UK ‘faces social unrest’ if Labour pushes ahead with Islamophobia definition

Labour need to rake in the Muslim vote. It will be defined, and labour will call anyone that disagrees with it an islamaphobic racist.

Labour doesn’t care about blasphemy, Labour cares about votes, and that’s the driving force as they know the muslim vote is rapidly growing

[removed]

Looking at the current state of the economy, and that Labour are too busy trying to appease Reform voters to actually tackle the economic issues, frankly I think Labour are actively trying to cause social unrest.

It’ll certainly help them with their push to curb personal freedoms and online privacy if it were to all kick off.

[removed]

There should be no laws that stop criticism of religion, any religion.

There are already laws to stop people threatening other people. They should be enough. Discussion should never be censored.

Just remember that various religions in the past have stood against, vaccinations, blood transfusions, organ donation, contraception, and even anaesthetics is on a very long list.

If we had laws back in the day to stop criticism of religion maybe we won’t have all those things.

If they make it such a definition, then criticising fundamentalism will fall under it. Which will mean there’s no stopping extremism.

Although this isn’t a law itself… the way it interacts with existing law probably makes it close enough to one and it will likely be issued as guidance to police, as from what I can tell the antisemitism version of this is used in identifying potential hate crimes. I’d estimate lawyers could point to the Islamophobia definition as grounds that someone is insulting and “grossly offensive” enough to be pinned with something under the Public Order Act or Communications Act.

Islamaphobia aka having any criticisms of their religion

So a blasphemy law, but only them? All other religions fair game though? They’d have to be really stupid to do this it’s like they only want the one term

I thought we didn’t allow opinion pieces here?

> Britain will face social unrest and **a perception** of a two-tier society if the government pushes ahead with plans **to come up with** a formal definition of Islamophobia, the head of a new campaign group has warned.

This whole issue is so pathetic. The Government has asked a working group to come up with a *non-binding*, *non-legal* definition of “Islamophobia”, and before we’ve seen what they’ve suggested, never mind before the Government has taken any steps to accept their recommendation, we are already being told it is terrible.

Look at how weaselly this guy’s words are:

> We are seeing a sense of people being very unhappy about two-tier application of the law, two-tier society,… The same narrative is being **potentially, I’m hearing**, it’s being used around this definition. Why are Muslims getting extra protection? Why do they have to have more laws?

That’s almost Donald Trump levels of weaselling.

> It creates a sense of a deeply chilling effect, where people are scared to raise things about religion, which can be used against them, and where digital traces can be placed online that are difficult to remove,… It creates a vastly, deeply problematic element of a chilling effect in society. It doesn’t matter whether it’s statutory or non-statutory.

What does? Nothing has happened yet! We don’t even know what might happen?

Would the Times run the same article about a definition of anti-Semitism? Or homophobia? I would say transphobia, but we know they’d be more than happy to publish an article criticising that…

> The government faced criticism for attempting to limit public input into the plans by circulating a call for evidence to only a limited number of groups. But its plans were derailed after Claire Coutinho, the shadow equalities minister, found a link to the online consultation form and circulated it widely.

Oh boy. The Government tried to cover this up by… making the consultation publicly available online.

So pathetic.

You can criticise a religion without being blatantly racist, it’s really not that bloody hard. Almost as if someone wants you to believe that genuine criticism is going to get you thrown in prison forever in order to spread an agenda….