Can the British Government bring in Blasphemy Laws?

Blasphemy laws, historically rooted in maintaining religious orthodoxy, were prominent in the Middle Ages. These laws punished individuals for expressions deemed offensive to religious beliefs. But could such laws be revived in modern times?

On July 6, Naz Shah — Bradford Labour MP (UK) — delivered an impassioned speech in Parliament during a discussion for the Police, Crime, Sentencing, and Courts (PCSC) Bill. In her speech, Shah has directly compared the “emotional harm” of the cartoon depictions of the Prophet Muhammad and the destruction of status. She also asked if there is a “hierarchy of sentiments” since the British Government is planning to impose prison sentences of up to 10 years and none for drawing cartoons of Muhammad.

The speech is being given when a suspended teacher in Britain is still under fire for displaying students images of the Prophet Muhammad in the classroom. Shah’s comments was interpreted by several British news sites as a call for the reinstatement of blasphemy laws. After Labour MP Kim Leadbeater called the behavior of the Muslim demonstrators “understandable” and offered a flimsy defense of the suspended teacher, some news sites asked if the Labour Party was suddenly “pro-blasphemy laws.” Paradoxically, blasphemy laws were repealed in 2008 by the Labour Party government.

Modern Legal and Social Challenges

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has said the online world is not ‘a law-free zone’
Shadow Home Secretary James Cleverly advised against tightening free speech

1. Conflict with Freedom of Expression:

In modern democratic societies, freedom of speech is a fundamental right. Blasphemy laws would directly infringe upon this freedom, leading to legal challenges.

2. Human Rights Concerns:

International bodies like the United Nations view blasphemy laws as contrary to human rights, particularly those related to free expression and religious freedom.

3. Secularism:

In secular states, where religion and government are separate, such laws would violate the principle of religious neutrality.

Riots are not the answer to solving problems that exist in the cities around Great Britain right now. Anyone causing damage to property of any sort should be condemned and be punished. However in saying that, many countrymen and women are fed up with what is happening in illegal migration.

The government are there for the people and the people are speaking, unfortunately in some cases, the wrong way by rioting. This is not the answer and never will be. Rather than only condemning the protesters, try looking at the problem of why the riots are occurring. It is the UK and the laws should be abided by and that goes for everyone, of all religions or non religious people. It seems that not all people are equal with the current protests. Many Pro-Palestian protesters shouted many hateful comments, loud and clear, but nothing was done about that.

With new laws that may be introduced by the Prime Minister Sir Keirs Starmer on Blasphemy and with free speech taken away from voters, there might be more protests in the future.

Shadow Home Secretary James Cleverly said he was ‘uncomfortable’ with a tightening on free speech and urged the Government not to ‘turn into an oppressive police state’

Mr Cleverly, who was in government when the Online Safety Act was passed, said: ‘It was carefully thought through when we brought it in.

‘It struck the appropriate balance between managing misinformation, disinformation, propaganda, and what we have seen, which is incitement.

‘I am uncomfortable with some of the calls that I’ve heard more recently… where people would fear that debate, legitimate debate, and disagreement becomes policed, and that we have some kind of social censorship by the backdoor.

‘We also have to be very, very careful that we don’t turn into an oppressive police state.

‘The Labour Party has a long tradition of overreach in terms of freedom of speech and civil liberties and I don’t want to see that happening again.’

‘Politicians love an easy scapegoat when things go wrong, and censoring the public rather than dealing with the true causes of rioting is the easy way out.

‘There are already plenty of existing laws that can be used against people who stir up hatred and violence, these should be enforced before seeking more online censorship.’

Will it get to a stage where people feel that cannot criticise a religion if they disagree with it? Everyone is entitled to have an opinion even if it offends some people.