Democracy cannot exist without the right to free speech.
Free speech should be robustly defended as a fundamental freedom.
The National Secular Society has defended free speech from religious threats since our founding. We played an instrumental role in abolishing "blasphemy" laws in Britain, but serious concerns remain. Blasphemy laws still exist in Northern Ireland. And throughout the UK, religious fundamentalists seek to impose their blasphemy taboos on others through violence and intimidation.
There are also increasing attempts to categorise offending religious sensibilities as 'hate speech', making criticism, mockery or perceived 'insult' of religion a criminal act akin to racial hatred or inciting violence – in other words, a 'blasphemy law by the back door'.
Without free speech no search for truth is possible; without free speech no discovery of truth is useful; without free speech progress is checked… Better a thousand fold abuse of free speech than denial of free speech.
We are further concerned by a developing 'culture of offence' in which any speech or action deemed likely to offend religious sensibilities is considered taboo. Enforced by a toxic mix of terrorism and religious deference, this is chilling free speech through self-censorship.
We also campaign against blasphemy laws around the world, where they continue to be used to target religious and political minorities. These are sometimes described by UK politicians as 'misuse' of blasphemy laws, but we contend there are never any legitimate uses for blasphemy laws.
Being offended from time to time is the price we all pay for living in a free society. Rather than trying to silence those we disagree with, we believe the answer to speech we don't like is more speech – better speech.
We therefore campaign to protect and preserve freedom of expression, including offensive, critical and shocking speech.
What you can do
1. Share your story
Tell us why you support this campaign, and how you are personally affected by the issue. You can also let us know if you would like assistance with a particular issue.
2. Join us
Become a member of the National Secular Society today! Together, we can separate religion and state for greater freedom and fairness.
Latest updates
Street preacher fined for using “abusive” language after quoting Leviticus
Posted: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 16:28
Street preacher Michael Overd has been found guilty of using "threatening" or "abusive" words after making homophobic remarks during a sermon delivered in Taunton High Street.
Overd was ordered to pay £250 to a passer-by who had been offended by the preacher's comments, and he initially refused, at which point judge Shamim Qureshi threatened the preacher with a prison sentence. He has been ordered to pay total costs of £1200.
Overd intends to appeal his conviction and said "I follow my Lord and leader, so I won't tone down."
The street preacher was charged with a public order offence, after complaints were made by members of the public that he had made homophobic and 'Islamophobic' remarks.
The sermons were delivered in June and July of 2014.
The BBC reports that the judge "told the preacher he seemed to enjoy testing the laws on free speech to their limits."
Mr Overd was also told "that he should not have quoted from Leviticus 20:13 when speaking about homosexuality," according to Christian Today, who also report that "the judge suggested that there were other verses he could have chosen if he wanted to talk about what the Bible says about homosexuality."
Judge Qureshi also works as a 'judge' for the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal, which aims to help Muslims "resolve disputes in accordance with Islamic Sacred Law."
In an interview with Premier Christian Radio, Overd said that Britain no longer "recognises the Bible" and said that his conviction "sadly" represented where the UK was "concerning sodomy and lesbianism."
He railed against "liars, thieves, drunkards, fornicators" and said that "Jesus offended people" and that Jesus was a "very offensive man."
Overd said "we're all sinners, that's what the Bible says. I am as well." He added that "God says" Muslims and homosexuals were "hell-bound" because they "denied the truth of the Bible" for breaking the commandments of God.
The preacher said he was "proclaiming the truth of the Gospel."
Mr. Overd was found not guilty on two other charges, which included "causing racially or religiously aggravated harassment, alarm or distress" after he made critical remarks about the Muslim Prophet Mohammed.
During the trial one witness said "I am all for free speech but not at the expense of [belittling] someone" and another said that Overd had made "defamatory comments" about the Prophet Mohammed.
The National Secular Society has previously raised concerns about the trial's implications for free speech.
Terry Sanderson, NSS president, said the ruling appeared to make the quoting of certain passages of the Bible illegal.
"Whilst we all want to encourage public civility, there is a higher principle at stake. As long as there is no incitement to violence, then people should be allowed to speak freely without fearing legal repercussions."
“Be Careful With Mohammed”: Muslim Action Forum launches “legal strategy” to stop publication of insults to Mohammed
Posted: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 16:50
The Muslim Action Forum (MAF), which staged a protest outside Downing Street against Charlie Hebdo in February, has launched a "legal strategy" to stop insults against Mohammed.
The organisation is also asking supporters to "lobby your MP" to make "Islamophobia" a criminal offence.
They state that they intend "to launch a series of legal challenges in the English Court system" because "depictions of our Holy Prophet peace be upon Him is the worst kind of 'Hate Crime' that can be perpetrated on the 3 million Muslims in the UK and 1.7 billion Muslims worldwide."
The group says that they have "devised a legal strategy to prevent the continuous insulting and derogatory publications depicting and abusing the personality of our Holy Prophet Muhammad peace be upon Him."
In a press release published shortly after the demonstration in February 2015, the MAF set out details of their plan to outlaw depicting Mohammed in the UK, through "amendment of some existing legislation and the presentation of a Private Members Bill that promotes the idea of Global Civility."
They describe "Global Civility" as a "new direction" and argue that the "desecration" of "collective human dignity", through "insult, denigration or humiliation is morally and ethically wrong". Their website rails against "reckless and malicious expressions".
They urge the 100,000 Muslims who they claim signed their petition to lobby their MPs and all candidates standing in the General Election. The MAF makes a number of suggestions including three specific questions which they ask supporters to direct to their MPs.
The MAF suggests that petitioners ask their MPs if they think the "the Public Order Act 1986 should be amended to include under 'hate crime' any malicious depiction of images and use of malevolent language against revered personalities of all religions?"
They also suggest asking if "Islamophobia should be a culpable offence?"
The suggestions include a point inquiring if MPs would support a "Bill of Rights" that promotes "Global Civility", a concept which would prevent insulting religion.
The appeal says that if the MP answers no to any of the points above, their answer "will clarify to the local Muslim community where their political representatives stand on the single most important issue to every Muslim in this country and worldwide."
Stephen Evans, National Secular Society campaigns manager, said: "We trust all prospective MPs will appreciate that there is no homogeneous 'Muslim community' and reject such unreasonable demands to undermine everybody's fundamental rights and freedoms. Free speech is the bedrock of liberty and a free society – and integral to combating the spectre of Islamism. Now more than ever we need to preserve and strengthen freedom of expression, not capitulate to extremist demands."
The Muslim Action Forum (MAF) explain that their campaign against satirical depictions of Mohammed, and what they call "uncivilised expressionists", took its "first historical step by presenting a petition supported by over 100,000 signatures of Muslims promoting the concept of Global Civility and condemning the continuous publication of these insulting cartoons in France and other parts of the world."
The MAF website has a section devoted to the concept of "uncivilised expressionists", and they cite examples including the Satanic Verses, Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten and the burning of the Quran. They define uncivilised expressions as a "a psychological disposition of the human mind which insults and maligns others without care or consideration of consequences." They call this "behaviour against Muslims".
The full press release on the Muslim Action Forum's legal strategy can be found here.
