Criticism of Islam is a protected belief

[theilltemperedmaggotintheheartofthelaw]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15272771/Criticism-Islam-ruled-legally-protected-belief-man-banned-fined-thousands-pounds-social-media-posts.html

I wasn't able to find the judgment. There'll be a hearing in February but it's not clear to me whether claimant's beliefs have already been tested for Grainger compliance. Either way, the tribunal will (also) have to address objectionable manifestation (Bananarama doctrine).

I've raised it here because of the parallels with Forstater. It's a constant refrain of TRAs that permitting Forstater belief is tantamount to attacking GR as a protected characteristic. They do not understand secularism (or the SC ruling).

Of course the situation is not the same insofar as Islam has not been written into our law and Muslims don't expect the rest of us to follow its rules.

Article 9, anyone?

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

Yes but it is also difficult to prove.

I don't think so.

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.

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

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?

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.

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.

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.

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!

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

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

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?

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.

Hard to understand sometimes the intent of some posts.

Or why anyone wants to answer.

Another thread on a detour.

Oh, you card!

Clip-clop

Holy shit do people actually believe this sort of toxic nonsense. I can’t work out if it’s a wind up or real.

Are you paid to make up stories? Muslims have always protected Jews and Christians as people of the book. The key to the church of the Nativity in Bethlehem has been held by two Muslim families for over a thousand years to avoid different Christian sects fighting over it

Does Swift think that no one with pale skin is Muslim?

The biggest critic of Islam (and they were very biased against it) I know had to flee Iran because they were an apostate and couldn't return due to serious threats to their life if they did go back. They were genuinely frightened, and it was not an unreasonable fear.

Research into unconscious bias says otherwise

Now, are you quite sure that ‘always’ is really the right word in that sentence?

With regards to specific issues like colonialism, racism and xenophobia, Islamophobia, white supremacy, capitalist patriarchy and cultural appropriation, yes white people should absolutely be showing deference to the opinions and lived experiences of marginalised folks.

As for your rather ludicrous example of two minority groups having conflicting views about a particular issue, well in that case taking a modular intersectional approach from a committee of POC individuals unaffiliated with either party would be the optimal solution.

I should add - the above is just a new form of 'original sin' - an inherited sin. Only, the sin is shown by the colour of your skin, and it is not a 'sin' that is shared by all human beings.

Woah woah woah, that will be a committee of BIPOC individuals please. Reeducation classes for you.