Spiked Online
Demonstrated hostility to the Muslim faith? Our response to that should
be: so what? In a free country, you should be perfectly at liberty to
‘demonstrate hostility’ to the Muslim faith. And any other religion, or
creed, or god, or ideology. Indeed, the right not to believe, the right
to blaspheme, the right to ‘demonstrate hostility’ to religion, are
hard-won liberties. People died for this. The fact that the media this
morning – including the Telegraph, the Guardian and the
BBC – are all using the exact same formulation of ‘demonstrated
hostility to Muslims and the Muslim faith’ to describe why Fransen and
Golding are going to jail, and the fact that this isn’t ringing any
alarm bells in public discussion, is a terrifying indicator of how
thoroughly we now accept that people’s views on religion ought to be a
matter for state control and possibly state repression. ..................That is clear from the fact that they were convicted of ‘religiously
aggravated harassment’. That is, they weren’t merely punished for
harassing people. They were also punished for what they were thinking as
they harassed these people, in essence for what they believe:
that Islam is bad and Muslims are dangerous. They weren’t only punished
for what they did but also for what they thought. There’s a word for
that: thoughtcrime.
No comments:
Post a Comment