Wednesday, February 01, 2006

Defeat for the Thought Police

Thank goodness that common sense has prevailed, even though it didn't happen in the commons. (Did you spot that? nice play on words there I thought!)

The Racial and Religious Hatred Bill will go forward in the milder form as amended by the House of Lords.

Clearly, I would not wish for anyone to feel threatened by others because of their beliefs (or lack thereof), nor do I want people to feel that they can incite hatred against a particular sector of society because of their beliefs, practices, etc.
And it is also that very same line of reasoning which made me feel the defeated form of the Bill went too far.

Respectful freedom of expression is very important for open, enlightened and democratic societies. Comments abound currently about the UK heading towards a nanny state. I believe citizens need to be charged with responsibility for their own behaviour not governed by an ever increasing set of rules. ... you can stop laughing now ... I know it sounds like a niave dream but seriously, the more the government tries to govern our daily lives, the less control we have over them and the less we will care.

In the same way that Christian speakers should be able to spread the good news to jaded shoppers on a saturday afternoon, that Muslim women should feel accepted not intimidated when they wear their chosen form of dress, and that religious meeting places should be safe and respected; then artists, commentators, bloggers etc should be free to criticise or even poke fun at any social institution, including religious ones.

There is a line between criticism or humour and incitment to racial hatred. Sensible humans can see that. But then again, since when have politicians been either of those?

If we continually have to self censor (for fear that the government will do it for us) how will we ever grow, learn, exchange ideas or remove intolerance?

5 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Its important to protect the good people of the UK against people like Abu Hamza...but at the same time we have to protect free speech. Difficult balancing act. Something that should definately not be too heavily defined in law and more left to the consideration of the jury...

2/01/2006 11:54 pm  
Blogger Rhea said...

Indeed - well said

2/02/2006 1:10 pm  
Blogger Zinnia Cyclamen said...

Good principle, but Nick Griffin and co just got off scot-free...

Rhea, I do always read your blog, but I don't always comment, because I think mostly you sum things up so well that all I'd be saying is 'hear, hear' or 'well said - again'. So please don't think I'm not reading just because I don't always comment.

2/03/2006 10:35 am  
Blogger Rhea said...

Good point, however they are facing a re-trial for the alledged offences on which the jury was unable to reach a decision.
Lets hope that the evidence in the next case is presented in such a way that the jury feel able to reach a decision.

And thank you for the compliment :o)

2/03/2006 1:36 pm  
Blogger Sarah said...

I totally agree with you. Couldnt have said it better.

2/03/2006 9:40 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home