About Me

My photo
I have a burning need to know stuff and I love asking awkward questions.

Friday, April 07, 2006

Claims of victory over religious hatred bill questioned -01/02/06

From Ekklesia

Claims of victory over the government's controversial religious hatred bill have today been questioned. Conservative Christian groups who have campaigned for special protections for the Christian faith, and lobbied against the extension of those protections to other faiths, have heralded last night's Government's defeat over amendments to the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill as a 'victory for free speech'. The Evangelical Alliance and the charity CARE are amongst those today claiming credit for last night's vote by MP’s to accept a series of amendments made by the House of Lords.

The Bill has now been stripped of measures to allow ‘abusive and insulting’ language as well as the crime of ‘recklessness’ in actions that incite religious hatred. The new offence will be restricted to ‘threatening’ words and behaviour, which the groups say will ensure that freedom of speech for religious groups can be protected. Commentators are however pointing out that these same groups have previously campaigned for the maintenance of special protections for the Christian faith, whilst resisting their extension to other faiths, calling into question claims about freedom of speech.

In evidence to a House of Lords Select Committee which looked at religious offences in the run up to publication of the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill, the Evangelical Alliance urged the government to retain the law on blasphemy which protects only the Christian faith. They have also resisted moves to extend the blasphemy law to other faiths, with the Alliance suggesting that Muslim's should instead be "less sensitive" about their faith. Many conservative Christians who belong to the organisations have even recently campaigned to ban what they perceived to be abusive and insulting portrayals of their religion such as the BBC 2 broadcast of 'Jerry Springer the Opera'.

Nola Leach, General Director of CARE said: "We welcome this defeat and thank God that we have not crossed a boundary which could have dangerous consequences for freedom of speech. The debate was lively and the result shows that many MP’s were, right up to the last minute, influenced by the letters and meetings with Christians in their constituency. This should encourage us not to give up." The Evangelical Alliance also suggested that it had "campaigned vigorously to defend everyone’s right to freedom of speech".

Joel Edwards, General Director of the Evangelical Alliance, said, “We are immensely relieved that the political leaders of this country voted to protect every British citizen’s right to free speech. We are pleased that the bill, which will now go for royal assent, is the one that has been substantially amended by the House of Lords.” In a statement the Alliance said it had "worked tirelessly with other organisations over the last few months to win the argument and persuade MPs of the dangers of the Government’s proposed legislation." The Alliance is now calling on "Christians and those involved in the coalition to build on the lessons learnt for future campaigns."

Don Horrocks, Head of Public Affairs at the Evangelical Alliance, said, “This is a victory for working together constructively and intelligently, for taking the argument to those who make decisions. However, we mustn’t be complacent. Although free speech won the day on this occasion we need to be committed to participating in the democratic process for a free society, where views can be expressed without fear. This result shows what Christians and others can do when they make common cause” he added. But Jonathan Bartley, director of the thinktank Ekklesia which has monitored the campaigns by religious groups on both sides of the debate, suggested a time of reflection on how recent campaigns had been conducted and the messages that were being sent off. "To many, the actions by Christian groups who on the one hand have attempted to retain special privileges for the Christian faith, whilst on the other claiming that they are for 'free speech for all' will smack of double standards."

No comments: