Secularist and Christian voices highlight threats to free speech
-25/05/06
Free expres
Secularist and Christian voices highlight threats to free speech
-25/05/06
Free expression is under unprecedented threat in Europe, a representative of the UKís National Secular Society (NSS) told a Council of Europe hearing last Thursday.
Speaking in a debate on ëFree Expression and Respect for Religioní at the French Senate in Paris, Keith Porteous Wood, executive Director of NSS opposed calls from religious leaders for the introduction of a Europe-wide code to enforce ìrespect for religious feelingsî.
Mr Wood said that although blasphemy is no longer the repressive tool that it once was in Europe, it is sneaking back in a new guise: ìBlasphemy has a new cloak. Its new name is ërespectíî, he said. ìWe are told that our freedom of speech ñ so precious, so hard-won ñ must now be curtailed in the name of ërespectí for religionî.
Following the Danish cartoon saga, the clamour for new restrictions on the press and on artists has become stronger, commented Mr Wood.
He continued: ìA tide of demands for censorship is now engulfing Europe. The Vatican rails constantly against films, books, TV programmes and art exhibitions which it considers ëdisrespectfulí. Often it calls for them to be banned, and sometimes it succeeds ñ as it did in Britain with the satirical cartoon Popetown.î
The NSS director went on: ìReports emerged just yesterday that the Bavarian Premier [has] called for new laws against blasphemy. This comes hot on the heels of a Vatican aide telling a UNESCO conference here in Paris last week that the Mohammed cartoons were an abuse of human dignity and that every means possible should be adopted (presumably including new laws) to prevent this so-called abuse.î
Mr Wood declared that ìsometimes religion deserves to be disrespected. The horrendous and ongoing abuse of children in the Catholic Church demands to be exposed, the exploitative, money-grubbing cults need to be examined, the manipulative political interference of religious leaders should be questioned. All these important, vital investigations risk being curtailed if we allow the concept of blasphemy ñ or some similar privilege ñ to be re-introduced into Europe.î
Opposition to blasphemy laws has also come from within faith communities. Dr Rowan Williamsí predecessor as Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr George Carey, has said that the UKís blasphemy laws ñ which protect only Christians ñ are redundant and should go.
The repeal of blasphemy laws and opposition to censorship also comes from the UK Christian think-tank Ekklesia, which says that granting special privileges to faith does it no favours and restricts the free flow of argument needed on religious issues ñ within and between those of faith and no faith.
The think-tank has also defended Jerry Springer ñ The Opera in the face of vitriolic attacks from other Christian groups.
Commented Ekklesia director Simon Barrow: ìPeople are right to be concerned about freedom of speech in the current climate. Trying to impose codes of respect through legal means is extremely dangerous. But we also have to move away from the rather adolescent desire of some people to throw around insults in the name of freedom.î
He continued: ìTo be against censorship is necessary but not sufficient. We also have to build bridges across cultural, political, social, religious and secular divides ñ to understand the wounds that not only divide, but threaten. Simply demonising others, whether on grounds of religion or non-religion, gets us nowhere.î
Last year Ekklesia called for a fresh approach to issues of free speech as part of its opposition to the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill. It said that ordinary Muslims felt threatened by the hostility they faced, and that this reinforced those with a militant agenda.
Ekklesia argues that Christians have a primary responsibility to disavow coercion, violence, abuse and self-seeking in the name of Gospel message ñ and it is suggesting that the post-Christendom era calls for a major shift in attitude and practice towards faith and politics within the churches, as well as fresh expressions of church life.
[Also on Ekklesia: Faith and Politics After Christendom – the forthcoming book by Ekklesia director Jonathan Bartley challenges existing views on religion and politics; Rethinking hate speech, blasphemy and free expression – an Ekklesia response to the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill; God and the politicians ñ where next? – an Ekklesia comment on aBBC 2 documentary aboutfaith and politics in a plural society; Think tank calls for big rethink on religious hatred and blasphemy; Lord Carey says blasphemy laws should go; Methodist position on religious hatred branded ‘naive’; Bigot on a bridge wins religious joke award; Secularists ask Live 8 to keep Vatican out; Get a life over springer, say Christians; Sadness and dismay at actions of religious campaigners; Jesus versus Jerry? by Simon Barrow; Christian peacemakers say anti-Muslim cartoons spread hate; US fundamentalist news service publishes cartoons of Muhammed; Anti-censorship committee reopened after religious protests; Culture Secretary says no to Springer ban; Calls for South Park to be censored over religious content]
Secularist and Christian voices highlight threats to free speech
-25/05/06
Free expression is under unprecedented threat in Europe, a representative of the UKís National Secular Society (NSS) told a Council of Europe hearing last Thursday.
Speaking in a debate on ëFree Expression and Respect for Religioní at the French Senate in Paris, Keith Porteous Wood, executive Director of NSS opposed calls from religious leaders for the introduction of a Europe-wide code to enforce ìrespect for religious feelingsî.
Mr Wood said that although blasphemy is no longer the repressive tool that it once was in Europe, it is sneaking back in a new guise: ìBlasphemy has a new cloak. Its new name is ërespectíî, he said. ìWe are told that our freedom of speech ñ so precious, so hard-won ñ must now be curtailed in the name of ërespectí for religionî.
Following the Danish cartoon saga, the clamour for new restrictions on the press and on artists has become stronger, commented Mr Wood.
He continued: ìA tide of demands for censorship is now engulfing Europe. The Vatican rails constantly against films, books, TV programmes and art exhibitions which it considers ëdisrespectfulí. Often it calls for them to be banned, and sometimes it succeeds ñ as it did in Britain with the satirical cartoon Popetown.î
The NSS director went on: ìReports emerged just yesterday that the Bavarian Premier [has] called for new laws against blasphemy. This comes hot on the heels of a Vatican aide telling a UNESCO conference here in Paris last week that the Mohammed cartoons were an abuse of human dignity and that every means possible should be adopted (presumably including new laws) to prevent this so-called abuse.î
Mr Wood declared that ìsometimes religion deserves to be disrespected. The horrendous and ongoing abuse of children in the Catholic Church demands to be exposed, the exploitative, money-grubbing cults need to be examined, the manipulative political interference of religious leaders should be questioned. All these important, vital investigations risk being curtailed if we allow the concept of blasphemy ñ or some similar privilege ñ to be re-introduced into Europe.î
Opposition to blasphemy laws has also come from within faith communities. Dr Rowan Williamsí predecessor as Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr George Carey, has said that the UKís blasphemy laws ñ which protect only Christians ñ are redundant and should go.
The repeal of blasphemy laws and opposition to censorship also comes from the UK Christian think-tank Ekklesia, which says that granting special privileges to faith does it no favours and restricts the free flow of argument needed on religious issues ñ within and between those of faith and no faith.
The think-tank has also defended Jerry Springer ñ The Opera in the face of vitriolic attacks from other Christian groups.
Commented Ekklesia director Simon Barrow: ìPeople are right to be concerned about freedom of speech in the current climate. Trying to impose codes of respect through legal means is extremely dangerous. But we also have to move away from the rather adolescent desire of some people to throw around insults in the name of freedom.î
He continued: ìTo be against censorship is necessary but not sufficient. We also have to build bridges across cultural, political, social, religious and secular divides ñ to understand the wounds that not only divide, but threaten. Simply demonising others, whether on grounds of religion or non-religion, gets us nowhere.î
Last year Ekklesia called for a fresh approach to issues of free speech as part of its opposition to the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill. It said that ordinary Muslims felt threatened by the hostility they faced, and that this reinforced those with a militant agenda.
Ekklesia argues that Christians have a primary responsibility to disavow coercion, violence, abuse and self-seeking in the name of Gospel message ñ and it is suggesting that the post-Christendom era calls for a major shift in attitude and practice towards faith and politics within the churches, as well as fresh expressions of church life.
[Also on Ekklesia: Faith and Politics After Christendom – the forthcoming book by Ekklesia director Jonathan Bartley challenges existing views on religion and politics; Rethinking hate speech, blasphemy and free expression – an Ekklesia response to the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill; God and the politicians ñ where next? – an Ekklesia comment on aBBC 2 documentary aboutfaith and politics in a plural society; Think tank calls for big rethink on religious hatred and blasphemy; Lord Carey says blasphemy laws should go; Methodist position on religious hatred branded ‘naive’; Bigot on a bridge wins religious joke award; Secularists ask Live 8 to keep Vatican out; Get a life over springer, say Christians; Sadness and dismay at actions of religious campaigners; Jesus versus Jerry? by Simon Barrow; Christian peacemakers say anti-Muslim cartoons spread hate; US fundamentalist news service publishes cartoons of Muhammed; Anti-censorship committee reopened after religious protests; Culture Secretary says no to Springer ban; Calls for South Park to be censored over religious content]