It is understandable that we may need a law against racial intolerance. We cannot choose our race. But we are free to choose our religion. So why a law against religious intolerance?
How are we ever going to define what “incitement of religious hatred” is? Listing the mistakes in other religion? Telling me that I believe in the wrong god? Inviting me to change religion?
Religions that cannot stand criticisms and religions that cannot tolerate critical examination does not deserve protection. The law of natural selection would simply wipe out such belief systems sooner or later. Let people debate and choose. Do not curb free speech and freedom of thought.
If Muslims want to protect Islam, then it should be done through intellectual discourse, and patience when faced with uninformed criticisms. Not by hiding behind legislations.
Filed under: Misc
Indeed. Not only is such law counter-productive, but also dangerous as it accords the authorities with the power to define the “correct” religion. But it applies equally to racial intolerance. I don’t see how the element of choice makes a difference.
I attended a very interesting panel discussion on this topic on Friday. Panelists were Simon Hughes MP, Sher Khan of MCB and Dr Rabia, an academic. I will write about it later.