LONDON, June 10, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Relativism – the idea that there is no absolute truth and that any religious idea is just as ‘true’ as any other – is a philosophical error that collapses quickly upon even perfunctory critical analysis. But since relativism is the basic philosophical building block of political liberalism, no matter how little sense any such laws make, and no matter how much legal chaos they create, western democracies committed to liberalism keep proposing and passing them.
The most recent case of this is a British bill that proposes to outlaw criticism of any religious ideas. The Racial and Religious Hatred Bill would outlaw remarks considered likely to stir up hatred against all religious groups. The law would “make it an offence for a person to knowingly use threatening, abusive, or insulting words or behaviour with the intention or likelihood that they will stir up hatred against a group.”
Among the many problems with such a proposal is that the laws of causality make it impossible for anyone to adequately assess whether his words or actions would be ‘likely’ to “stir up hatred against a group.” The question of whether a crime of religious hatred has been committed therefore, cannot be assessed objectively, but falls to the subjective feelings of persons whose sensibilities have been offended. No hurt feelings; no crime.
The Home Office has posted a FAQ section on its website which says the law’s purpose is “to prevent hatred being stirred up against people targeted because of their religious beliefs, or lack of religious beliefs.” The legislation however, avoids the thorny problem of defining ‘religious belief.’ In our relativistic era, the very notion of defining religion is often itself considered discriminatory, who is to say whose personal fantasies are or are not a legitimate religion. Recently, a large number of new Zealanders wrote in ‘Jedi’ in the religion section of the census form.
It would cover authors, publishers, theatre directors, film distributors and broadcasters. Critics of the bill say such a law would effectively outlaw making religiously based jokes – bad news for British comedy, a main staple of which is poking fun at stereotypes of all religions.
Paul Goggins, the Home Office minister defending the bill said, “It does not stop people poking fun or causing offence. It is about stopping people from inciting hatred. It is about protecting the believer, not the belief.”
In a less amusing vein, because the bill declines to define what a legitimate religion is, Satanists, Voodoo practitioners and other dangerous cults would also be protected.
The opposition shadow Home Secretary said that religion, unlike race, was a matter of personal choice and therefore appropriate for open debate. He said, “Aggravated crimes against religious groups are already protected while this new law would technically prevent what many people may regard as reasonable criticism of devil-worshippers and religious cults.”
Dominic Grieve, the shadow attorney general, said, “We are likely to see religious groups trying to get other religious groups prosecuted, which will inflame community tensions rather than make them better.”
hw