B***** C***********

by Feòrag

England and Wales: Home Secretary David Blunkett's proposals for a law against religious hatred have come under scrutiny, and most are sceptical, including the Financial Times. An editorial first notes that incitement to violence, for whatever reason, is already illegal, and then observes

Any new law would probably have the same effect as the more comprehensive incitement to racial hatred clause of the Public Order Act 1986, which covers threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, including inflammatory comments made in public or in the media. While such measures are understandable in the case of race, they would be utterly excessive when applied to religion. Racial origins are an aspect of people's inheritance, but religious creeds are subject to choice. No less than political or social ones, they should be open to critical comment.

The government also gets to define 'religion' and could well discriminate against atheists, and anyone else critical of religion.

Second, any definition of religion is likely to include not only Muslims, Christians, Hindus and Buddhists, but potentially Scientologists, Druids, or even Satanists. There is no non-arbitrary boundary between religions, creeds, cults and sects. Nor is it clear that this legislation would be neutral with respect to secular commentators or satirists who express disdain for all religious worship. Such criticisms are an essential aspect of any open society.

Bounded tolerance - Financial Times, 9th July 2004.