Are these statements offensive?

[JellySlice]

And if so, to whom? Are there any circumstances where it is acceptable or unacceptable to state them publicly?

"Jesus was not the Messiah."
"Mohammed was not the last prophet."
"There is more than one god."

Does it make any difference if these statements are preceded by "I believe that..."?

Is this a Scotland Hatey Hurty Feelings law thing?

The first one ‘he’s a very naughty boy’?

It depends. As a simple statement of personal belief then not, as a forceful proclamation then yes - the first to Christians, the second to Muslims and the third to both. If you made the opposite statements then it would still hold true except the first for Muslims and the second for Christians.

They can be a forceful proclamation and they wouldn't achieve unacceptable or hateful public status!

There is no god! Fact, not a belief!

There is a God! Fact not belief!

Both have the same value... nether are upsetting or hateful!

It's the people who try to claim otherwise that are upsetting and, sometimes, hateful!

The only (grudgingly) time I'd consider them offensive is if they're proclaimed in a designated religious building, during a service. Oh wait didn't Peter Tatchell invade a church service, yes he did
PETER TATCHELL, the gay rights campaigner, was found guilty of "indecent behaviour in a church" and fined pounds 18.60 yesterday under an obscure ecclesiastical statute from 1860.

Mr Tatchell said he was grateful to have been blessed with "a magistrate with a sense of humour". He was given 28 days to pay the fine and the pounds 320 costs of the case.
www.independent.co.uk/news/church-protest-costs-tatchell-pounds-1860-1188595.html
How times have changed.

Are there any circumstances where it is acceptable or unacceptable to state them publicly?

Acceptable: When you are simply stating your own beliefs, when you are in a general forum where people are discussing beliefs, when you are discussing legislation, rights and policies.

Not acceptable: If you hung around outside a place of worship and started harassing believers.

No.

Context can influence what's offensive. I don't think that is generally a complicated thing though, most of us know 95% of the time when it's more appropriate to keep our mouth shut.

Of course if you say things like that you need to be prepared for people to tell you with equal conviction that you are wrong.

I mean, if you are talking to our Muslim friend about theology, you would be kind of an ass to say "but Mohammed was NOT a prophet" as if that was just obviously true. Maybe being an ass is offensive.

Legally, if somebody were to stand outside a church shouting "Mary wasn't a virgin" at everyone who left, would you need 'hate speech' legislation to convict them of a crime?

It doesn't really matter whether they are or not surely? People don't have a right to be not offended as far as I know?

Of course they aren't. You can believe whatever the hell you want, no reason for anyone else to take it personally.

@merrymouse

Legally, if somebody were to stand outside a church shouting "Mary wasn't a virgin" at everyone who left, would you need 'hate speech' legislation to convict them of a crime?

No, I don't think so. People would just think they were crazy or very rude.

I suppose though the question is where it crossed over into really bothering people. Being a nuisance. Interrupting the church service would be a no-no but also yelling at people going in and out all the time could get a bit old.

You could also talk, rather than about offence, about being disrespectful, and I think that's a much more useful idea. Treating people disrespectfully is bad, but generally it's not criminal.

@merrymouse

Legally, if somebody were to stand outside a church shouting "Mary wasn't a virgin" at everyone who left, would you need 'hate speech' legislation to convict them of a crime?

Breach of the peace, maybe? "Hate speech" is utterly ridiculous.

It might be a bit annoying if someone or lots of people were standing outside the church and yelling Jesus is not the Messiah, however, Christian religion is taught to expect opposition and to pray for enemies. Also it is also more of the historically main religion here.

I would think it much more offensive to shout outside a mosque about Mohammed. But, I am not familiar with their teachings. It is more they are a minority in this country and often subjected to racism as well.

Neither religion is monochrome. There are variations of belief, emphasis etc.

There is no human right not to be offended. On its own, any statement is not an offence. Continual harassment is another matter.

And saying those things doesn't make you Islamaphobic or Christophobic.

They can be a forceful proclamation and they wouldn't achieve unacceptable or hateful public status!

I agree. But they would still be offensive. We should be allowed to offend people.

I don't think they're offensive at all. I don't think it would be appropriate to voice those opinions as a teacher to students, though, without qualifying that it was your personal belief. Shouting them outside a mosque or church may cause offence, I suppose. But offence is such a personal thing. People might be more concerned about your mental health than offended by your statements. I take offence to the word 'bitch' but many women use it in everyday language and it doesn't bother them at all. I don't think it's at all possible to legislate on the basis of offence because that would first entail agreeing on what people find offensive, and that's not really possible or practical.

Being a ass is offensive

Shouting outside a church or mosque, or in a cemetery is offensive

Telling people you think their beliefs are nonsense is offensive

There are a lot of things I find offensive but do I think the speaker should be locked up for something I find offensive? No. For a start it would land a lot of people in jail considering I find profanities offensive.

I don't think they're offensive at all.

But that is it - we each of us get to choose for ourselves what we are offended by. You cannot legislate on personal morals, beliefs and taste.

I am not sure that offence is a choice, but rather an emotional/visceral reaction that may or may not be warranted. Sometimes I feel offended but realise that there is truth in what is being said - doesn’t stop the feeling though. Sometimes I think something is utterly wrong/abusive/hateful, but I am not offended by it.

I think being offended is about taking something very personally because it challenges/attacks something that is personal to you or that makes up part of what you see your ‘identity’ (for want of a less loaded word). This is different from thinking something is utterly wrong and to argue against it.

If this is regarding the Scottish Hate Crime Law, it's less of a tool for protecting the downtrodden (and offended) and more of a hefty weapon to allow the Woke to keep the populace in line. Kind of like playing whack a mole with a ten pound lump hammer.

Not directly to do with Scotland's Hate Speech law, more to do with freedom of speech and conscience in general. Particularly freedom of conscience, I think, because establishing what are effectively blasphemy laws against certain forms of belief is very much an attack on freedom of conscience.

I am not sure that offence is a choice, but rather an emotional/visceral reaction that may or may not be warranted.

I don't know, I think being offended can very much be a choice. Not always, admittedly.

I would be offended if someone tried to make me say any of those things (or anything at all for that matter). As long as it is not being shouted disrespectfully or with the express intention of upsetting someone then people can say what they like - I can choose to ignore it (and quietly think my own thoughts about them).

Of course not.
They might be perceived as hateful by a religious bigot, but so what?