Criticism of Islam is a protected belief

Don't be ridiculous.

White people aren't some super special seperate species. Every race, every single one, has colonised and had/dealt in slavery (arguably some far worse than white people, who we can thank for ending slavery in the western world by the way).

I have brown skin, and guess what? I have biases, unconscious and conscious, just the same as everyone else. To suggest that people who aren't white don't have bias as a part of them is so stupid, it would be funny if it wasn't so dangerous.

The people to really be wary of are the ones who declare that they have none, that only other 'kinds' of people have them.

You cannot be serious?! Our place is only to listen and implement.

Should we give quiet obedience to any single-interest group requiring it, or only those you choose??

What happens when two groups of conflicting interest demand it?

Oh don't be such a doormat, it's pathetic.

12 Reasons to Be Skeptical of Common Claims About Implicit Bias | Psychology Today

Haha. Amazing that for some people this still counts as edginess, as if the past 75 years haven’t happened.

Cosmo Lang’s going to be beating down your door for that one!

You’d think so but you would be mistaken. If you are white, your bias will be a part of you, no matter how much you profess it isn’t. The best thing you can do is understand that and never stand in the way of progress, particularly when it is led by someone from a marginalised background. White people really should not be having any say on proposed Islamophobia legislation. It is not our place to dictate, only to listen and implement.

People with strongly-held opposing views work effectively together all the time. I've sure as hell worked with plenty of sexists, racists, homophobes, people of faith and political opponents.

Living in a tolerant society means having the maturity to 'agree to disagree'. Now and again, you might win someone round to your point of view. You will never win anyone over by intimidating them, though.

Did they also teach you that unconscious bias has very little impact on how people actually behave in real life?

We're human beings and we are intelligent. We can overcome our bias, unconscious or otherwise.

So what is your suggestion? To outlaw all negative views about Islam?

Are we allowed negative views about forced marriage?

What about a regular broadcast call to prayer in a residential area? Are we allowed to be hacked off about a 5 am wake up call?

I'm just aware of unconscious bias. It's what they taught me in my adult university.

That's probably because you are either 16 or extremely intolerant.

Most of us are perfectly capable of separating people from their beliefs and accepting that they might have odd notions, but if they're generally OK we get along with them and accept them.

I don't see how you can have negative views about a religion and not its followers. Especially when you hold them to the point youre having to defend your views in court.

I don't think so.

Yes but it is also difficult to prove.

This is a peculiarly rigid way of thinking. I would be very surprised if this was a widespread difficulty.

It was such a relief to see this man won his appeal also. His conviction and the reason the judge gave for it was utterly chilling.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9v7wlj3pr2o.amp

Religious belief is a protected characteristic in the Equality Act so it is already unlawful to discriminate against people on grounds of religion.

Did you also go to court over the issue?

Don’t be ridiculous. I’m an atheist but don’t practice workplace discrimination against people with faiths.

I think there are particular issues with the current manifestation of Islam in much of the world. Doesn’t mean I have a problem with my Muslim family.

The problem I have with this is that I suspect someone who feels so strongly about Religion or Culture X will not, say, hire someone who is obviously from Religion or Culture X.

Like this man, would be assume that a person who is visibly Muslim just isn't the right fit? Or would he assume they have values that are against the ethos of the profession/company?

I can't see a world where you want the legal right to be able to criticise a religion but won't be discriminatory against its followers.

I think they are just going by posts. Parody maybe.

You really do talk a load of old nonsense.

I suggest you go and look at the MI5 website and find out some actual information rather than making stuff up.

Here you go, some evening reading for you.

Islamist terrorism
Islamist terrorism is the most significant terrorist threat to the UK by volume.
Islamist terrorists are generally driven by an extreme interpretation of Islam or perceived grievances against ‘the West’, particularly those propagated by terrorist groups such as Daesh (also referred to as ISIL, ISIS or the Islamic State) or al-Qaeda. Much of the volume of the threat is from individuals who have self-radicalised, seeking to carry out attacks using unsophisticated or low-sophistication methodologies. Generally, individuals will decide themselves to conduct an attack, rather than the attack being directed or controlled by a terrorist group.
This can make it harder to identify terrorist activity.
There also remains an enduring threat from overseas terrorist groups which seek to inspire, support or enable attacks and which retain an intent to conduct sophisticated attacks.

www.mi5.gov.uk/what-we-do/countering-terrorism

I think it is worth remembering that part of the problem now is how more recently thanks to laws around hate speech, the weaponising of supposed shared values by politicians to get cheap votes at the expense of shared values is what is happening now.

Tooo many employers, let alone the police, are jumping in thinking that what is a personal opinion expressed outloud is intended as an insult or threat.

As I posted earlier

criticism of Judaism (or any religion) can be a protected "philosophical belief" under the Equality Act 2010, provided it meets specific legal criteria and does not cross the line into unlawful discrimination, harassment, or hate speech.

So why is anyone asking inane questions about does it apply to christianity?

The problem used to be thought a matter of "taste" eg Mary Whitehouse vs the BBC.

Now everyone is is caught up in the whole hate speech mentality.

But this suggests that the process isn’t a punishment in itself if we can’t rely on the common sense and prioritisation of freedom of speech by those in the frontline responding to complaints - the police and low level prosecutorial authorities. I can’t imagine it’s much fun to be questioned by police, detained, arrested or have to pay legal fees just to be exonerated of all offences.

I have little faith that any discretion will be exercised in favour of women complaining of
unequal treatment or abuse promoted by patriarchal religions or pointing out patterns of behaviour for safeguarding etc where the relevant religious authorities or followers complain about racism or Islamophobia. Surely we’re all aware of the very different reactions to accusations of racism etc over misogyny/ sexism. The former is always treated as more serious in legal and moral terms - presumably as it affects the only people who really count - men!

Stop making stuff up.