FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Oh My God!

by MICHAEL DICKINSON

Did you ever hear the one about the Muslim, the Christian and the Jew? It’s a cracker! But I’d better tell it to you quick while there’s still time. If I leave it too long I might be arrested.

Arrested, you ask? Why on earth would that happen?

The Bill is back in town. Strongly lobbied for by the mainstream Muslim Council of Britain who want “safeguards against vilification of dearly cherished beliefs”, the Incitement to Religious Hatred Bill, first put forward in the British Parliament last year, and which failed to get through before May’s general election, is now being reintroduced. Third time lucky?

It’s already an offence to incite racial hatred under the 1986 Public Order Act (yay!); but the Religious Hatred Bill will also cover the stirring up of hatred against people of any religious faith.

The offence will carry a maximum seven-year jail sentence.

The new law has been warmly applauded by some religious groups who say it is needed to give protection to all faiths and beliefs.

A spokesman for the Muslim Council of Great Britain said: “We believe stirring up hatred simply because of someone’s religious beliefs should not be tolerated and is a social evil.

“Some communities, Sikhs and Jewish communities, are already covered by existing laws all we are seeking is equality for people of all faiths.”

Home Office Minister Paul Goggins insisted the law would not stop people from telling jokes.

“It does not stop people poking fun or causing offence. It is about stopping people from inciting hatred.”

Hatred is a strong term, and a tricky word. It goes beyond ridicule, prejudice, dislike, contempt, anger or offence. But who can measure where it tips the balance?

In a statement about the bill last year, English comedian Rowan Atkinson told the House of Commons: “To criticize a person for their race is manifestly irrational and ridiculous. But to criticize their religion – that is a right. That is a freedom.”

And Hanne Stinson, executive director of the British Humanist Association said: “There are many things that can be legitimately criticized in religion. Religions make extensive and often mutually incompatible claims about the nature of life and the world – claims that can legitimately be appraised and argued over. There is no parallel for race. And religions, unlike race, set out to dictate their followers’ attitudes and behaviour, sometimes in ways that are extremely controversial. The religions also exert influence on social attitudes and national and international policy so it has to be legitimate to criticise.”

“There seems to be a lot of confusion about what “incitement to religious hatred” means,” said Hanne, “with many people interpreting it as a broad extension to the law on blasphemy. The Government needs to send out a very clear message that their proposed legislation is not about blasphemy, but about protecting individuals from incitement to hatred. The best way to do this would be to abolish the blasphemy law at the same time.”

Yes, the archaic Blasphemy Laws, which only covers offence to Christians, still exists in British jurisdiction.

Despite a recommendation in 1985 by the Law Commission that the laws be removed from the statute book or widened to apply to all religious faiths, and a Bill introduced by Tony Benn into the House of Commons in 1989 to abolish prosecution for the expression of opinion on matters of religion’ (dropped without debate), Britain retains its law against blasphemous libel. This is defined as the publication of any writing concerning God or Christ, the Christian religion, the Bible, or some sacred subject using words which are scurrilous, abusive or offensive and which tend to vilify the Christian religion or outrage the feelings of believers’, and can still be invoked at any time.

In the multi-ethnic, multi-cultural society that Britain has become, this law which protects Christians alone is manifestly unjust, but rather than extending the laws to cover Islam and other religions, I believe that the blasphemy laws should be abolished entirely.

The existence of a blasphemy law which protects Christianity alone in a modern democracy like Britain sets an example and provides legitimacy for fundamentalists to justify their own law in countries governed by Islamic law, where the concept of blasphemy embraces many kinds of disrespect or denial of religion. In Pakistan words or actions against the Koran or Mohammed can result in the death penalty or life imprisonment.

With the introduction of the European Convention of Human Rights into British domestic law and its legislation which guarantees freedom of thought, expression, conscience and religion’ Home Office lawyers believe that the blasphemy laws will not stand up to any test and therefore become obsolete, but there are no plans to remove them from the statute book.

Surely we have learned by now that morality can exist without religion, and Christianity is capable of surviving without penal sanctions. The use of the criminal law to smooth down ruffled religious feathers endangers liberty. Any country that has signed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has agreed to Article 19 which clearly states: Everybody has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers.

Whatever, the government hasn’t parceled the Blasphemy laws up with its new proposals and has only said that it may look again at the law in the future.

Time to go. But before I do, I’d better tell you that one about the Muslim, the Christian and the Jew while I’m able.

They all worshipped the same God but they hated each other!

Hilarious eh?

MICHAEL DICKINSON is a writer and artist who works as an English teacher in Istanbul, Turkey. He designed the cover art for two CounterPunch books, Serpents in the Garden and Dime’s Worth of Difference, as well as Grand Theft Pentagon, forthcoming from Common Courage Press. He can be contacted at www.stuckism.com, where collages from his recently banned website can be seen.

 

Michael Dickinson can be contacted at michaelyabanji@gmail.com.

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

March 29, 2017
Jeffrey Sommers
Donald Trump and Steve Bannon: Real Threats More Serious Than Fake News Trafficked by Media
David Kowalski
Does Washington Want to Start a New War in the Balkans?
Patrick Cockburn
Bloodbath in West Mosul: Civilians Being Shot by Both ISIS and Iraqi Troops
Ron Forthofer
War and Propaganda
Matthew Stevenson
Letter From Phnom Penh
James Bovard
Peanuts Prove Congress is Incorrigible
Thomas Knapp
Presidential Golf Breaks: Good For America
Binoy Kampmark
Disaster as Joy: Cyclone Debbie Strikes
Peter Tatchell
Human Rights are Animal Rights!
George Wuerthner
Livestock Grazing vs. the Sage Grouse
Jesse Jackson
Trump Should Form a Bipartisan Coalition to Get Real Reforms
Thomas Mountain
Rwanda Indicts French Generals for 1994 Genocide
Clancy Sigal
President of Pain
Andrew Stewart
President Gina Raimondo?
Lawrence Wittner
Can Our Social Institutions Catch Up with Advances in Science and Technology?
March 28, 2017
Mike Whitney
Ending Syria’s Nightmare will Take Pressure From Below 
Mark Kernan
Memory Against Forgetting: the Resonance of Bloody Sunday
John McMurtry
Fake News: the Unravelling of US Empire From Within
Ron Jacobs
Mad Dog, Meet Eris, Queen of Strife
Michael J. Sainato
State Dept. Condemns Attacks on Russian Peaceful Protests, Ignores Those in America
Ted Rall
Five Things the Democrats Could Do to Save Their Party (But Probably Won’t)
Linn Washington Jr.
Judge Neil Gorsuch’s Hiring Practices: Privilege or Prejudice?
Philippe Marlière
Benoît Hamon, the Socialist Presidential Hopeful, is Good News for the French Left
Norman Pollack
Political Cannibalism: Eating America’s Vitals
Bruce Mastron
Obamacare? Trumpcare? Why Not Cubacare?
David Macaray
Hollywood Screen and TV Writers Call for Strike Vote
Christian Sorensen
We’ve Let Capitalism Kill the Planet
Rodolfo Acuna
What We Don’t Want to Know
Binoy Kampmark
The Futility of the Electronics Ban
Andrew Moss
Why ICE Raids Imperil Us All
March 27, 2017
Robert Hunziker
A Record-Setting Climate Going Bonkers
Frank Stricker
Why $15 an Hour Should be the Absolute Minimum Minimum Wage
Melvin Goodman
The Disappearance of Bipartisanship on the Intelligence Committees
Patrick Cockburn
ISIS’s Losses in Syria and Iraq Will Make It Difficult to Recruit
Russell Mokhiber
Single-Payer Bernie Morphs Into Public Option Dean
Gregory Barrett
Can Democracy Save Us?
Dave Lindorff
Budget Goes Military
John Heid
Disappeared on the Border: “Chase and Scatter” — to Death
Mark Weisbrot
The Troubling Financial Activities of an Ecuadorian Presidential Candidate
Robert Fisk
As ISIS’s Caliphate Shrinks, Syrian Anger Grows
Michael J. Sainato
Democratic Party Continues Shunning Popular Sanders Surrogates
Paul Bentley
Nazi Heritage: the Strange Saga of Chrystia Freeland’s Ukrainian Grandfather
Christopher Ketcham
Buddhism in the Storm
Thomas Barker
Platitudes in the Wake of London’s Terror Attack
Mike Hastie
Insane Truths: a Vietnam Vet on “Apocalypse Now, Redux”
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail