Episode 2 Free Speech

Hello, and welcome to Free Speech, the show which makes your voice

heard in the national conversation. I'm Rick Edwards and welcome to Free

Speech. Tonight we are live from Broadwater

Farm in Tottenham, north London. Our live audience ready to tell us what

they think but we want to hear what you think too. Just tell Tina

Daheley. Thanks Rick - yes, we want to hear from you at home in this

show. Here are the hashtags and addresses you need. Your answers and

comments will come straight to me where I'll make sure they're heard

in the debate. As well as your comments we'll be running the Power

Bar. As the questions are asked we'll be putting them up on the

bottom of the screen for you to debate. Just use the hashtag Free

Speech Yes or hashtag Free Speech No to let us know what you think of the

topic being discussed. And here is our panel. Telegraph columnist and

historian, Tim Stanley, Broadcaster and Labour candidate for parliament,

Amy Lame Luisa Zissman, businesswoman and star of the

Apprentice and Celebrity Big Brother and Maajid Nawaz, co-founder of

anti-extremist think tank Quilliam and now Lib Dem candidate for

parliament. And that's our panel. APPLAUSE. Our first question comes

from our studio audience. My question is are the police right to

judge young people on the way we look? Are the police right to judge

young people based on the way that we look? Let's start with you

please, Maajid. My answer one absolutely not. I have been probably

the only person on this panel that has been arrested at gun point and I

was detained over night and I know how terrifying it can be. If you're

going to profile people racially, that tells you nothing about whether

they'ry -- carrying drugs or weapons and all it does is breed resentment

that we saw here in this area in Tottenham. It is difficult and some

people fit into a certain demographic that statistically they

will carry knives or do drugs. But on the flip side it is wrong to be

discriminated against. The police have to profile people, because they

can't stop and search everybody on the street. How would you respond to

that? I would say young people, why do the police have to take the media

stereotypes of young people, just because we're wearing hoodies or

trainers and on the street, just because a certain group of young

people commit those crimes, everybody who wears those brands is

not a criminal. The media stereotype that it was 18 to 24-year-olds, but

on the streets it was more 30-plus-year-olds who were looting

and stealing. The gentleman at the back. I don't think, it is easy to

jump on the police for profiling, but it is society in general. But we

as young people are being profiled in the media and on the streets, I

could walk op the street wearing a hoodie and see other people cross

the street. That is not just the police. That is society. What do you

think, Tim? That is a very good point. There are two issues. First

that of youth being targeted on the basis of the way people dress. Well,

no, if you wear a hoodie, it doesn't mean you're necessary lay criminal,

but you're more likely to be a criminal and you will be judged by

the police in that way. That is unfortunate, but the police have to

make snap decisions. That is separate from the issue of racial

profiling for which there is no excuse and none of this could

justify stopping and searching, which is unconstitutional. But I

don't think we can blame the police for trying to bring law and order to

the streets by making judgments that are rationale basis of people

hanging around in groups, or people looking a certain way on the basis

of clothing. That is not unreasonable. Maajid? If you think

that the majority of people that wear hoodies happen to be preparing

to commit a crime. I didn't say that. Most people in California are

wearing hoodies, so I find that strange where the statistics are.

People wear all sorts of clothing. That is preposterous as saying all

people in pink ties and suits are bankers and are ripping people off.

They probably are! The gentleman here. I agree that the police have

to make snap decisions. It is more of a society problem than it is the

police's false. If you're to be seen wearing a hoodie and what not, the

police do tend to think you're a xrl. But like I said, it depends on

the police have to make snap decisions, because they see somebody

wearing a hoodie and they have a knife and they leave them alone. It

could come back and be a problem. Has anyone experienced stop and

sench? -- search? A couple of years ago I was riding my bike home and I

got stopped and searched and it was quite at the time it was quite

humiliating. My first instances is the colour of your skin and I think

personally the proportion rate of stop and search is high on black,

African, Caribbean. You're seven more times like to be stopped if

your black an white. Yes. I would say to say the idea that if you wear

hoodie there is some chance that you're a criminal, I completely...

That is ridiculous. I go to college and everyone I know wears a hoodie.

So is everyone likely to be a criminal, are we all smuggling drugs

because we wear hoodies? Let's clarify that this. -- clarify this.

Police are walking down the street and a car alarm goes off, there are

two people in the street. A young person in a hoodie and a little old

lady with her bags, who are they going to stop? Let's live in the

real world. It is a hypothetical situation. It is hypothetical. This

gentleman? The fact that I wear a baseball cap does that make me me

more like to commit a crime. Because I'm young mayor of Lewisham. Is

something funny? Because it is a thing where I have been stopped

because I was wearing a baseball jacket and a hat. While the police

are not doing their job, they're supposed to be searching the guy in

the white van who could be carrying how many drugs, instead of profiling

young people. Because why am I being stopped and searched for my minding

my own business and the same excuse is given there has been a robbery in

the area. You should be stopping and searching the vans who have got

loads of drugs, instead of going for young people because of the way they

dress. That is reasonable. You can't stop everyone driving a white van.

Then you have the same problem with white van drivers. You have to

understand where the profiling comes from. So they will look at correct

me if I'm wrong, they will look at crime rate in the area and look at

the typical who does the crimes and typically I think from profiling and

statistically it will be a young male, I don't know if it is black or

white, I don't know if the colour of your skin makes a difference, in

your age range, wearing those clothes. That will be the profile

and that is when they stop people. There is a reaction on Twitter. To

you Tim, a lot of people reacting, not necessarily in a good way. No?

Monica says no it is discrimination, just because you're black and young

does not mean you're going to stab someone. I did not say that. One

says if you're innocent you have nothing worry about. And this, not

all police profile people, but if you carry yourself in a certain way,

be prepared. Picking up on what you said, if you're innocent and you

have nothing to worry about. There is a humiliation associated with it.

It is intimidation and if the first instance the young people have with

the police is stop and search, what situation is this present gt for the

future? It means young people will be intimidated by the police and

won't trust the police and we need an overhaul of stop and search

policies. Otherwise community relationships between young people

and people as a whole and the police will continue to break down. I can

answer that question. Because I was, when I was stopped is, I was 15 and

the tweeter that said if you're innocent you have nothing to worry

about. Having a gun put to your head is something to worry about.

Although I was released, no one wants a gun puts to their head and

we know how people can be accidentally shot to death. Well at

16 a year later I joined an extremist organisation, because I

became so disillusioned with mainstream society and what I saw

going on in terms of racism and then added of course my own ideological

dogma, which I now try to challenge. But people become so disconnected

and disen-Fran xhiezed from society that they start seeking identities

in other forms. And they are extra-legal organisations. How would

you respond to this? It is sad in the sense of someone says it is a

stereotype. I think the conversation we have picked up here is a

stereotype. One thing we don't know is stop people on the way sis --

basis of the way they dress, their skin colour or they're wearing a

baseball cap. It is sad, because there is lot of positive things that

we do with young people and lots of work we do with young people.

Particularly on stop and search. For example, some of the young people

want to go to Google fed up, it is a programme that we made with a local

company here about stop and search and talking about your rights. What

we can do and working with us. The majority of stop and searches are

not a problem. The issues that we are looking at is not the stop and

search, but the way we do it. It is the attitude of police officers and

the way he or she reacts with the young people and we are working with

young people to correct that. It is important. If you ask the majority

of young people should the police carry out stop and search, most

would say yes. But do it with respect and dignity and actually

tell me the reasons why you're stopping me so it makes sense. If we

do that, we get into a position where we use stop and search to

protect young innocent people who want to spend their time in a public

place and enjoy themselves. A few people nodding there. Following on

from the point about statistics and it is a certain demographic that get

chosen for stop and search. If you take it from race and think about

car insurance, there is a certain demographic, maems, who -- males,

who tend to cause the most accidents. Now there is no gender

discrimination with car insurance and we have to foot the bill. So now

will everybody get stopped and searched regardless? I think that is

the only way that is fair. If we have to do it with car insurance,

even should get stopped and searched. Because it is too

expensive. The police officer at the stop said the majority of stop and

searches are OK. For you and for me. But not for plenty of people here.

The fact is it is not OK for the thousands of kids who have been

stripped searched for no reason other than the colour of their skin

and the police close ranks, refuse to sxrut niez themselves --

scrutinise themselves when everyone knows they murdered a young black

man. The police have to be respectful to the people their

stopping and the people are powerless in that position. That is

what the police have to realise and I think they have a lot to answer

for. A power point. What people think. What we are thinking are the

police right to judge us on the way we look. 61% say yes it is right.

That is surprising. Yes. You mentioned about the way that we do

things and your scenario of a younger and an older person. There

was a video with a car set up with a keys not in it and expecting to see

who would steal it and it was an old lady? Does that not suggest maybe we

are profiling, but are we doing it in the wrong way. When you were

speaking, I chuckled, I was not chuckling at you. I was trying to

defend what may go through the minds of certain policemen. It doesn't

mean it is right or wrong. But the point made by the officer there is

the better one. There is a reality, there is a fantasy and a reality of

what goes on in police work of mistakes are made. People feel

targeted and that's bad for relations. In the majority of cases

police are trying to maintain law and order. Sometimes they make

judgements which turn out to be wrong, but the majority of cases the

police are on our side and we owe them more trust and respect than we

currently give them in the media. Yes, this gentleman here. Well, I

think we have engaged... A different one to what I was going for. We have

engaged in more general debates about stopping and searching. .

There will be anomalies to statistics, there is always a big

possibility that you are going to be dealing with an anomaly to those

statistics and therefore, I think, it becomes to the idea of respond to

go individual circumstances, what are the actual reasons that we are

going suspect an individual of committing a crime? A particular

moment rather than referring to statistics. There is something weird

about the way you phrase it. You said the probabliality of there

being an anomaly. I have been stopped and searched numerous

amounts of times and I have always responded with the utmost respect

from the police officers. They have treated with me dignity. The idea

that so many people feel that they have been mistreated and they feel

that the police force are not being in touch with the youth is in my

opinion not really true because there is things like the police

cadets and numerous organisation that is the police try and get

involved with the youth and other groups of people. It is not true

what everyone is saying. OK. Last comment up here and in the

grey jumper. I wanted to get back to you on that, when you get a line of

police officers, they stop you, they ask you about insurance and they ask

you what's on your floor and they ask you if you mok smoke and as a

full-time worker and graduate that takes liberties. Once it happens

with one person and it happens in the community, it breaks down the

trust and I think that's the issue. APPLAUSE

It feels like it is about respect. We are going to move on to our next

question. This one comes from our leaderboard, Tina. All week Free

Speech viewers have been going to Free Speech on Facebook. Clicking

through to the audience questions page and looking through the many

questions, all of which, have been submitted by you at home. This is

how it works. People click like on the questions they want to see on

the show and we count up the likes to make this, the leaderboard, here

it is. Published at 2pm this afternoon. There are the questions

and there are the number of likes they got. The top question is from

Jakes James Briggs, he asked should we legalise medicinal cannabis? No.

I can understand the case for those who are in tremendous pain and there

should be some resource for those people being able to access drugs.

But the reality is that turning marijuana to something you can get

on prescription creates a new market. If you spend your time in

California, you see people going to the doctor saying I am down, nudge,

nudge, wink. It creates a market for all kinds of new drugs. You don't

get people off harder things, you simply encourage people to

experiment with harder things. I think the message we need to send to

people is that drugs destroy lives, but they are also a moral choice

which means that you end up becoming part of a criminal system which

supports child labour, which supports gangsterism in foreign

countries, but is about dropping out of society and dropping out of the

system and I think that's the wrong message to send to people.

The gentleman up here in the stripy top. We should legalise all drugs.

APPLAUSE The problems that people describe,

aren't because of the drugs themselves, it is because they are

in the hands of criminals. It caused more harm than the drugs themselves.

Legalise drugs and it would solve most of the problems. Amy. I

disagree with your statement. I really don't think they should be

legalised. I have a very personal story about this because my sister

was a heroin addict for 12 years and I have seen first hand how drugs

tear apart families, communities, how they disturb children. The

devastation is massive and what I think we really need to do is to

look more kindly upon addicts and get to the root of the issue around

addiction which is often a backdrop of mental health issues, social

exclusion, economic exclusion, all sorts of things so I think we need

to approach drugs in a different way, I would come down with the full

force of the law on drug pushers and dealers, but I think we need to take

a more holistic and kinder approach to people who have addiction issues.

On Facebook, they don't want to give their name. Cannabis helped me live

with Crohn's disease. I have tried every treatment available. It puts

Crohn's disease into a more controllable state. I should have

the choice. Even my doctors told me off the record not to stop. Do you

think this person should stop? There are other medications that can deal

with pain. He tried every single treatment. This is the only thing

that works. I have an open mind about certain things, but I don't

think that creating a market for legalised cannabis in all cases is a

good idea. And that person is self medicating which is never a good

thing to do. The doctors told them not to stop and they have tried

every single treatment. Peter Reynolds. You are the leader of

Clear, you want cannabis law reform? Absolutely. Explain why. For

medicinal use. Crohn's disease is an excellent example. There are

clinical trials taking place in Israel on this subject. But what

most people don't realise is 100 years ago, half of the medicines

that you could get this this country contained cannabis for a wide range

of conditions. And it is only 80 years ago that we started this

experiment of banning cannabis and on no basis exempt on the basis of

prejudice and it is only 30 years ago that science has begun to

explain why cannabis is so effective for such a wide range of conditions

and what we advocate is very simple and that is if a doctor wants to

prescribe cannabis based on his professional judgement then he

should be able to do so and the fact of the matter is because there is so

much... Is it n true that they can? No, they can't. There is a cannabis

medicine which has existed in this country for five or six years. And

it is a spray? It is a spray, OK. The ridiculous thing we are the only

country in the world that is licensed to major pharmaceutical

company to grow cannabis for medicine and our Government, our

Home Office tells us there is no medicinal value in cannabis. So what

we want is we want doctors to be able to prescribe cannabis and

science has begun to explain why cannabis is effective. We have

something in our body and cannabis modulates this and it controls our

cardiovascular system. We will Google this later!

The gentleman in yellow. There is some clear benefits for medicinal

use, but where do you draw the line to ensure that access doesn't become

easy for recreational purposes and lead to potentially situations like

Amy discussed? One of the remarkable things about cannabis is it is safe.

Even professor, the chair of the Government's advisory panel says

that cannabis is a safer drug than aspirin and can be used without any

serious effects. That's not... Aspirin doesn't give you

schizophrenia. You are walking into The Daily Mail characture. Cannabis

does not give you schizophrenia. It is nonsense. You look at the

statistics, anybody in this country is six times more likely to be

admitted to hospital for mental and behavioural problems related to

alcohol than for cannabis. APPLAUSE

It done mean you should release another drug on to the market. There

are strong arguments for legalising cannabis for adults all around. Very

strong arguments, here tonight we are talking about medicinal use. It

is outrageous that politicians and civil servants can try and override

what a doctor wants to prescribe for his patients.

APPLAUSE We have got to be very careful.

There is two extremes to this debate. One is legalise everything,

let's go to the corner shop and buy crack cocaine, why not? There is a

middle ground. I agree request something that Nick Clegg said when

he came back from Columbia. He said that middle ground will be UN review

into this. The Government is under going a review into this and there

is a serious question about looking at cannabis because it isn't

statistically as you have said correctly, it doesn't lead to as

much social damage and health damage as alcohol. It has a medicinal

purpose. We are talking here specifically, not about

legalisation, but decriminalisation and changing the debate from being

one of law and order to health. It is a health question and like any

other health question, if someone is an alcoholic, we don't say let's ban

alcohol? We say they need rehabilitation. If someone gets

addicted to cannabis then they can go to rehab like everyone else who

is addicted to alcohol and cigarettes.

We were talking specifically about medicinal use. The evidence really

is overwhelming, OK. I am going to chat to the police about this.

LAUGHTER Alex Marshall, where do you stand?

The Government makes laws and it is for the police to enforce the laws

so the police don't have a role in make the laws, there is no doubt the

harm that is done. Interest a medical point of view, in medicine,

the established practise is you always test things thoroughly and

you have have a scientific basis for a treatment that a doctor provides.

I am from the College of Policing, we doing research to make sure the

policing approaches we use, stop and search an example we heard about

earlier, are based on sou evidence, not on judging people by the way

they look, but on the evidence of what works. You should look at

evidence in these things, but the laws are made by Government, not by

the police. This from someone called Younglin.

Tim needs to leave his elitist fantasy world and visit the

Netherlands. They have different access to

cannabis. Let's look at the Power Bar to see what people at home

think. Should we legalise medicinal cannabis. 66%, Free Speech, yes.

The gentleman at the back. I think cannabis is miraculous. I read a

story about a girl, $1 million of diagnostics wasn't able to diagnose

her condition and oil cured her having less seizures. I want to

address Tim on this one because he said if it was medicinal you could

go to your doctor and be like, "I am in pain. I need a little bit of -

what about alcohol, you don't have to lie to your doctor? You can go to

the shop and buy it and drink as much as you want and it kills

people. Weed never killed anybody. APPLAUSE

Alcohol is bad. People abuse it and it kills people. Let's ban it.

That's not an arguemed for legalising a different kind drug.

Alcohol is part of our society. If we did try and restrict it, or ban

it, if we did try to restrict it or ban it that would have extraordinary

societal effects. Like wise, if we tried to legalise drugs, it will

have societal effects because we have not... There are two sides to

this argument. It will have a massive, massive effect we can't

predictment Luisa? I'm all for legalising

cannabis for medicinal purposes. But if you have a problem like Crones

you can grow the weed its and from a corrupt Government point of view,

think how much the Government makes from pharmaceutical companies and

how much of an interest The In it. When you legalise weed, you go into

another shady area of grey, where people can self-prescribe and the

government would lose a huge amount of money from prescribing legal

drugs. The lady in red? Tim said about alcohol being part of our

society that is only because of its long-standing history. If it was

discovered today, would we accept it causes lung cancer and alcohol has

such long effects in society. It is only because of its history. That is

true. If we discovered alcohol I would say it should be illegal. No!

We have case studies where they have experimented with the legalisation

of cannabis and they have found that generally and this is not

necessarily the case going forward, but there hasn't been a mass surge

of people getting aticket dicted -- addicted and they started taxing the

trade and raised a lot of money. Because surprisingly, a lot of

people are on weed. And final think Afghanistansters -- gangsters, they

deprived them of a lot of money and it makes economic and social sense.

I am standing for Parliament answering the police point, I will

campaign on the legalisation of medicinal cannabis. That is

something I decided a long time ago before this debate. Yes? Does that

mean this is all a business to the Government? I thought our debate was

on the medicinal side. You mentioned they tax it. So that does mean that

we are looking at the economic benefits over the benefits of

people? That is what laws should be on. It comes down to a lot about the

Government and people don't realise how much influence the Government

has and how much is made from alcohol and Sigg ketds -- cigarettes

and how much they would lose out. Because people would self-grow. Any

taxation goes back into the health industry and you deprive organised

crime of lots of their revenues. Which is a huge problem when you

talk about the consequences and costs to society by policing

organised crime. And the cost to society, let's be real, drugs, when

we talk about regulating them, it is a huge industry and if you add that

to the health benefit and that poor soul who is living in pain, people

should be allowed to decide what to do with their own bodies when it

comes to medicinal cannabis. It is not crack cocaine. Now we tried to

debate this on our last show in Birmingham, but then we didn't. But

better late than never. I talk about being Muslim gay in society. These

labels shouldn't fit well together, but here I am and I refuse to give

one up over the other. I kept it to myself, because I was afraid what

the community would say, what my parents would say. I came out to my

parents when I was in my 20s. My mum came into my room and questioned me

about my sexuality. I said this in Urdu, which is my mother tongue.

That means my mum, gay. There was an occasion where my mum asked whether

I need to go and see a doctor. I said this isn't something that I can

take a medicine for. When I introduced my partner to my parents,

I introduced him as the person I want to marry and although I entered

into a civil partnership, they sort of saw it equal as a marriage and my

mum attended the ceremony and ended up giving me away and giving us her

blessing. It sounds a cliche but it was the best moment of my life. The

character has allowed me to reach out to many people. My mum, my

aunties and sisters came to one of my shows. The gay community were

inspired and in awe that a Muslim woman dressed in a nick nick cab has

come. So when it will be right to be Muslim and gay? Why did you want to

ask that question? It is an issue affecting a lot of gay Muslims in

the country. Thousands of gay Muslims and I think it is a topic

that is relevant today. It is a topic that doesn't get discussed on

any level. Continuously gets brushed under the carpet and I would like to

get it discussed. Amy? What do you think I think it is absolutely all

right. I think he is inspiring and to hear your story about your family

being so loving and gentle with you is just wonderful. Of course, it is

OK to be gay and Muslim and Christian and nonreligious and

whatever. This is the 21st Century and you know, not only do we have

the laws to support this equalitiers -- equality, we have changed a lot

of hearts and minds in the past 20 years. It is, we are looking at a

fantastic weekend ahead on Saturday we will have the first equal

marriages taking place here in the UK and I think it is a proud moment

for the country. What is your position on this? Well, the Islamic

position is we don't label people by their sexuality or their nationality

or their race. This label was invented in the Victorian era. As

soon as you diskrim napted by label, you diskrim named. In Islam we don't

have a title like that. You are just humans. The only thing that is

judged, it is just actions. And there many actions which are sinful

and many are permitted. We can't say you can't be gay and Muslim. We

don't make the disrim crimination between sexuality. That is when

discrimination begins. I'm confused. Would you therefore describe him as

sinful? What he does in his own home ills not my concern. I'm just

saying. Look, what he does in the privacy of his own home is not my

concern. If you want a judgment, you can refer it to god. I'm not God,

I'm just a human being. But Islamic says thr things like drinking

alcohol, eating pork or different gender intercourse out of marriage

which is sin you feel. But you -- sinful. You can still be a muss

Muslim. The real intolerance. It is rich that he says he can't profile

young people because they have hoodies, but his organisation

profiles Muslims who have orthodox beliefs and calls them extremists

and he is a Government-funded stooge attacking Muslims. What we are

talking about is different. But I have got a right to get back to the

subject. Quilliam doesn't profile Muslim and we are not Government

funded. But back to the subject... You were. It is time we had an

honest debate. We are as Muslim communities in the plural,

simultaneously oppressed and the oppressors. That is a dynamic that

plays out in any other scenario of victimhood, whetherivity is domestic

abuse, somebody usual lip has abuse done to them and they turn to an

abuser whether with a wife or children. It is a cycle of violence.

And with Muslim communities across the world, we have failed a lot of

violence. I faced torture in prison in Egypt I have been had police

brutality and in turn we become brutalisers of others. And in the

case of being a minority within this minority, we sometimes end up

discriminating against minorities within the minority and a case in

point is gay Muslims. Yesterday a film was shown about an openly gay

muz whip who has to -- Muslim who has to live in hiding because he has

been attacked. We have to have an honest debate. It doesn't mean every

Muslim is homophobic. But we have to be honest and say there is

discrimination within Muslim communities and call a spade a

spade. I'm a British Muslim, my family has been in London for 50

years. And the question raised, the two topics are controversial, but

you can be gay and Muslim. I think it was wrong for the mosque to ban

the discussion a few weeks ago, because we live in a democracy,

where we are allowed to disagree. The mosque are not here to defend

themselves. But OK, I don't think we're allowed to sensor anything.

But I know him and he does a lot of work for the gay community. Being a

drag queen isn't the same as being gay. It may sound obvious. Being gay

is not about and sex or sexual - anal sex or sexual membering

Nishings. -- mechanics. And to say they're in the same vein as

murderers and paedophiles. He has a position of responsibility and that

same language is used by people around the world to justify

murdering and persecuting people in the community and it causes a lot of

sadness. I volunteered for a UK organisation and we have helped

asylum seekers and people in the UK who have been disowned by their own

family and simply to love someone isn't a sin. No religion is

preaching hate. If there is 1.5 Muslims and 10% is gay. People need

to stop hating and start loving. Well Maajid talks about how he loves

minorities. But he tells the Government that certain beliefs are

extreme. Let's stick to what we are talking about. Including the belief

that what is sinful and what is not sinful to believe in mainstream

believes. If I believe that same gender physical intercourse is a sin

doesn't make me extremist. There are Christians that believe this. Don't

ask me to judge people. I'm not here to judge anyone. Will be judged when

I'm dead. You should not be called extremist for holding mainstream

beliefs. And people that hold these beliefs are not attacking anyone.

They are holding the beliefs and being treated as outcasts and modern

day her ticks. Anonymous, it is come -- it is hard coming out in a Muslim

family and you live two lives. I came out to my mum and still haven't

told the family. I don't wish to. I am happy, I am gay and I am Muslim.

And another one as a Muslim the issue around homosexuality within my

faith and community is one of anom imty -- anonymity and it has led to

depression and suicidal thoughts. My siblings know telling my parents is

something else. Isn't it attitudes within the community that we are

hearing stories like this? All Muslims are human and we all commit

sin. In the thee logy you cannot say I have done this. You keep it

private. We all do sins, but you shouldn't be I must come out. Who

said you should come out? Just you know I tell everyone about my

private life. You do not choose to be gay.

APPLAUSE If you want to live your life by a

book that's ancient, it is just so beyond the views are outdated. I

think it is bad... There is a confusion. It should be why can you

not be religious and gay? APPLAUSE

Can I braefl clarify that -- briefly clarify that? Being gay refers to

emotions of feelings, right? That's different from actions, all right.

We're talking about actions. I'm not saying about feelings in Islam

feelings are not sinful, right? Actions are a good person or a bad

person, that's all we're saying. Being gay is not bad. That's not

what I'm saying. We don't even label the people to discriminate them. You

are the one that discriminates them. You are the one that makes the

discrimination. You don't even acknowledge it, that's worse. I

treat them as humans. The lady here. He came out and said the censorship

that happened on BBC Free Speech was not only an attack on LG and BT. The

fact that you have sensored it and postponed it. Postpone is not the

same as sensored. The mosque, the concern, they expressed concern and

the BBC decided to abide by that and they came out saying. You need to

identify, you identify yourself as gay. Why do you chose to be Muslim

when it says within Islam, that that is prohibited?

APPLAUSE I would like to say that sexual

orren tation is not a choice. It is a choice for you to be Muslim. No.

No. Couldn't get involved in this. Why would you choose to be a Muslim.

In the Koran it says that's prohibited? What is prohibited is

the act... you to be Muslim.

That's wrong. I was brought up in an Islamic household. I am from a

conservative Pakistani community. If my mum and dad can accept me, why

can't the wider community accept me? The lady in the blue.

APPLAUSE I think the question that you are

asking is when will the Muslim community accept you as a gay

person, accept gay or homosexuality. It is not accepted in Islam so the

Muslim community will never accept homosexuality. You can be gay, but

then at the same time, if you choose to follow a religion which prohibits

homosexuality you can't ask when will they accept for you to be gay?

Can I just say then? Yes. What are people like me meant to do? Gay

teenagers, the suicide rate is going up. Homophobic crime is being

unreported. It is because of attitudes like that that are causing

people like me such dilemma. I will speak out and continue to speak out

and you are right to identify however you want, what we are

hearing right now and you can think whatever you want, the danger with

literalism is insisting there is only one way of doing things. If we

take literalism literally then only 200 years ago slavery was accepted

and justified by religion. Let me finish. The Koran explicity and

literally allows for slavery as does the Bible, but we no longer practise

that because our attitudes has changed. There is no one way of

interpreting things. Fed wants to -- fed wants to -- if he wants to be a

Muslim. This gentleman says he is not going to discriminate against

him. APPLAUSE

God does not exclude anyone. That's a crucial first point. Everyone has

the right to define for themselves what their identity is and we all

have identities which quite often are contradictory. We have to find

some way navigating that, of remaining faithful to our vision of

God whilst remaining faithful to who we are. To add to that also, the

rest of society and in particular the State, should not try to impose

its view, its morality upon Islam. This is a conversation that has to

happen within Islam. There might be room and there might be room for

growth and change. You decide for yourself, but the idea of saying to

someone, "You are a sinner." You cannot be part of this religion."

That's anti-God because that's a decision that God makes, not you.

APPLAUSE What you said about interpretation,

you are pushing the idea that there is no true sperption of Islam. By --

interpretation of Islam. You are saying that the people, the

extremists, their interpretation of religion is valid. There is

mainstream Islam. There are things that are universally accepted within

Islam. The gentleman brought up the idea of drinking, of doing drugs,

you know, those things are prohibited within Islam. I can chose

not to do them or I can, but for me to go out and say, "I am a Muslim

and I drink" And that should be accepted, that's not religion. You

are conflating choice. He was born the way he is and I am sure he can

speak for himself. Many, many Muslims would consider you a sinner

for covering your face. This is all interpreted, just as you have got

the right... No. No. No, look you are going into all sorts of

different avenues now. Can I finish my point? They should you shunnedant

be speaking in -- shouldn't be speaking in front of men. Oh come

on. Osama Bin Laden was asked why do you go against Islamic prohibitions

of killing women and children. He said, "Oh, the law is not set in

stone." He believes in different interpretation of Islam. You can

reinterpret it. In Islam, we believe in rules and principles. You can't

just change those things. Yes, you have been very patient. I

think the real question we should be asking is when will religion accept

homosexuality? Narrowing it done to Muslims is not doing anyone any

favours. APPLAUSE

Let's get to the Power Bar. Some comments. This is the minority view

though. You can't be gay in a Muslim. You are not a Muslim, you

are just Asian. These are the messages coming in. "Being gay and

Muslim is not right and it is disrespectful." # 1% of -- 71% of

people watching say yes, it is all right to be a gay Muslim.

APPLAUSE The gentleman up here.

The question of the Bible and the Koran. In society, there are laws

and we are here to abide by the laws. If Christians have the Bible

and the Bible sets out rules that Christians should follow, you are

either a Christian or not a Christian. Equally so, the Koran and

the laws that are set for you to follow, you either accept or reject.

On the basis of all these, people have rights to their choices. It is

all about choice and the life you want to lead. You should not hold us

to ransom because of the life you want to live. I am a Christian and I

am also a lesbian and I believe that they are all made in God's image.

APPLAUSE God has also given us the ability to

judge for ourselves and to think for ourselves and that is the crucial

point here. We will make the judgement that they want to follow a

biblical or a Koran-led form of that faith. What I find odd is the idea

that there is one true interpretation which can be applied

across the religion or across the culture. For me, I deeply respect

people who choose to live a chased life who are gay and who choose to

live according to the biblical precepts, but I accept you have to.

Those who choose to follow a different kind of relationship with

God and people who say, "You ain't going to get into heaven." That's

not my call. That's God's call to make. All religion practises love.

For you to separate them from the religion is not practising love. You

are not loving them for who they are. Love them regardless because at

the end, you are practising one religion.

The gentleman at the back there. The biggest problem here for Islam, I am

going to speak as an outsider, I am a Catholic Christian, Islam, the

issues is tolerance. I have friends who are Muslims. They would tell

you, Islam is not about love, it is about rules, rules, rules. The issue

here is what I call Protestant heritage. Islam, there are two many

interpretations involved. The big issues are defying some dogma saying

this is what it really means. You have got to tolerate that he is gay.

I tolerate that you are a lesbian. I congratulated this gentleman three

times for his nondiscrimination. I don't have a problem with him, but

he has a problem with me. Is the issue here not that as soon as you

start judging somebody else based on one factor of their personality and

identity you get it into a really dangerous... That's a good place to

end. That's it. We're off air until April, 10th. We are coming from

Winchester and we will be joined by a special audience made up of two

groups of people, those educated in a comprehensive system and those

educated privately. Our audience questions page on Facebook has been

reset and it is waiting for your questions. Click like on the ones

you most want to see on the programme, we will count them up and

see what comes top. This is your programme and we follow your agenda.

From us in Tottenham, good night. APPLAUSE