The return of blasphemy laws (UK)

[Bruce Lung]

Here:

http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/docs/rrpbcrpol.pdf

Making "abusive" and "insulting" comments about religion is not only a feature of SikhAwareness but is also a part of being a member of a free society. Soon to be a thing of the past, with govt-appointed, mandatorily-qualified ministers of religion heading up every mainstream denomination.

You wonder about the SGPC and the Tat Khalsa?? Well right under your nose you are seeing the birth of the Tat Khalsa, Tat Muslim, Tat Christian, etc, all backed up with the iron fist of the government to suppress dissent.

[mloco]

it says that it 'outlaws crime where the offender is motivated by hostility or hatred'

has nothing to do with free speech - you're free to discuss it, just not free to insult or judge, which is part of the basis of the legal system 'innocent till proven guilty'

I agree with it to be honest. We don't tolerate racial slurs, or slurs against peoples' sexuality (gay or straight or whatever) which are physical things, why should we tolerate slurs that attack the essence of who we are as a person and are much deeper than physical attributes.

Just as we have protection of attacks on our physical things (houses etc) its only fair that we have protection from attack on our personality.

It also has nothing to do with the SGPC or Tat Khalsa type organisations - its a simple police matter, you dont need to have any knowledge about any religion to know whether someone is being hateful or hostile towards it.

As far as having 'abusive' statements made on Sikhawareness.com, if someone came on here and made any 'abusive' statements they'd probably be kicked off and the thread deleted or locked by the mods.

As far as it being part of a free society, we have to choose between 'freedom to abuse' or 'freedom from abuse', I believe the latter is more important; there is no such thing as a totally free society, otherwise we would not have prisons. I do not believe that in a civilised society there is any space for 'freedom' to abuse. The concept of a free society is that the people choose how it's run, not that we are free to do what we like, the government (in general) is the representative of the people and has a duty to protect people from abuse and hostility.

[Bruce Lung]

In this case the government is not trying to protect people from "abuse and hostility", but rather to protect state-recognised mainstream religious ideologies from criticism.

The arguments you make regarding protection of attack on our personalities are pretty stupid. The laws already exist protecting our personalities. What we're seeing is more law, intended to protect state-recognised mainstream religious ideologies from criticism.

The CPS and the judicial system is to judge on whether criticism towards any state-recognised mainstream religious ideology is hateful or abusive. That puts them in charge of those state-recognised mainstream religious ideologies, making them state-headed religions rather like SGPC was and the Church of England is.

Don't waste words with me about civilised societies and your own narrow interpretation of what a free society is. I don't have time to waste on you and your 3 or 4 mindless fanatical followers here. I only posted this here because I think it's something you should be aware of as it pertains to religion. I really don't care about your bland and unsupported assertions regarding the role of goverment and the legitimacy of our democracy. This is not because I think you're too small but because I don't believe you.

A man in religious garb is nothing more than a Judas.

[amandeepm]

What this proposed law does is to put a great deal of power into the hands of the formal religious structures in the UK. This means that they can define when they are "abused" or "insulted". As a result any dissent from the mainstream defintions of religious acceptability can be prosecuted. Isn't that what the Mughals were doing to Guru Arjan? or Guru Tegh Bahadur? or indeed didnt Poncious Pilot find Jeses offensive and abusive (he even had him crucified).

We all know that this bill is juts a sop by the labour govt to the Muslim community in the UK who feel put upon by "islamaphobia", what they coudl create is a monster where religious institutions start prosecuting each other becuase they dont like what they are saying.

Personally I find some Gurdwaras quite insulting and abusive at times maybe we should prosecute them?

aman

[mloco]

In this case the government is not trying to protect people from "abuse and hostility", but rather to protect state-recognised mainstream religious ideologies from criticism.

The arguments you make regarding protection of attack on our personalities are pretty stupid. The laws already exist protecting our personalities. What we're seeing is more law, intended to protect state-recognised mainstream religious ideologies from criticism.

The CPS and the judicial system is to judge on whether criticism towards any state-recognised mainstream religious ideology is hateful or abusive. That puts them in charge of those state-recognised mainstream religious ideologies, making them state-headed religions rather like SGPC was and the Church of England is.

Don't waste words with me about civilised societies and your own narrow interpretation of what a free society is. I don't have time to waste on you and your 3 or 4 mindless fanatical followers here. I only posted this here because I think it's something you should be aware of as it pertains to religion. I really don't care about your bland and unsupported assertions regarding the role of goverment and the legitimacy of our democracy. This is not because I think you're too small but because I don't believe you.

A man in religious garb is nothing more than a Judas.

on the contrary it is trying to protect people from abuse and hostility..or did you not read your own link. It clearly states that it is an act to protect people from acts motivated by hostility or hatred.

norrow interpretataion?...lol...as compared to your dream like state? wake up and smell the coffee - mine is not an interpretation it is an analysis of how our 'free' society works - where've you been since 9/11 - democracy hardly exists anymore - you can get arrested for saying 'bomb' in an airport.

if you dont care about what I think then dont read/comment on it, its a public forum and i can post what i like within the rules and regulations, as well as believe what i like. If you truly believed in freedom of belief you would never criticise anything anyone ever said as you would acknowledge their right to believe it. As regards to my '3 or 4 mindless fanatical followers' (lmao) read your reply to my post and tell me who the mindless fanatic is, you the person trying to lobby for free speech who cant handle the next opinion that comes their way. For someone who deosnt care you seem to be pretty stung by my beliefs.

please point out my bland and unsupported assertions as I dont see them. Most of my views on the matter started with the words 'I believe' which is also the basis of your post. On the contrary it is you implying that abuse and insults are all part of living in a free society, I am simply saying that freedom from abuse and insults are more important than freedom to abuse and insult, although I admit prosecution is a bit extreme.

But again like I said it aims to protect people from acts 'motivated by hostility or hatred.' Discussion and criticism of religion dont fall into these categories.

as to your last statement - if that were true then every single Saint/Sikh/Jew etc that wears the 'garb' of their religion is a Judas.

Karmi aapo aapni ke nerai ke door.

bhull chuk maaf

[Bruce Lung]

Believe what you like and write what you like. It's obvious that you're too overcome by ego even to be able to read properly. As I said, I'm finished wasting time on you. Have fun.