Labour-run council U-turns on Christian street preacher ban
Rushmoor borough council, in Hampshire, sought an injunction in February that would have prohibited Christians preaching, praying and handing out leaflets in the town centres of Farnborough and Aldershot.
The local authority claimed preachers were being 'offensive' and caused 'alarm and distress' to passers-by.
But it has now withdrawn its application for an injunction after being accused of attempting to 'criminalise' Christians because the maximum sentence for breaching an injunction is two years' imprisonment.
Jamie Broadey, a preacher and evangelist, said it was 'highly concerning' that the council had attempted to acquire the injunction in the first place.
'We welcome the news that the council has withdrawn its application, but it is highly concerning that they made this attempt to criminalise the Christian faith in the first instance,' he said.
'When I first read the injunction I thought: 'They must have made a mistake.' I felt complete disbelief that it was saying that you can't have religious discussions, you can't pray or sing, and people have to come to you, you can't go to them and share the gospel which Christians have done freely in this country for centuries.'
Under the terms of the drafted injunction, Christians would have been banned from praying for anyone 'without their prior permission', offering leaflets or Bibles by hand and laying hands on anyone in prayer even if they consented.
Other proposed prohibitions included approaching people to discuss Christianity and the preaching of any sermons that were 'hostile towards anyone with the protected characteristic of age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy, race, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation'.
Sally McGuinness, a cleaner and street preacher, said the council had attempted to 'criminalise' her.
'If this had not been challenged and stopped in its tracks now, we have no doubts that the Christian faith would be criminalised in Aldershot and Farnborough,' she said.
'This would have been terrible for Christian freedoms and freedom in general in this country. We are still awaiting an apology from the council and assurances that nothing like this will ever happen again.'
The council's about-turn came after local Conservative councillors Gareth Lyon and Ade Adeola took up the preachers' case.
The council organised meetings with local ministers and preachers where the Christians' objections were heard.
In a statement, the council said it had discussed introducing a 'voluntary code of conduct' for street preachers to limit 'distress' caused to passers-by.
The preachers maintain that being seen as 'hostile' is unavoidable when attempting to convince non-believers of the truth of Christianity.
Cllr Lyon, leader of the Tory group on the council, said: 'I am delighted by the decision to withdraw the application for an injunction. It is absolutely the right decision.'
Cllr Gareth Williams, the leader of the council, added that he was 'pleased' to address a 'very sensitive issue'.
'I'm pleased that, following our discussions with the local Christian community and faith leaders, we have been able to address this very sensitive issue and agree a way forward that balances the rights to freedom of worship and expression with the interests of all town centre users,' he said.
Bishop Malcolm Cummins, a Pentecostal minister and chairman of the Rushmoor Faith Leaders Forum, said: 'We're relieved that our discussions with the council have proved constructive. We now look forward to working closely together to build even stronger relationships.'
Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, which supported the street preachers, added: 'We urge Christians to remain vigilant and prayerful, and to continue supporting efforts to ensure that the public square remains open to the gospel and to the free exchange of ideas.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
4 hours ago
- The Hill
‘South Park' vs. Trump: And the little children shall lead them
What does it say about America that the only people taking on President Trump on his own terms — which is to say, in the gutter — are two bad-boy cartoonists? In its 27th season opener this week, titled 'The Sermon on the Mount,' the Paramount Plus animated show 'South Park' provided by far the most comprehensive and trenchant critique of Trump's first six months back in office. The episode, which includes both Jesus and Satan as characters, brutally and hilariously takes on Trump's laundry list of fixations: NPR, bathrooms, electric cars, returning Christianity to public schools, tariffs, 'wokeness,' '60 Minutes' and Stephen Colbert. Characters also denounce Trump for looting the country for personal benefit ('putting money in his own pockets') and ruling through fear and lawsuits. In its first return volley after viewing advanced episode clips, White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers dismissed 'South Park' as a 'fourth-rate show' that 'hasn't been relevant for over 20 years and is hanging on by a thread.' Series creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone replied to the criticism with typical puckishness. On Thursday, appearing on an animation panel at Comic-Con in San Diego, Parker was asked his reaction to the controversy. 'We're terribly sorry,' he deadpanned. If past experience holds, we may hear more about this from the nation's number one amateur TV critic (and slashing Queens street-fighter), and it won't likely be pretty. On Thursday, after 250 days of suspicious foot-dragging, the Federal Communications Commission voted 2 to 1 to approve the $8 billion merger of Skydance Media and Paramount Global, corporate parent of CBS. Many believed the approval was delayed to force the network into settling Trump's lawsuit against '60 Minutes' for $16 million, litigation which many legal and media figures considered to be without merit. But Parker and Stone have a benefit not afforded to other Trump media critics. Unlike Colbert and 'The Late Show,' their show makes money for Paramount. Just days before the 'South Park' season opener, the pair signed a five-year contract with the studio for $1.5 billion — yes, you read that right, with a 'b' — for 10 episodes per season. The deal may make Parker and Stone bulletproof to any Trump lawsuits. If not, their pockets are at least deep. In fact, factoring in their 'The Book of Mormon' financial behemoth, they may be worth more than Trump himself. As in seasons past, this episode of 'South Park' weaves scatology with eschatology, placing the Christian cosmos at its center, as I have written pr e viously. This episode begins at South Park Elementary School, where the principal had previously embraced diversity, equity and inclusion — which he describes more simply as 'kindness.' Since the November election, he, like so many, has cravenly flipped. At a student assembly, the principal now embraces compelling students to accept Jesus as their personal lord and savior —to the point where Jesus himself comes down from Heaven to make his pitch, even in the lunchroom. At first one parent objects. 'What's Jesus doing in your school?' Randy Marsh asks the principal. Another character asks, 'What the hell is this president doing? He doesn't even act like a Christian.' Without what Trump calls 'wokeness,' student Eric Cartman, a reformed bigot and antisemite, says, 'Everyone hates the Jews. Everyone is fine with using gay slurs. It's terrible. Because,' he says, near tears, 'I don't know what I'm supposed to do.' Jesus cautions Trump's 'South Park' opponents that, as an unhinged, omnipotent megalomaniac, the president 'can do anything he wants to anyone.' 'You really want to end up like Colbert?' Jesus asks at one point. Jesus says he only returned to South Park to warn the townspeople. 'I didn't want to come back to the school, but I had no choice because it was part of a lawsuit and the agreement with Paramount. … The guy can do whatever he wants now that someone backed down. … If someone has the power of the presidency, and also the power to sue and take bribes, then he can do anything to anyone.' Rather than unalloyed outrage at what some would call (and have called) the blasphemous portrayal of Jesus in this and previous 'South Park' episodes, some Christians take a more nuanced view. Veteran speaker and writer Rusty Wright told me, 'As a longtime Jesus-follower, I can appreciate faith-skeptics' criticisms, because I once was one. 'South Park' gets it right in that too many Christians can be pushy, controlling and intolerant. 'South Park's' Jesus portrayal might be more credible if he befriended more of his critics, was less PR-anxious, and expressed confidence in divine ability to bring good from difficult situations.' The cartoon Trump, meanwhile, is literally in bed with Satan, his longtime boyfriend. The devil is so upset with him that he refuses the president sex, saying Trump is beginning to remind him of his previous boyfriend, Saddam Hussein. Satan is also disturbed to learn that Trump has appeared in the Jeffrey Epstein files. When the town of South Park is sued by Trump for $5 billion for opposing the president, they settle for $3.5 million, but with the added requirement of producing 50 public service announcements extolling the president's virtues. The first one … well, let's just say it doesn't help his cause. There may be an actual political dimension to the episode. The show's key demographic is young males, precisely the cohort that has been drifting toward Trump. If they are persuaded by the episode that Trump is a tyrannical buffoon and a fair target for ridicule, that may affect their next trip to the polls. Mark I. Pinsky is the author of 'The Gospel According to The Simpsons' and has written extensively about the intersection of religion, popular culture and politics.
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
US condemns French inquiry into Elon Musk's social media platform X
US officials have strongly condemned a criminal investigation by France into the social network X, owned by billionaire Elon Musk, on suspicion of foreign interference. "As part of a criminal investigation, an activist French prosecutor is requesting information on X's proprietary algorithm and has classified X as an 'organized crime group,'" the US State Department's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor wrote on their X account. "Democratic governments should allow all voices to be heard, not silence speech they dislike. The United States will defend the free speech of all Americans against acts of foreign censorship." Paris cybercrime prosecutors called for the police probe 11 July to investigate suspected crimes – including manipulating and extracting data from automated systems "as part of a criminal gang". The social media company last week denied the allegations, calling them "politically motivated". X also said it had refused to comply with the prosecutor's request to access its recommendation algorithm and real-time data. X slams French probe as 'politically motivated', refuses to cooperate Foreign interference The investigation follows two January complaints that alleged the X algorithm had been used for foreign interference in French politics. One of the complaints came from Eric Bothorel, an MP from President Emmanuel Macron's centrist party, who complained of "reduced diversity of voices and options" and Musk's "personal interventions" in the platform's management since he took it over. X said it "categorically denies" all allegations and that the probe "is distorting French law in order to serve a political agenda and, ultimately, restrict free speech". Tesla and SpaceX chief Musk has raised hackles with his forays into European politics, including vocal backing for the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party ahead of February legislative elections. "Democracy is too fragile to let digital platform owners tell us what to think, who to vote for or even who to hate," Bothorel said after the investigation was announced. Tesla customers in France sue over brand becoming 'extreme right' (with newswires)
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
US condemns French inquiry into Musk's social media platform X
US officials condemned France's criminal investigation into the social network X, owned by billionaire Elon Musk, after Paris cybercrime prosecutors said they were examining complaints in France that the X algorithm had been used for foreign interference in French politics. US officials issued a harsh condemnation Friday of France's criminal investigation into the social network X, owned by billionaire Elon Musk, on suspicion of foreign interference. 'As part of a criminal investigation, an activist French prosecutor is requesting information on X's proprietary algorithm and has classified X as an 'organized crime group,'' the US State Department's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor wrote on their X account. 'Democratic governments should allow all voices to be heard, not silence speech they dislike. The United States will defend the free speech of all Americans against acts of foreign censorship.' Paris cybercrime prosecutors called for the police probe July 11 to investigate suspected crimes—including manipulating and extracting data from automated systems 'as part of a criminal gang.' The social media company last week denied the allegations, calling them 'politically motivated.' Read moreEurope's leaders have had enough of Musk's meddling, but can they stop him? X also said it had refused to comply with the prosecutor's request to access its recommendation algorithm and real-time data. The investigation follows two January complaints that alleged the X algorithm had been used for foreign interference in French politics. One of the complaints came from Eric Bothorel, an MP from President Emmanuel Macron's centrist party, who complained of 'reduced diversity of voices and options' and Musk's 'personal interventions' in the platform's management since he took it over. X said it 'categorically denies' all allegations and that the probe 'is distorting French law in order to serve a political agenda and, ultimately, restrict free speech.' Tesla and SpaceX chief Musk has raised hackles with his forays into European politics, including vocal backing for the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party ahead of February legislative elections. Read more'Sheep for hire': Trump, Musk and Zuckerberg's dangerous plan for Europe 'Democracy is too fragile to let digital platform owners tell us what to think, who to vote for or even who to hate,' Bothorel said after the investigation was announced. (FRANCE 24 with AFP)
