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
NSS: free speech must be protected in hate crime review
Posted: Fri, 6 Sep 2019 09:10
The National Secular Society has urged the Law Commission to protect free speech on religion as it reviews hate crime laws in England and Wales.
The commission is set to consider "the adequacy of protection" offered by current hate crime laws and make recommendations for reform.
Religion, defined as "a group's religious belief or lack of religious belief", is one of five characteristics currently protected under hate crime legislation.
The NSS has now met the commission and cautioned against lowering the threshold on what constitutes an offence on the basis of religion.
Some of the laws under review prohibit the "stirring up" of hatred against people with particular characteristics. This includes provisions under the Public Order Act of 1986 which prohibit the stirring up of hatred on the grounds of religion.
Currently conduct must be "threatening" to reach the threshold for stirring up hatred on the basis of religion. Conduct which is "abusive or insulting" on the basis of religion is not prohibited, as it is in the case of racial hatred.
As part of its review the commission will consider whether to recommend changes relating to the way the various characteristics are protected, "to promote a consistent approach".
During the meeting the NSS also said hate crime laws had created a perception that people have a right not to be offended, exacerbating censorious attitudes on religion.
And the society urged scepticism over efforts to achieve social harmony through the suppression of speech.
Explaining the NSS's position, CEO Stephen Evans said: "The Law Commission's review must prioritise the protection of freedom of expression and encouragement of robust debate on religion.
"It should be particularly wary of any attempt to criminalise behaviour which could be considered 'abusive or insulting' on the basis of religion. Going along with those who wish to lower the current threshold on religious hatred would undermine civil liberties and social cohesion."
Hate crime laws also allow for crimes to be considered aggravated if offenders demonstrate, or are motivated by, hostility towards someone on the basis of a protected characteristic. Judges can hand out stronger sentences in these circumstances.
The Law Commission is an independent body charged with keeping the law of England and Wales under review and recommending reforms. It intends to outline provisional proposals in a comprehensive consultation paper early next year.
‘Islamophobia’ definition curtails free speech, campaigners warn
Posted: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 08:27
The widespread adoption of a proposed definition of 'Islamophobia' risks curtailing freedom of speech and the exposure of extremism, a collection of essays has warned.
An anthology published by the think tank Civitas warns that the definition proposed by the all-party parliamentary group (APPG) on British Muslims poses a threat to liberal values.
The collection features a piece submitted by the National Secular Society, with other contributors including NSS honorary associates Peter Tatchell, Richard Dawkins, Pragna Patel and Maryam Namazie.
The APPG's definition says: "Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness."
The NSS and others argue that the broad and vague definition, and the normalisation of the idea of 'Islamophobia' more widely, will silence criticism of Islam.
The NSS's submission argues that "the gatekeepers of public debate can't patronise away anti-Muslim bigotry" and highlights concerns raised by the report which accompanies the APPG's definition.
It also highlights broader worries about the failure of those in power to engage with legitimate criticism of Islam and the harmful privileges granted to it.
The NSS has lobbied the government and several councils to urge them not to adopt the definition in recent months, with some responding by rejecting it.
Several local authorities and major political parties have adopted the APPG's definition in recent months. The government has not adopted it and is currently consulting on proposals to introduce its own definition of 'Islamophobia'.
Stephen Evans, chief executive of the NSS, said: "This anthology highlights a broad range of concerns about the much-discussed proposed definition of Islamophobia and the problem of criticism of Islam being routinely dismissed as racist.
"Those who raise concerns about religious privileges which undermine women's rights, animal welfare, LGBT rights and the principle of one law for all are routinely shouted down as Islamophobes and marginalised from public conversation.
"The adoption of the APPG's vague definition, which protects ill-defined 'expressions of Muslimness', would hasten this process – while undermining efforts to tackle bigotry against Muslims."
In May the NSS and others signed an open letter criticising the "uncritical and hasty adoption" of the APPG's definition.
Emma Webb, director of the Forum on Integration, Democracy and Extremism (FIDE) at Civitas, coordinated the anthology. She said the definition would choke legitimate discussion and exposure of Islamism.
"The definition would have a chilling effect on necessary discussion around the Islamist threat to the UK. In a free society, there can be no arbitration of which criticisms of any given religion or ideology are legitimate, regardless of perceived motive, level of education or quality of debate."
Other contributors include the former Islamist Ed Husain, the former chairman of the Conservative Muslim Forum Mohammed Amin and David Toube of the Quilliam Foundation.
