Tag Archives: Magna Carta

Free Speech: Five Centuries of Struggle and One Forgotten Hero

Posted on by

From Magna Carta to Tyndale’s Bible, how Christian conviction built the liberties we now take for granted

Right Times with Kathy Gyngell

Aug 07, 2026

A guest post by Bob Robinson.

FREEDOM of speech is under threat from authorities seeking to impose international rules on nation states and deny access to information. This is not the first time English people have been called upon to oppose the centralisation of power and control of knowledge. Civil wars were fought in defence of the principles of Magna Carta. The Reformation removed the corrupt and stifling influence of the Catholic Church. International wars have been fought against the ambitions of authoritarian regimes.

This year marks the 500th anniversary of William Tyndale’s English translation of the New Testament. Its impact on the development of the English language, religious liberty, and national identity was immense. Tyndale, a multi-lingual scholar from Gloucestershire, translated the Bible into English from its Latin, Greek and Hebrew versions, enabling more people to read and understand Scripture for themselves. Before then, religious teaching had been restricted to an elite group of learned men deemed to be ‘best qualified’ to decide how Scripture should be interpreted and explained to the majority.

The invention of the printing press dramatically increased access to information in books and pamphlets. In a similar way, the internet has democratised knowledge and the seeking of truth. When the printing and distribution of his Bible was banned in England, Tyndale travelled to Germany where a clandestine printer produced hundreds of pocket editions of his translated Bible. These were then smuggled into England. He was hunted across Europe and eventually captured in Antwerp, where he was executed by strangulation and then burned at the stake. Today, Tyndale should be remembered as one in a long line of Englishmen who stood up for freedom of conscience and the right to free speech.

Share Right Times with Kathy Gyngell

Christianity has a remarkably long association with the people of the British Isles. Folklore tells of Christ visiting England alongside his metal-trading uncle, Joseph of Arimathea. According to Orthodox tradition the first Bishop of Britain was Saint Aristobulus, one of the Seventy Apostles sent around the Roman Empire. He arrived in Britain shortly after the Roman invasion in AD 43. At this time, Christians who proclaimed their faith were persecuted by the authorities; nevertheless, they remained defiant and refused to stay silent about their beliefs. The early Church was characterised by cults built around local Romano-British martyrs, such as Saint Alban. Many of these saints have since been lost to the Anglican Church, but are still celebrated by the Orthodox Church.

Following the Roman withdrawal in AD 410, indigenous Romano-Britons were unable to prevent the widespread settlement of Anglo-Saxon pagans. Christianity was confined to the western and northern parts of the British Isles, and was introduced to the Anglo-Saxons in England in the early 7thcentury. Biblical principles and Christian moral guidance underpin English common law, which developed from a series of legal precedents taken from the wisdom, customs, and traditions of the Anglo-Saxons. For hundreds of years, this legal system has provided a defence of individual freedoms and rights.

The ‘Golden Rule’ in the Gospel of Luke ‘to do unto others as you would have them do to you’ is lost on many in the modern secular age. Unnecessarily abusive social media posts considered ‘hurtful’ are used as an excuse by authorities to clamp down on freedom of expression and speech. This has been helped by the English legal system moving away from flexible, common-sense case law and towards poorly defined statutory codes that are open to subjective interpretation by social media platform moderators and unelected judges.

Magna Carta was sealed by King John in 1215. Its principal author, Stephen Langton (Archbishop of Canterbury at the time), opposed the notion that monarchs could act above the law. He believed that morally upstanding citizens were a prerequisite for a just and prosperous Christian society. Individuals needed to operate with honour and integrity to find their true sense of spiritual and secular purpose. For this to happen they had to be free, and a system of law based on truth, fairness and transparency had to underpin these freedoms. If all people were treated were treated equally under the law, individual rights and freedoms would be respected across society. Today, this basic concept, the cornerstone of Western civilisation, is at risk from legally enforceable protected characteristics which have created a hierarchy of victimhood and ill-defined differentiation.

In the 14th century, English dissenters challenged the authority and corruption of the Catholic Church. The Lollards (a ‘proto-Protestant’ movement) included academics such as John Wycliffe (the first translator of the English Bible), and radical priests including John Ball (one of the leaders of the Peasants’ Revolt). Although many dissenting Lollards were hunted down by the authorities, their ideas never disappeared. Wycliffe’s work would later influence reformers such as Martin Luther. In the 16th century, a new Protestant theology based on a deep understanding of the Bible emerged in parts of Europe and in England.

Tensions between Catholicism and various strands of Protestantism existed at this time. Christian attitudes towards religious tolerance were influenced by the 17th century English philosopher John Locke, who argued for a separation of government and religion. This was based on a recognition that individuals could not be forced into a particular faith or way of thinking, as this only came with a genuine change of mind. Furthermore, while governments have powers to impose laws by force, they have no power to change what an individual believes to be true. The Toleration Act 1689 put much of this reasoning into law.

Western nations have since thrived in an atmosphere of tolerance, underpinned by the right to freedom of speech. For Christians, the role of nations is integral to God’s redemptive plan, and in the Gospel of Matthew there is reference to Jesus telling his disciples to ‘go and make disciples of all nations’. The new covenant in the New Testament is a promise from God that does not just apply to one specific group. Anyone in any nation who believes can be part of the covenant, and each nation should protect the right of every person to have a faith if they chose to.

Share Right Times with Kathy Gyngell

English missionaries spread Christianity across northern Europe during the early Middle Ages. In the 18th and 19th centuries, they took the Gospel message around the world, helping to end slavery, human sacrifice and widow-burning. English Christians developed a just legal system, reformed a corrupt Church, and introduced greater religious and political toleration. It is worrying that modern-day secular leaders fail to acknowledge our Christian heritage. The freedoms and liberties we enjoy today did not just arrive overnight. They have been fought for over many generations. While we remember the sacrifice made by William Tyndale some 500 years ago, we should also remember that it takes only one or two neglectful generations to erase a historic legacy that represents the pinnacle of human achievement.

Bob Robinson is the author of
Identity Lost, Identity Regained: The Story of England and the English People.

Thank you for reading and supporting us. Please

Free Speech: Five Centuries of Struggle and One Forgotten Hero

From Magna Carta to Tyndale’s Bible, how Christian conviction built the liberties we now take for granted

Right Times with Kathy Gyngell

Aug 07, 2026

A guest post by Bob Robinson.

FREEDOM of speech is under threat from authorities seeking to impose international rules on nation states and deny access to information. This is not the first time English people have been called upon to oppose the centralisation of power and control of knowledge. Civil wars were fought in defence of the principles of Magna Carta. The Reformation removed the corrupt and stifling influence of the Catholic Church. International wars have been fought against the ambitions of authoritarian regimes.

This year marks the 500th anniversary of William Tyndale’s English translation of the New Testament. Its impact on the development of the English language, religious liberty, and national identity was immense. Tyndale, a multi-lingual scholar from Gloucestershire, translated the Bible into English from its Latin, Greek and Hebrew versions, enabling more people to read and understand Scripture for themselves. Before then, religious teaching had been restricted to an elite group of learned men deemed to be ‘best qualified’ to decide how Scripture should be interpreted and explained to the majority.

The invention of the printing press dramatically increased access to information in books and pamphlets. In a similar way, the internet has democratised knowledge and the seeking of truth. When the printing and distribution of his Bible was banned in England, Tyndale travelled to Germany where a clandestine printer produced hundreds of pocket editions of his translated Bible. These were then smuggled into England. He was hunted across Europe and eventually captured in Antwerp, where he was executed by strangulation and then burned at the stake. Today, Tyndale should be remembered as one in a long line of Englishmen who stood up for freedom of conscience and the right to free speech.

Share Right Times with Kathy Gyngell

Christianity has a remarkably long association with the people of the British Isles. Folklore tells of Christ visiting England alongside his metal-trading uncle, Joseph of Arimathea. According to Orthodox tradition the first Bishop of Britain was Saint Aristobulus, one of the Seventy Apostles sent around the Roman Empire. He arrived in Britain shortly after the Roman invasion in AD 43. At this time, Christians who proclaimed their faith were persecuted by the authorities; nevertheless, they remained defiant and refused to stay silent about their beliefs. The early Church was characterised by cults built around local Romano-British martyrs, such as Saint Alban. Many of these saints have since been lost to the Anglican Church, but are still celebrated by the Orthodox Church.

Following the Roman withdrawal in AD 410, indigenous Romano-Britons were unable to prevent the widespread settlement of Anglo-Saxon pagans. Christianity was confined to the western and northern parts of the British Isles, and was introduced to the Anglo-Saxons in England in the early 7thcentury. Biblical principles and Christian moral guidance underpin English common law, which developed from a series of legal precedents taken from the wisdom, customs, and traditions of the Anglo-Saxons. For hundreds of years, this legal system has provided a defence of individual freedoms and rights.

The ‘Golden Rule’ in the Gospel of Luke ‘to do unto others as you would have them do to you’ is lost on many in the modern secular age. Unnecessarily abusive social media posts considered ‘hurtful’ are used as an excuse by authorities to clamp down on freedom of expression and speech. This has been helped by the English legal system moving away from flexible, common-sense case law and towards poorly defined statutory codes that are open to subjective interpretation by social media platform moderators and unelected judges.

Magna Carta was sealed by King John in 1215. Its principal author, Stephen Langton (Archbishop of Canterbury at the time), opposed the notion that monarchs could act above the law. He believed that morally upstanding citizens were a prerequisite for a just and prosperous Christian society. Individuals needed to operate with honour and integrity to find their true sense of spiritual and secular purpose. For this to happen they had to be free, and a system of law based on truth, fairness and transparency had to underpin these freedoms. If all people were treated were treated equally under the law, individual rights and freedoms would be respected across society. Today, this basic concept, the cornerstone of Western civilisation, is at risk from legally enforceable protected characteristics which have created a hierarchy of victimhood and ill-defined differentiation.

In the 14th century, English dissenters challenged the authority and corruption of the Catholic Church. The Lollards (a ‘proto-Protestant’ movement) included academics such as John Wycliffe (the first translator of the English Bible), and radical priests including John Ball (one of the leaders of the Peasants’ Revolt). Although many dissenting Lollards were hunted down by the authorities, their ideas never disappeared. Wycliffe’s work would later influence reformers such as Martin Luther. In the 16th century, a new Protestant theology based on a deep understanding of the Bible emerged in parts of Europe and in England.

Tensions between Catholicism and various strands of Protestantism existed at this time. Christian attitudes towards religious tolerance were influenced by the 17th century English philosopher John Locke, who argued for a separation of government and religion. This was based on a recognition that individuals could not be forced into a particular faith or way of thinking, as this only came with a genuine change of mind. Furthermore, while governments have powers to impose laws by force, they have no power to change what an individual believes to be true. The Toleration Act 1689 put much of this reasoning into law.

Western nations have since thrived in an atmosphere of tolerance, underpinned by the right to freedom of speech. For Christians, the role of nations is integral to God’s redemptive plan, and in the Gospel of Matthew there is reference to Jesus telling his disciples to ‘go and make disciples of all nations’. The new covenant in the New Testament is a promise from God that does not just apply to one specific group. Anyone in any nation who believes can be part of the covenant, and each nation should protect the right of every person to have a faith if they chose to.

Share Right Times with Kathy Gyngell

English missionaries spread Christianity across northern Europe during the early Middle Ages. In the 18th and 19th centuries, they took the Gospel message around the world, helping to end slavery, human sacrifice and widow-burning. English Christians developed a just legal system, reformed a corrupt Church, and introduced greater religious and political toleration. It is worrying that modern-day secular leaders fail to acknowledge our Christian heritage. The freedoms and liberties we enjoy today did not just arrive overnight. They have been fought for over many generations. While we remember the sacrifice made by William Tyndale some 500 years ago, we should also remember that it takes only one or two neglectful generations to erase a historic legacy that represents the pinnacle of human achievement.

Bob Robinson is the author of
Identity Lost, Identity Regained: The Story of England and the English People.

Thank you for reading and supporting us. Please

Bill C-63 — Canada’s Darkest Hour

Posted on by
Canada’s darkest hour  In the present day and considering the status of free speech in Canada, it would not be a stretch to say this country is facing its own “darkest hour”.  What else to think when its longstanding history and tradition of Magna Carta-inspired rights and freedoms stand to be lost with the enactment of Bill C-63 (Online Harms Act).  The legislation in questions has been remarked on by C3RF patron, David Solway, as being “nothing less than a censorship closely reminiscent of the justice apparatus in authoritarian states likes China and North Korea”.  He is not alone in this assessment as other notables both domestic and international, such as Joe Rogan, Elon Musk, Jordan Peterson, Russell Brand and Margaret Atwood, have likewise chimed in to describe the new law in terms of the “lettres de cachet” once issuable by the king of France to enforce “arbitrary actions and judgments that could not be appealed”.  It’s like Canada has retreated back into the 17th century and the days of the “Star Chamber”.
Margaret Atwood – Bill C-63 will give Canada its own “lettres de cachet”-style legal system It’s easy to see how the Online Harms Act could give rise to Star Chamber or kangaroo courts in Canada.  After all, the legislation calls for: the creation of a “Digital Safety Commission” that can, on the basis of anonymous charges, punish alleged wrongdoers of past and even potential future acts with fines, house arrest, electronic tagging or communication bans; Commission-appointed investigators to conduct warrantless searches and for the Commission to conduct its business without the need to be bound by any legal or technical rules of evidence; and the use of vague definitions of hate speech that will flood the Canadian human rights system with “eye-of-the-beholder” complaints of offensive, discriminatory speech. Such blatant disregard for the most basic tenets of Western judicial philosophy, including “innocent until proven guilty”, are more than a little remarkable.  It might be for this reason that the act throws a bit of a sweetener into the mix with popular measures that serve to protect against the “sexual abuse of children, intimate images shared without consent, and material that can be used to bully a child or encourage them to commit self-harm”.  These clearly harmful activities, however, are already illegal under Canada’s criminal code and seem to be included in Bill C-63 only to give cover to its freedom-crushing measures.
Justice Minister Virani, Bill C-63 will not be split into two parts! Sweetener aside, the legislation represents a baldfaced attack on the Charter rights of everyday Canadian citizens.  The ability of the Digital Safety Commission, for example, to turn anonymous charges, of potential future offenses no less, into serious fines and punishments is a direct assault on the Charter’s Section 7 right to life, liberty and security of the person in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.  Then there is its ability to demand warrantless searches in direct contravention of Section 8 of the Charter and its protections to be secure from unreasonable search and seizure.  When all of these injustices are tied together with a bow in the form of the Commission’s authority to dispense with the evidence requirements of Section 1 of the Charter, we can see that anyone entrapped within the net cast by Bill C-63 will find themselves in a very dark place.  Indeed, the country as a whole may feel it has descended into its darkest hour as the rights and freedoms that used to underpin its reputation as a Western liberal democracy will have evaporated.
Looks like Bill C-63 will supersede the Charter as the supreme law of the land?
Descent into darkness David Solway has made note of the darkened depths to which Canada has descended.  Indeed, if Bill C-63 passes the House and is ratified by the Senate “Canada would no longer be a country any sensible and freedom-loving individual would consider worth living in.”  The rule of law would most certainly be pitched out the window as the citizen would become “utterly dependent on the favour of the government” as he or she was forced through a gauntlet of informers given the power to issue “damaging but unverified accusations”.  And so, citizens will be forced to tread on eggshells as they try not to say, do or even think of anything that, in accordance with Bill C-63, is “likely to foment hatred”.   A subjective standard if ever there was one and one that is inextricably influenced by the eye-of-the-beholder.
Canadian essayist and C3RF patron, David Solway, queries whether Canada “is worth living in” Given the pressure that can be brought to bear on everyday citizens by the subjective eye-of-the-beholder strictures associated with Bill C-63, it’s easy to see how other Charter rights like freedom of religion, assembly, association and mobility, along with a fair and responsible press, will need to be sacrificed to keep offence at bay.  The new Canada that prioritizes the sensibilities of the thin-skinned over the civil liberties of the all is quite a stretch from the nation that had been built up on the tradition of individual sovereignty and the concept of “free men” as conceptualized in the Magna Carta of 1215.  Concepts marvellously captured by John Stuart Mill in his “On Liberty” of 1859 which is well suited as an addition to the reading list of any authority involved with enacting Bill C-63.  After all, its analysis of the “nature and limits of the power which can be legitimately exercised by society over the individual” is one the Bill could have benefited from.
John Stuart Mill “On Liberty” needs to be on the reading lists of Canadian legislators? The framers of the Canadian Charter, like The Honourable Brian Peckford, might have intended for individual sovereignty to be accommodated in the “fundamental” rights section of the document but the intention seems to have faded away over time.  This vanishing act has been aided and abetted by a judiciary besotted  by the ever-flexible concept of the “living tree”.  This doctrine has proven popular with Canadian courts and paved the way for “progressive interpretation” to address the “realities of modern life”.  These new realities, eagerly taken up by the political class, have oftentimes distinguished themselves by their rejection of traditional mores and the development of diverse identity groups which are open to division on the basis of being oppressed or being an oppressor.  Conflict and acrimony reign supreme and the situation is ripe for exploitation by psychopaths with the help of useful idiots.  And so the descent into darkness began.
Charter framers Brian Peckford et all intended for the development of competing camps?
Darkest hour “call to action” The descent in darkness, amazingly begun on the heels of the patriation of the Charter in 1982, has accelerated over the 2015 investiture of Canada’s current Liberal government.  The quickening pace could be seen to pick up almost immediately with the passage of Motion M-103 (Islamophobia).  This motion, true to form and in line with the strategy of identifying and dividing people into camps, shamelessly stated that Canada and Canadians were “systemically racist” and prone to discriminating  against whole religions – particularly Islam.  Many, many accusations would follow as the good folk of once “strong and free” Canada would be labelled as genocidal, climate denying anti-vaxxers who were in urgent need of being reigned in through draconian measures that restricted their ability to express such hateful mutterings.
If diversity is our strength, then why are we so divided and so oppressed? As Canadians navigate through their darkest hour one thing has become abundantly clear, only they have the power to force their betters to reverse course.  As the events of the Wuhan virus pandemic have shown, there is no cavalry coming over the hill to restore our free and democratic society.  Indeed, if anything, it is quite apparent that those given this power over Canadians have abused it to place ever more restrictions on speech as demonstrated by Bill C-63.  As Billboard Chris so eloquently stated, “politicians don’t change the culture, we do!”  You can join in the battle to change our wayward, anti-free speech culture by confronting your federally elected representative by phone, email or, best yet, a personal visit at their constituency office.  Your own Member of Parliament’s contact information may be found here and here are some thoughts for your MP to ponder: using ill-defined “hate speech” to bring citizens to task for what they say is a subjective mug’s game that stands to be abused by “eye of the beholder” sensibilities; allowing anonymous charges to result in prohibitive fines, house arrest, electronic tagging and communication bans is an abuse of your right to security of the person; allowing charges to advance on the basis of what a person might say, or think, is truly Orwellian; and allowing for warrantless searches and seizures is simply a slap in the face to Canada’s supreme law in the form of the Charter that is embedded in our Constitution. Your decision to intervene is critical to turning Canada away from a truly dystopian future for your children and grandchildren.  It’s worthwhile remembering that although Churchill recognized a nation in its darkest hour, he also, in the same speech, recognized the opportunity to turn it into its “finest hour”.

Salon owner facing £27,000 fine after quoting Magna Carta to defy lockdown

Posted on by

Salon owner facing £27,000 fine after quoting Magna Carta to defy lockdown

A salon owner who refused to close during England’s current lockdown has been given a £27,000 fine. Sinead Quinn, who runs Quin Blakey Hairdressers, was initially fined £1,000 for staying open after November 5.

She stayed open and further fines were issued. She tried to use the Magna Carta as a defence of her decision to stay open. However, the law she cited – Clause 61, offering 25 barons the right to lawfully dissent or rebel if they thought they were being governed unjustly – was repealed and never incorporated into English law.

Kirklees Council ordered her to pay £4,000 on Saturday and police issued another two £10,000 fines when she opened again on Monday and Tuesday.

Quinn had previously shared videos of herself arguing with council officials and police on Instagram. In one clip she could be seen telling them she didn’t consent to the ‘unlawful’ fines, and cited ‘common law’ in her defence. On Tuesday Quinn shared a picture of a police car outside the salon and captioned it: ‘This is what your tax paying money goes toward. Sitting outside my business whilst I’m lawfully earning a living.’ In another video she accused the police of ‘stalking’ her.

Hairdresser Sinead Quinn She previously put the Magna Carta up in the salon’s door (Picture: Instagram) Police fine the salon Officers have visited the salon twice this week (Picture: Bradford T&A / SWNS)

Kirklees is currently among the most infected areas in England, with a rate of 446.4 cases per 100,000 people in the seven days to November 19. The council said in a statement: ‘It is absolutely crucial for people’s safety that we all follow the latest Covid-19 rules and guidance. ‘Kirklees currently has the fifth highest rates in the country, with 135 people admitted to hospital last week and 25 sadly losing their lives to a Covid-19 related death.

The salon sign The Magna Carta can not be used as a defence in court (Picture: Bradford T&A / SWNS) Quinn Blakey Hairdressing, on Bradford Road, Oakenshaw is visited by two PCSOs as they appeared to be staying open in defiance of lockdown restrictiond, November 10 2020. See SWNS story SWLEhair.

A hair salon appears to have rebelled against the current lockdown rules by staying open despite the tightened coronavirus restrictions. Quinn Blakey Hairdressing, on Bradford Road, Oakenshaw, was seemingly open for business yesterday and at one point, police community support officers arrived at the premises.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson ordered certain businesses – including hairdressers – to close from November 5 in the face of rising Covid-19 cases. On the same day, a post on the salon?s Facebook page said: ?I earned this week?s rent today, not sure where I would be pulling that money from given the government want self employed business people to wait SIX WEEKS for a payment. She has received £27,000 in fines (Picture: Bradford T&A / SWNS)

‘The law set by the Government is there so we can bring infection rates down, ease pressure on our health services and save lives. ‘But it only works if we all stick to it and realise that no one is above the law. Frankly, the actions taken by this business are selfish and irresponsible. ‘We will not hesitate to take action on anyone who breaches the rules that are in place to keep us all safe. Repeated breaches of Covid-19 regulations result in ever increasing fines up to £10,000 and eventually prosecution.’

Read more:

Salon owner facing £27,000 fine after quoting Magna Carta to defy lockdown

Twitter: https://twitter.com/MetroUK | Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MetroUK/