The clause has been batted back and forth between the House of Lords, who reinserted it last July, and the Commons, which has repeatedly rejected it. The bill is to return to the House of Lords November 11th and 12th for debate.

Tory MP Dominic Grieve, Shadow Secretary of State for Justice, said on the night of the vote that without the amendment, the bill could have a "chilling effect on freedom of speech" and that there is "plenty of evidence" that existing similar "public order" ordinances already have this effect.

Such laws, he said, are "based upon a form of political correctness" that are "leading to abuse in a number of circumstances by the police who threaten individuals with prosecution unless they desist from expressing perfectly legitimate views."

Grieve said, "I would be more reassured if the Government were taking the public order legislation problems that have arisen more seriously." The problem is continuing, he said, and for that reason, "we should be very wary of legislation that fetters freedom of speech."

Lord Waddington, the author and sponsor of the amendment, told the House of Lords on Monday, "We are not talking about the terrible threat that is faced by many gays, because that threat can be dealt with - and often is dealt with - under the present law."

He said it is simply "not the case" that the "free speech clause opens the gates to incitement to violence against gays." He pointed to the same incidents referred to by Mr. Grieve in which citizens expressing religious or other opinions opposing homosexual activity have been "interviewed" by police as possible offenders. Such people, he said, "were told by the police that they were very close to the serious offence of homophobia, punishable by seven years' imprisonment."

The most recent case in which a citizen expressing an opinion against homosexual behavior has been interrogated is that of Mrs. Pauline Howe, 67, a Christian who was denounced to police by her local Norwich Council when she wrote complaining of the local "gay pride" events. Mrs. Howe was visited by police who questioned her and said she could be open to a hate crime charge. She is considering legal action, saying the visit frightened and intimidated her, although police said they concluded they had no grounds for a charge under existing statutes.

In October, Lord Dear, a former HM Inspector of Constabulary, said that the amendment was "essential" if police officers are to enforce the Government's 'homophobic hatred' law with "good judgment and a light touch."

"The police need to be free to make a judgment in the moment, not harnessed by a one-size-fits-all policy dictated from above," Lord Dear said.

The bill has been heavily criticized in its long journey through Parliament, even by homosexuals themselves. In 2007, British actor and comedian Christopher Biggins warned that it would quash freedom of speech and result in a backlash against homosexuals. Biggins called it "yet another step in the grim march of authoritarianism now afflicting Britain, with people terrified of speaking their minds for fear of the knock on the door."

URL: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/nov/09111107.html

*****

Free speech clause maintained in homosexual hate law

The BBC News website and the Christian Institute report today that the Government has admitted defeat in its efforts to remove Lord Waddington's "free speech" clause from new laws against inciting homophobic hatred.

MPs have voted four times to scrap it but it has been repeatedly overturned in the Lords, who again last night voted by 179 to 135 to keep it. In the House of Commons today the Justice Secretary Jack Straw accepted the Lords vote.

Lord Waddington, who inserted the defence of free speech into legislation covering religious hatred last year, said peers had to maintain consistency.

"If we are to finish up with a free speech clause in the religious hatred offence but no free speech clause here, we're simply asking for trouble."

It means the Government's sexual orientation hatred law includes a protection for the free speech of those who wish to express their beliefs on sexual conduct.

A Ministry of Justice spokeswoman said the government was "very disappointed" at the Lords vote, adding: "There is no doubt about the threshold of this offence. No 'freedom of expression' section is needed to explain it. The threshold is a high one.

"The offence only covers words or behaviour that are threatening and intended to stir up hatred."

But she added the government could no longer delay the passage of the Coroners Bill.

"It is with considerable disappointment, therefore, that the government has agreed not to remove the 'freedom of expression' section."

Simon Calvert, Deputy Director (Public Affairs) at The Christian Institute, called it a "victory for common sense".

He said: "After many well known cases involving heavy handed policing of Christians, Parliament has decided to protect free speech.

"The free speech clause simply makes clear that which the Government has always accepted - that criticism of homosexual conduct is not, in itself, a crime."

Click here for BBC news report http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8356093.stm