Criticare la religione dovrebbe essere esente dalle leggi sulle molestie, dicono i parlamentari
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/blasphemy-islamophobia-harassment-mp-bill-free-speech-dqsxr7swj
di ThatchersDirtyTaint
Criticare la religione dovrebbe essere esente dalle leggi sulle molestie, dicono i parlamentari
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/blasphemy-islamophobia-harassment-mp-bill-free-speech-dqsxr7swj
di ThatchersDirtyTaint
29 commenti
You can harass a person, you cannot harass an idea.
“The Freedom of Expression (Religion or Belief System) Bill would make clear that the provision of the Public Order Act does not apply in the case of “discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents”.”
While I agree with what they want I can not seeing it having a chance of coming to fruition
Then add proselytizing to the list of forms of harassment.
Lets make our country fiercely secular now, before it’s too late
Plenty of pro-Palestine protests have been restricted from specific areas because of presence of synagogues or other Jewish-related buildings. If this bill goes through the police will have no power to restrict these protests or to arrest protestors for “ridiculing, insulting or abusing” British Jews for their religion.
I don’t think these Tory MPs actually want such a bill passed.
Criticising organised religion should be fair game. And while we’re at it, let’s remove tax exemption.
Yep, it should not be a prison-able offence to critique myths, not in modern day Britain anyway.
there should be no exceptions in law related to religion, there can be no blasphemy law when one religion things another is blasphemous.
where does that end?
no one has the right not to be offended, no group has the right to silence those critical of it
This guy again… if he was just criticising the religion that is one thing. But as far as I understand he was shouting and cursing in the street making a massive fuss – enough to upset and anger the people his performance was directed at.
Would it be tolerated if it was a West Ham fan protesting outside the Millwall ground?
Yeah, fuck those Catholics especially out of wedlock!
i think a lot of redditors would agree if this sort of law was enforced against critisim of Christianity. Imaging facing fines for calling God “skydaddy” or other reddit norms. But they wont because reddit.
Burning the Holy Quran is not “criticising religion”.
It is criminal damage and inciting hatred.
No books should be exempt from burning. I recently had a fire at home where I got rid of texts from nonce Rolf Harris and TERF Hagrid Rowling. But I didn’t make it a performative act of hatred.
Do I criticise religions? Absolutely. They are almost all founded on the dishonest premise of the existence of a god or gods.
To my mind, that is a risible foundation to build on.
But I don’t go into a cathedral and burn copies of the Bible. I don’t go to a mosque and burn copies of the Quran. I don’t go to a synagogue and burn copies of the Tanakh.
When my friends of faith want to discuss their religiosity I do it with respect and understanding.
Rights must always be counterbalanced by responsibilities.
It seems like this should be fairly straightforward (but clearly isn’t currently). If someone is using religion to harass an individual, then I don’t think that should be protected, necessarily.
If you’re using religion to protest at an embassy, though, then that absolutely should be legal.
Since when has criticizing anything at all been harassment.
Harassment and criticism are not the same thing.
I should be able to criticise religion as much as any fictional book.
Criticism of religion should be treated in the same way as criticism of the government or public officials. If a government official would consider a particular form of criticism unacceptable such as hate speech, incitement, or personal attacks then it shouldn’t be considered acceptable when directed at religious beliefs or communities either. There should be a consistent standard. If we demand civility and responsibility in political discourse, the same should apply to religious discourse.
I ain’t even religious, but I’ve never seen this rhetoric where you cannot criticise a religion. If you’re not being hateful or insulting to other people religion, I’ve found most people are very open to a discussion about their religion. That is people who actually practice and not just say they’re so and so religion in name.
Religion is arguably fictional and should be open to criticism. If society cannot criticize things that could be made up then we live in a world of make believe.
Criticising religion should be a sacrosanct human right.
Any religion should be able to cope with criticism, just like ideas and opinions, as long as it isn’t done in a hateful or abusive way.
It absolutely should…
There’s no more appropriate target for mockery than religion.
It already is isn’t it? A specific extension of our, already broad, laws around incitement, harassment etc just sounds like it would end up being
“that weird hack the police don’t want you to know that allows you to harass people legally”
If some religion calls dogs “dirty”/haram, I’d like to be free to openly criticise it. I don’t want to live in society where hating on dogs is acceptable, for example. I don’t want this to spread in any Western community to accommodate some religious group’s sensitivities. I want my dog to eat, shit, play and enjoy life freely without a fear of being called “haram” by a certain religion. All in all, I want to be free to exercise my right to hate religions that hate dogs.
I think the laws should be clarified and tightened up in the direction of protecting speech, but there is a balance. I don’t think this guy should have been convicted but I wouldn’t want to give racists or sectarians carte blanche to actually harass people and use religious criticism as a defence.
They’ll say that criticising religion should be exempt from harassment laws when discussing Islam but you just watch GB News the moment someone uses the same argument to criticise Christianity
Just like with Reforms demands to ban the Burkha, it’s entirely about targeting Islam. If they were worried about face coverings intimidating people and hiding criminals identities Reform would be demanding motorcycle helmets be banned too but they strangely aren’t
So it should be.
And those that decide to defend that religion by violence should be jailed no exception.
If Muslim were so solid in their beliefs they wouldn’t attempt to permanently silence anyone who’s critical of them.
There’s criticising religion, and then there’s ranting and raving in public with the *intention* to cause alarm and distress in a particular group of people.
Civilised conversation and criticism is legal and will always remain that way, mouthing off like a cunt could rightly get you in trouble. We used to take pride in our dignified manner as British people, and the right to scream your head off in order to disturb others has *never* been a part of the values we hold dear as a nation.
Where would depicting an image of your lad Muhammad come under such a proposal, if you were doing so to demonstrate your disagreement with the idea that his image should not be depicted? What some might consider critique or satire may be deemed as harassment by adherents.
You can criticise religion, but harassing people should be illegal.
If people are just gonna disguise hate speech as criticism, then they might as well just limit criticism