To not want blasphemy laws in the UK?

[Blueybanditbingochilli]

https://www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/news/24516089.sutton-man-61-chanted-who-f-allah-jailed/

Thug sentenced for violent disorder and threatening police, all good.

But the chanting? Maybe I’ve got the wrong end of the stick but I thought criticising religion, even crudely, is permitted in the UK and not a crime so long as it doesn’t stray into harassment or incitement of another crime.

Labour are allegedly considering new legislation around the extent to which people can criticise Islam.

AIBU to think people should have the right to criticise religion (even crudely), and that we should not revert to having blasphemy laws in the UK? I apply this to all religions, including my own, and not just Islam.

I don't want them either, but if we have to then they should be universally applied. Same as if we make misogyny a hate crime then misandry should be too. The fact that certain demographics are targeted more often and perhaps need more safeguarding doesn't mean we should simultaneously reinforce the message that other demographics aren't privy to the same protections should they find themselves the subject of similar discrimination.

But they don’t find themselves “subject to similar discrimination.” Majority and mob violence directed at minorities is not similar to random individuals commenting unfavorably or comedically about your religion.

I agree. It should be a blanket rule. Don't offend others/anyone, no matter how trivial you think your offence is compared to others' offence towards you/your group. It makes it simple and fair to carry out.

Making it illegal to offend someone is a terrible idea and would lead to the end of free speech and ultimately democracy.

Who would determine what is offensive?

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

That's the point I was making. It shouldn't be, especially not for one group but not others. It's either wrong for everyone or no one.

Offence is taken not given.

Different people will be offended by different things, who will be the arbiter of what is offensive?

There is no democracy without free speech.

Again, that is my point. I was responding to the post saying that too.

Lol! You can't bring yourself to look just in case it turns out to be not as bad as you are making it up to be?

Agree. I don't think you can ever be 100% safe from offending people because some people get offended by the most bonkers, trivial things (as often seen on here).

Labour warned over attempt to define Islamophobia

Is this what OP is referencing?

He was charged with violent disorder. Not blasphemy. He pled guilty.

Clearly people on this thread are enjoying making up alternative realities and getting all get up about them.

Do you really think people should be free to violently attack police in the name of free speech?

YABU @Blueybanditbingochilli. Yer man was done for Violent Disorder because he committed Violent Disorder. Nothing to do with blasphemy.🙄

This explains Labour's position. There's absolutely nothing there about prohibiting criticising religion, God, or foreign governments.

Maybe people should inform themselves before getting all upset.

https://labour.org.uk/resources/labours-islamophobia-policy/

Yep. As you say he pleaded guilty to violent disorder. Sadly that won't stop the fantasists constructing alternative realities about the case.

You should be able to say and think what you like about religion.

I’m a Christian and can take anything you want to fling. I find ‘sky fairy’ comments patronising, and criticism about other Christians challenging because I know how much some of them serve others selflessly but to paraphrase somebody greater than me, ‘I would fight to the death for your right to say it’. Free speech is under threat at the moment at a time when we need it more than ever.

Islam in its various forms, is a special case in that to criticise anything about it is more dangerous than to criticise the silly ol’ Church of England for example. That in itself, and its fundamental beliefs about women and gay people, tells you something of why it’s important not to give it any more privilege in law, over and above any other religion.

Is there such a thing as Hinduophobia or Buddhismophobia? What is it about Islam that results in Islamophobia? What is the difference between Islamophobia and plain racism?

I made this very clear in my OP. But the chanting was brought up in court and used against him as part of the disorder, as evidence of criminal conduct.

That’s their current position which they are looking to review.

The elephant in the room.

Well of course you do. In that very comment you’ve earmarked yourself as somebody who only believes in free speech if you agree with what the person is saying. If you weren’t, you would be able to separate my feelings about the individual and the feelings around this very specific issue.

Was it? Could you link to the judgement please?

Ok so can you link to their proposed changes?

No because they haven’t been released yet. Angela Rayner has said they are going to redefine Islamophobia, and change its current status of protection which mirrors protection for other religious groups.

My comment has nothing to do with free speech and everything to do with the way you're lying about this conviction. Your response is very telling.

‘Very telling’ is a bit like ‘unhelpful’. A stock response from a poster who wants to throw some mud because they dislike what I’m saying but can’t specifically argue with it.