegal to quote the Bible in a newspaper letter-to-the-editor, why would we imagine that pulpit speech would be any more protected?
Mark Steyn has already been sued simply for linking to another website that, while not being deemed a "hate" site, offended someone. He recommends disobedience. So do I.