In the future, will we have to start tip toeing around the subject of religion?

[financeguy]

Some of you may be aware of the UK Government's proposed legislation dealing with 'hate crime', in which they propose to strengthen existing laws against 'hate crime'. (So, apparently, if I express the desire to burn a Koran, then I'm committing 'hate crime' against Muslims).

So I guess the latest casualty of Bin Laden's war against us (or alternatively George's/Tony's/John's war against terrorism), is that we have to be nice and tip toe around the subject of religion.

Interestingly, I have read that some of the first casualties of a similar law in Australia, were actually Christian preachers who were allegedly preaching hate against homosexuals.

I wonder, how many restrictions against freedom of expression are we prepared to tolerate, in the interests of being nice to devout believers?

 

[A_Wanderer]

Actually the legislation here in Victoria was two evangelical preachers who gave a talk about how Christians should deal with Muslims, talked about Djinn and a whole heap of other stuff not knowing that there were people in there looking to be offended ~ they apparently offended Muslims and are put up on these obscene racial and religious vilification laws and now face threat of going to prison.

The UK has proven itself to be worse in making concessions so as not to offend but I am not aware of full blown legal proceedings (yet).

And I am really starting to doubt that that "moderate Islam" that everybody keeps telling me about is any more real than "moderate Christianity". Fact is that the only "moderate" religion is one that has been sidelined by secular society.

I don't have as much of a problem with protecting people against race hate because peoples race is inherent, it is genetic. Religion on the other hand is ideas and concepts that deserve to be scrutinized and mocked.

 

[BVS]

Well what is exactly the legislation? So speech is now considered a hate crime? And what type of speech, does it have to incite violence?

 

[financeguy]

And I am really starting to doubt that that "moderate Islam" that everybody keeps telling me about is any more real than "moderate Christianity". Fact is that the only "moderate" religion is one that has been sidelined by secular society.

While I agree with the rest of your comments in your post, surely it has to be conceded that Christianity in its current form is a lot more moderate than Islam in its current form, given that Christianity does not call for death to infidels and non-believers, force women to wear burqas, etc?

Perhaps the moderation of Christianity has come about partially through secular influence, but I am more inclined to give Christianity the benefit of the doubt at this point, and to concede that its influence is frequently beneficial and positive (in terms of being pro-human rights, etc).

 

[Kieran McConville]

Don't know the specifics of the legislation per se, but (oh god I will get hell for this) how is 'speech' not a hate crime? I mean, at least theoretically. I guess it depends who is doing the speaking, but when a powerful figure is using their position to demonise some group that maybe don't have a heck of a lot of influence, how is that not hate?

Thought crimes, no. Nobody can police the inside of my (or anyone's) head. But doesn't 'civil society' mean something here?

 

[A_Wanderer]

Doesn't free speech extend over ideas? Or do they get special protection when their dressed in funny robes and superstitions.

 

[blueyedpoet]

Speech is free unless it causes harm to others. For instance, the overly used "you can't shout fire in a crowded theatre." I believe if ministers were preaching on how to evangelize the Muslim world they are protected under freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Of course this wasn't in America, and I'm not exactly sure how personal freedoms are expressed in Australia..A_Wanderer, can you share some light on this?
I certainly am what most would consider liberal, but I am opposed to political correctness. I am all for politeness and dialogue, but anytime people have to tip-toe around each other, the possibility for any exchanging of ideas and sharing knowledge is destroyed.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Basically it comes from not having a Bill of Rights and having a state government that wanted to legislate harmony and coexistence by silencing critics of religion. The joke is that the move was championed by all the mainstream religious groups and all it is breeding is animosity.

 

[blueyedpoet]

I don't see how you can legislate harmony and coexistance...i suppose that's just the taoist in me

 

[A_Wanderer]

It's all about control, I suspect that they knew they were doing the right thing by making it illegal to say bad things about Muslims or other religious minorities (we know the law would never be used to protect Christains, they can take it). Take a litle freedom away for the good of the people. And it has turned out exactly as anybody might think it would.

 

[blueyedpoet]

the more rules you put on people the more criminals you create...the best leaders do not rule with iron fists

 

[A_Wanderer]

There is no such thing as good government, just least bad government.

 

[blueyedpoet]

you're so cynical...of course the world has given ya great reason