Rundle Mall: Preachers banned for hate speech
The Advertiser reported this afternoon that a pair of Christian preachers, commonly seen proselytising in Rundle Mall, the central shopping district in the Adelaide CBD, had been temporarily banned. Shop owners had allegedly complained about the content of the sermons being delivered by the group, which reportedly contained offensive comments regarding Islamic people and threats of divine retribution. Furthermore, it is alleged that the preachers ‘shouted and screamed’ their sermons using amplifying equipment.
Many Adelaidians will be familiar with these street preachers, commonly seen tag-team proselytising in the mall. Despite their obnoxious volume, they’re generally either ignored or are the target of some derision. However, it is difficult to say that they should be banned from making their views public to those who want to listen, as one of the preachers reportedly argued; “In order for a democracy to work, there needs to be a free-flow of information.”
The pair of preachers stand accused of hate speech, purportedly what led the council to seek the ban in the first place. To dispense with the preachers’ claim that they do not take part in hate speech. In my experience, it is not uncommon to hear distasteful or offensive remarks in the context of sermons, though I have never heard such openly inflammatory comments as “Muslims are dirty,” as reported in the Advertiser article and the preachers contend that they have never made such remarks and that the Advertiser has a secular bias (see comments).
So, should the preachers be banned from the mall? The issue is not so clear cut. After all, the mall is very frequently a staging area for special interest groups of many kinds, some of which might cause offence to others with differing viewpoints. For example, Voluntary Euthanasia advocacy groups are a frequent sight. However, there are a number of crucial differences between these two examples. Primarily, such groups are rarely (if ever?) making gratuitously offensive remarks or threats, but it is also noteworthy that, while they frequently offer pamphlets, they are also unlikely to be announcing their agenda over a loudspeaker. Thus, they minimise their potential offensiveness and make taking in their message largely optional. This is, of course, the well known area where free speech and hate speech part company.
Leaving aside the issue of whether it is possible to proselytise religion without causing gratuitous offence (it may not be, given the necessary exclusion of certain people involved, such as homosexuals), it is reasonable to expect that any individuals entering the mall with loudspeaker equipment for the sole purpose of making racial slurs or otherwise degrading comments would be unwelcome. Moving aside the Christian trappings of the alleged hate speech, then, makes the issue a little clearer. Their religion is perfectly acceptable (within laws regarding volume, etc.), but their offensive comments are not.
When asked for comment, one of the preachers reportedly said:
“I’ve got some very good Muslim friends, Hindu mates, friends who are homosexual and friends who are [sic] athiests,”
This fallacious defense is tired and well-known to anybody who has argued against someone accused of hate speech or other offensive behaviour. Simply put, it is irrelevant whether one has friends of Category X to whether one is guilty of discrimination, except possibly the fact that said friends may have made a poor choice in companions. Nothing in having a Muslim friend precludes one from attacking Muslims and it certainly doesn’t exempt someone from being called on such behaviour.
Finally, it is as yet unclear whether religious proselytising is prohibited by council by-laws in the mall in the first place. This issue is currently being investigated and is likely to factor heavily into the final decision.
Tags: Adelaide, Advertiser, ban, Christians, preaching, Rundle
You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.
August 31, 2010 at 5:51 pm
I am one of the street preachers involved in these accusations, & I have read through various reports given by shop-keepers – who blatantly lie about us saying derogatory remarks about muslims and asians. This is actually quite far from the truth. Regularly, I personally (not speaking for the others) preach AGAINST racism – and I preach especially against white ‘supremacy’. Never have I once in four years of street preaching said ‘muslims are dirty’ (and nor would my comrades).
I think the report posted on ‘Adelaide Now’ is a typical ‘Advertiser’ report full of slanted journalism & secular bias. Like the ‘ABC’ they are slanted against fundamentalist Christianity very obviously to all regular readers and viewers.
It is somewhat humorous to me personally, that the Advertiser & the ABC not once have reported how over 30 times we have been acquitted and found not guilty in the Adelaide Magistrates courts for false charges given under false arrests by SA Police. After all of these wins, I must admit I find it disappointing to see the media so quick to publish our one loss, when we have over 30 victories.
That besides, any atheist who wishes to dialogue with us is more than welcome to do so – even in the form of a structured public debate if they feel so inclined. The end of the issue is that mankind hates God & loves sin, man is morally corrupt and therefore does not find it very appealing to hear a preacher of righteousness.
In conclusion to this report, I would add that the average Adelaidian knows very little about South Australian history. George Fife Angas, one of the core founders and fathers of Adelaide city (see his biography by Edwin Hodder) was an attendee of Norwood Baptist church (now a cafe’) & also was a strong Christian, who in his personal Bible wrote many notes on South Australia. Mr. Angas actually founded Adelaide as being a place for Christianity to thrive. And thrive it did!
Little do most locals know, that statistics given in antiquarian literature dated in 1915 state that 25% of South Aussie’s were Wesleyan Methodists (that’s not including the Presbyterian, Congregational, Lutheran, Baptist churches too). The raw statistic is that S.A’s population in 1914 was 418,172 and of that number, 85,892 were Methodist Christians (source: ‘Missionary Triumphs’ by John Blacket, 1914). Furthermore, this number doubled by 1973, in which 215,000 South Aussie’s were Methodist Christians (source: C.B. Wells, Vice President, National Trust of S.A in ‘Morgan’s Colonial Methodism’ 1973).
It was this rich Christian heritage which gave Adelaide its popular jingle “The city of churches”. And for those who wish to argue that Christians ought not to engage in street preaching – I can cite various case citations from the Magistrates court in which secular magistrates have stated “preaching is a part of society”. Further case history we can find quotes like “Christianity is part and parcel of common law” (see ‘Historical Roots of the Aus Constitution’ by Francis Nigel Lee for further case citings and sources for the above). Ironically, Adelaide history buffs will know that the Adelaide City Council complex (25 Pirie St) stands on the site of the original Mother-Church of Methodism in S.A (Pirie St Methodist), early photographs can be seen at http://www.trove.nla.gov.au (search ‘pirie st methodist’). The building might be demolished, but the stories of its revival of religion remain stubbornly upon our local history in the pages of one of its Minister’s – see ‘South Australia’ chapter in ‘Glorious Gospel Triumphs’ by John Watsford (published 1900). I quote all this literature to prove to you atheists that we are a Christian founded city, and Christianity is grounded in not only our South Aussie history, but our Australian Constitution even (see ‘Preamble’).
I conclude, that biblically & historically, street preaching is a right well guarded by our forefathers, & is undeniable as being protected by many various laws of our country. Whether you are atheist, muslim, or a follower of Christ – this cannot be denied. I strongly encourage any reading this to repent of your sins, seek God’s forgiveness, & surrender yourself to the Lord Jesus. We won’t lie down easily my fellow country-men! We await the day of your salvation.
August 31, 2010 at 6:19 pm
I am very much aware of the dishonest nature of The Advertiser’s reporting, hence my reluctance to rely on it as a source and my main concern being whether people who were behaving offensively should be excluded from the mall. Although to say that the Advertiser is slanted against Christianity is a bit rich, given their apparent hatred of change of any kind. They are a fairly conservative paper overall. As I said in my article, I don’t think that your preaching group should be banned, that much is a freedom of speech issue. I am pleased to note, therefore, that you have been acquitted on numerous occasions.
However, I’m sure you can see how passers-by would be offended to be told that they are morally corrupt or will suffer everlasting torment, even if you believe these things to be true.
With regards to history; I never disputed, nor would I, that Adelaide is a Christian-founded city. I don’t find it difficult to ignore street-preaching and don’t mind people sharing their views in public, except for one gentleman who, when I politely declined to take a pamphlet, followed me down Hindley Street yelling at me. I choose to treat him as an outlier, rather than the norm.
July 14, 2011 at 8:50 am
For those that do want to be able to publicly debate what it is that you are preaching, could you please give me a link or could you reply with a rough timetable of when you are preaching in the mall or at the top of hindley street
August 31, 2010 at 6:25 pm
I have updated the post to reflect your comment regarding the veracity of the Advertiser’s article.
August 31, 2010 at 9:26 pm
Leaving aside the issue of christians, and preaching, and hate speech and the like, I have two issues with street preachers.
(1) Stay away from my children. Say what you like to me, but do not ever, ever, threaten my children with torment and damnation.
(2) No loud hailers. They hurt my ears.
On that note, could Harris Scarfe stop blaring their sales pitch into the mall.
Great post, Daniel.
September 2, 2010 at 9:43 am
[...] The pair of preachers stand accused of hate speech, purportedly what led the council to seek the ban in the first place. To dispense with the preachers’ claim that they do not take part in hate speech. In my experience, it is not uncommon to hear distasteful or offensive remarks in the context of sermons, though I have never heard such openly inflammatory comments as “Muslims are dirty,” as reported in the Advertiser article and the preachers contend that they have never made such remarks and that the Advertiser has a secular bias (see comments at Detrange.com). [...]
September 8, 2010 at 11:35 am
‘Forbes’, if you must spout this lunacy, why not do so inside a religious building? That way, you have a presumably captive audience (manner of ‘captive’ optional) and avoid irritating a great many people. I am not the one to decide whether your outbursts are truly hateful, or just annoying. Refer to outdated census data if you wish, but the majority of us now living in Adelaide are contented in our particular beliefs and do not appreciate being shouted at by a crazed automaton. Why not go into politics? This sort of behaviour is encouraged there. And as for ‘free speech’, apart from the legal specifics which generally don’t condone forcing vitrol at the community, you are also quite ‘free’ TO KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT!
September 30, 2010 at 7:42 pm
Furtunately James is benefiting from this opportunity to put his point of view publicly, but his intolerance of allowing others to put their point of view shows nothing but hypocrisy
October 13, 2010 at 11:16 pm
Well us preachers have had the ban lifted and the council is on the back foot already. The Adelaide City Council by-law is about to down to. Turns out the councils injunction did not last long after all.
November 5, 2010 at 9:09 am
I heard that the council are finding it hard to get any evidence against any of the preachers for their claim of hate speech? There is also talk of a law suit against the council of a quarter of a million…
October 14, 2011 at 7:28 am
Just want to back up Deb and James. In my youth I often heard religious people say “The best sermon is a good example,” and I wonder what sort of example these people think they are setting. They yell and put up signs denigrating the free religious choice of ohters, and therfore present a most unappealing image of thier own religious group. If I were in the market for new religious beliefs, I would not go in their direction. I think they are driven by adrenaline addiction – something very weird about people who seek out megaphones and pay for what must be expensive signs when they must surely attract few converts. Why not go and do some good works for a change? It is not stifling free speech to ask whether this arrogant noise polution really repelcts what poor old Jesus would have liked. I’d even prefer them ot go and overturn a few tables in shops .. so logn as they turned off the amplifiers.
December 5, 2011 at 12:24 am
“Why not go and do some good works for a change?”
how do we know that they AREN’t doing “good works”….?
from my understanding of the situation, they mainly preach on Friday nights….so…..that leaves the other six days of the week to do “good works”….
also….if you read the Gospels, Jesus Christ Himself made what could be construed as “offensive” remarks….so much so that many of his erst-while disciples actually left Him!……”not being offensive” is *not* a criteria for a devout Christian!
in fact, according to the Gospels, He probably spent more time making “offensive remarks” than He did healing the sick!
Christianity is *not* a “works-based” belief system….it is a *faith*-based belief system from which “good works” naturally flow…..
that’s how we got such things as schools, orphanages and hospitals from Christian believers of 100 or more years ago whose faith, by today’s standards, would be described as “offensively extremist”!