According to the Telegraph,
Among the things Mr Vogelenzang, 53, is alleged to have said is that Mohammad was a warlord. His wife, 54, is said to have stated that Muslim dress is a form of bondage for women.
The couple now face fines up up to £2500 each and a criminal record under Section 5 of the Public Order Act (causing harassment, alarm or distress).
Now, I generally don't trust the press's ability (or inclination) to accurately portray events such as these. However, if we assume for the moment that the Telegraph isn't distorting the facts, then this is an abominable application of a (probably) bad law. Sure, statements like those reported above aren't particularly pleasant. But illegal?
According to the paper, the statements were made during a conversation the woman was participating in. She wasn't being harassed; she wasn't being bullied or proselytized. She was engaging in a conversation about her religious beliefs with people who didn't share them. Certainly she should have been prepared for challenging statements?
Anyway, we'll keep an eye on how this pans out. I'd really like to think that this country can learn to set aside or amend bad laws whose only function is to censor honest opinions which harm nobody.
At this rate it's starting to look like we were better off with the old blasphemy law...
ReplyDeleteHeh. A bad law that's never used is better than a bad law that is used, eh?
ReplyDeleteBit of an either-or fallacy, but I understand the feeling. Sometimes this wonderful country of ours, with its many ancient customs and obsolete laws sitting uncomfortably alongside a progressive and generally equitable public opinion (and many enlightened laws), drives me a little bit crazy.