What do you think of Scotland’s hate speech law?
Specifically should we be able to abuse or stir up hatred against religions?
Specifically should we be able to abuse or stir up hatred against religions?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Scotland’s hatespeech law proposal
- Thread starter danieldemol
- Start date
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
If the law stops hate toward religion, race, and stop racism then it's very good
Samael_Khan
Goosebender
In what cases is abuse and stirring up hatred necessary?
Samael_Khan
Goosebender
Also, I think that a problem people might have with the law (although I havent read it myself) is how do they interpret what abuse and "stir up hatred" mean. Is criticism of a relgion abusive and hateful?
What if a person wants to criticise ideas that a religion has or its scriptures? Would that be considering stirring up hate?
The problem is that when government starts controlling speech that is potentially the first step to creating an indoctrinated society similar to Orwell's 1984.
Does it also prevent religions from oppressing others?
Last edited:
exchemist
Veteran Member
Can you provide a link, so we can see what this law actually says, please, before everyone starts sounding off on the basis of ignorance?
All hate speech whether targeted at religion, race or gender should be illegal. I reserve judgement on political dissing
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
New hate crime laws put forward
The above link will give some context to the OP
I would suggest that the rising level of hate crime is partially informed by the prevailing attitudes emanating from the American white house. these are seen on a daily basis around the world and become a defacto licence to follow that example, among the disenfranchised ignorant and easily led members of society.
These baser instincts and attitudes spread like a disease.
The above link will give some context to the OP
I would suggest that the rising level of hate crime is partially informed by the prevailing attitudes emanating from the American white house. these are seen on a daily basis around the world and become a defacto licence to follow that example, among the disenfranchised ignorant and easily led members of society.
These baser instincts and attitudes spread like a disease.
Agreed and certainly in the uk i also consider Brexit responsible for a huge rise in hate speech.
What would constitute abusing religion or what would abusing religion look like?
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
All talk about a certain religion to make it look evil, wrong, or speak hateful about those who follow the religion
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
I do not see how abusing a religion can be a hate crime.
hate crime is about abusing people, not ideas.
hate crime is about abusing people, not ideas.
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
Why abuse any of them.
HonestJoe
Well-Known Member
Which one are you talking about exactly? (Lets assume most people here aren't intimately familiar with the Scottish legal system
)You mean abuse and hatred against innocent people solely because of their (perceived) religion? I can't imagine why any sane person would want the freedom to do that. There are open questions as to whether specific laws are if so, the best way to address it and how, where and when they should apply.
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
I just think abuse is the wrong term to use to describe attacking a concept or an organisation.
I am not supporting doing either with out reason.
However there are occasions when In debate, I would feel no compunction against attacking the entire concept of Scientology and its organisation. (my pet hate)
In these situations context is everything.
I would hate it if it was illegal to attack bad practices when they became evident, and see no reason to give such protection to religions or any other organisation. they are perfectly capable of standing up for them selves.
I think it is called the Hate Crime and Public Order Bill.Which one are you talking about exactly? (Lets assume most people here aren't intimately familiar with the Scottish legal system
Nope, I said against religions and that is what I meant
exchemist
Veteran Member
Thanks for this.
As I read it, what it does is:
- pull already existing laws against hate crime (which already included religion) together into one place,
- adds some gender based items and
- creates a new crime of "stirring up" hatred against any of these categories.
I presume what you want to discuss is the last of these, as the others don't seem to change anything in respect of religion. Is that right?
P.S. I found this link, which explains the basis of the bill: Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill
P.P.S. This is the background to the bill:https://beta.parliament.scot/-/medi...hate-crime-and-public-order-scotland-bill.pdf
For those unfamiliar with the Scottish legal system, Lord Bracadale is a retired senior judge and Queen's Counsel (QC), a senior advocate (barrister) who was asked to review the existing laws in this area and bring them up to date.
Last edited:
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
Instead of "attacking" is it not better to ask if they are sure they practicing according to the teaching? Then it is a question and not an attack
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
you are conflating two distinct issues
The concept associated with the religion and its membership.
While is perfectly reasonable to argue and put a case against the first, it is not OK to attack the second.
Altfish
Veteran Member
It is very badly worded; the problem is, "What is the difference between harsh criticism and hate speech" it is a grey area.