Would you support laws against people denouncing Islam?

You missed out the option to introduce a law that makes it compulsory to criticise religion.




Only in barbaric and backward countries like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. In the west we have freedom of speech, which quite rightly includes the right to criticise and mock religions.

Freedom is so counterproductive.

Why don't you go and live in North Korea then? Or Saudi Arabia?

Would you support laws that protect Islam and stop people being able to criticise Islam or mock sensitive elements such as Muhammad?

Would you also support laws that make it illegal to speak negatively about Muslims?

Well if it's offensive to be racist, sexist, homophobic etc then why should we laugh off mean things that offend Muslims? (The same should apply to other religions too btw) if you're gonna protect Muslims, protect other religions too.
I wouldn't support the law, but I wouldn't reject it either.

I cant quote but..
The fine line between criticism and negative speech is subjective
Yes religion is a choice but even so, why should we disrespect each others choices? Just because I grew up deciding to believe in Santa, that doesn't mean i should have been bombarded with insults about Santa. (Just an example, i acc never believed in santa lmao)

Many muslims would agree that their religion is sacred. Whilst many people would agree that a jacket is not sacred. Don't try to falsely equivocate the two.

You are still unable to understand the difference. Hate speech is not the same as negative speech. Stating that "X" part of "Y" religion is sexist is not hate speech.

Designating belief systems as protected is silly and dangerous. Should we also ban negative speech against pasta because some people are Pastafarians and members of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and find Pasta and Ramen sacred (this is a real and registered belief system)? Can I start a religion based on Apple products and stop people from speaking ill of Steve Jobs and Iphones?

It's a dangerous precedent. You cannot pick and choose which religions to protect. Either you support all of them, or you give them all the ability to be targeted under free speech. It doesn't matter that fewer people find jackets sacred, those people can and will demand to have the same protections and their claim would still be perfectly valid.

Hate speech vs negative speech

So you seem to be all clued up about the differences between the two so if I provide a couple of examples, could you categorize them?

- We should burn the beards of radical and mad mullahs. A joke, obviously

- It is an undeniable fact that Islam breeds extremism and we should eradicate it from our society. An reasonable opinion (though I don't subscribe to all of it myself) though it could descend into illegality if the eradication were violent

- Those that act on their sexual feelings for those of the same gender, will burn in hell. A silly superstitious belief.

Done.

:Lol: I think I made it quite clear that I understand the difference between criticism and negative speech.

Err, categories being "hate speech" or "negative speech".

In that case they are all negative, obviously, even the joke.

Could you take those examples and explain to us all, how exactly are they not hate speech but rather, negative speech?

The first is an obvious joke. The second is a political position. The third is a preposterous superstitious belief. Enough said.