Re: [OT] Blasphemy laws in Britain

On 2025-05-15 1:07 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

On 2025-05-15 11:14 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

 

Britain used to have blasphemy laws, mostly to protect Christianity
against abuse, but the last conviction under those laws was registered
in the 1970s. The blasphemy laws were finally abolished altogether in
2008. However, increasing demands from Muslims mean that we are seeing
an emergence of new blasphemy laws. This video looks at how these new
rules are emerging.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZjkbVuWU_0 [11 minutes]

 

The discussion of the conspiracy to get the fatwa issued against Rushdie
had a lot of information I was unfamiliar with. It's shocking that
Rushdie was criticized by government ministers and that opposition M.P.s
contributed to scapegoating him for their own political gain. Even
opposition politicians who defended Rushdie quickly turned on him.

 

That surprised me, too. Then again, I'm sure we've both seen politicians
change their views 180 degrees when the wind seemed to be shifting.

 

The videographer credits television comedian Rowan Atkinson for lobbying
to get the censorious hate speech bill -- modern anti-blasphemy
legislation replacing the recently repealed blasphemy legislation --
toned down slightly.

 

Atkinson has been a real fighter for free speech. He's definitely one of
the good guys.

 One of them. Rushdie lobbied for it too but he was targeted with
attempted murder. What seemingly disinterested party believes in free
exercise of religion in the UK, or free speech/publishing to discuss or
criticize religion?
 Voters don't appear to be interested in throwing political parties out
of office for supporting modern laws criminalizing blasphemy.
 No one seeks to preserve the "fundamental rights of all Englishmen".
 

I think Nigel Farage and his Reform Party might beg to differ. They did better than anyone expected at the recent local elections and Farage is now perceived by many pundits to be a plausible contender for Prime Minister at the next national election. (This horrifies both Labour and the Conservatives but all three parties are in a three-way tie right now in the polls.)
The election is unlikely before 2029 so a lot can - and will - happen before then but the present trend is very positive for Farage and his fledgling party.

But did this truly originate in 1988 with opposition to his book or was
this a long-standing issue in UK society? He didn't convince me that
this was the origin.

 

I'll bet it was already there before then although it may not have been
all that visible yet. It probably goes back to the days when the second
Muslim in Britain talked to the first Muslim and they agreed that these
infidels weren't getting with the Islamic program.

 Undoubtably a third Muslim who had begun to question the religious
beliefs he was raised on.
 

The anti-blaspheming violence in the UK has been almost entirely Muslim
against Muslim. Huh. Censorship doesn't reign in violence. Who knew?

 

I wonder if prosecuting violent offenders opposing the free exercise of
religion by others, throwing the book at them, might reign in violence.

 

I'd love to see it tried!

 

I was very surprised to see Leo Kearse practically doing a victory dance
in his latest video. He seems to think the tide is turning against the
woke/multiculturalism/open-borders crowd. I truly hope he is right but
the "progressives" seem deeply ensconced just about everywhere in the
West so I'm not counting on it being over yet.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gePgY6A5Cq4 [11 minutes]

 I don't have time to watch that right now, but I don't see that as the
fundamental problem. Progressivism used to promote liberal values as
part of overall reform of society in support of individual right and in
opposition to corruption. For decades, they've rejected liberalism to a
greater or lesser extent.
 We expect this.
 We don't expect the elites of society to require everybody to
infantalize Islam, the conclusion of the first videographer, treating
all of its adherants as immature and incapable of living in a society
embracing Western values. Instead of promoting liberty for all and
teaching them its benefits, the elites are attempting to force everybody
else to reject Western values so these horribly immature people can feel
better about themselves, if not superior.
 That came out of left field. Why?

--
Rhino