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
Equality and Human Rights Commission publishes new freedom of expression guidelines
Posted: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 08:04
New guidance on freedom of expression has been published by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).
The new advice, coming after the attack on the Paris offices of Charlie Hebdo, is aimed at clearing up "muddle and misunderstanding" over UK free speech laws.
NSS executive director Keith Porteous Wood said: "Those seeking hardest to shut down freedom of expression in the UK should heed the Commission's welcome reminder that, in effect, no one has the right not to be offended. The law however does not explicitly make this clear.
"Given the PM's commendable emphasis in Paris on the importance of freedom of expression, we call on him to initiate a long-overdue root and branch review of our patchwork of laws in this area, which this guidance shows to be so contradictory.
"His top priority should be to introduce freedom of expression safeguards into the Public Order Act, where threatening, abusive or insulting behaviour prosecution thresholds are very low - but convictions can result in a 7 year prison term where the offence is deemed to be religiously aggravated. This is in effect a draconian 'all religion' blasphemy law that has no place in a liberal democracy."
Whilst the guidance makes clear that freedom of expression is a "fundamental right" protected by the Human Rights Act 1998 and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the guidance does set out areas where some statements are not classified as protected speech.
The guidance explains that Article 10 "extends to the expression of views that may shock, disturb or offend the deeply-held beliefs of others", but notes that "freedom of expression does not protect statements that discriminate against or harass, or incite violence or hatred against, other persons and groups, particularly by reference to their race, religious belief, gender or sexual orientation."
EHRC Chief Executive Mark Hammond said: "The recent tragic events in Paris have again highlighted the importance of freedom of expression in our society. We have a long history of debating free speech in this country and the law recognises its value and importance.
"Today's guidance aims to address any muddle and misunderstanding about the law. What goes beyond causing offence and promotes hatred is sometimes a fine line and the source of intense debate. As an expert body and National Human Rights Institution, we hope we can play an important role in helping public bodies to understand and navigate this complex area."
The guidance states that there are "legitimate ways the state restrains what we can say but the test for curtailing freedom of expression in law is a stringent one."
It adds, "Any restrictions on freedom of expression must always be clearly set out in law, necessary in a democratic society for a legitimate aim, and proportionate. Subject to these conditions, freedom of expression may be limited in certain circumstances, including in order to protect others from violence, hatred and discrimination."
The EHRC add: "The boundary between the expression of intolerant or offensive views and hate speech is not always an easy one to draw. However, a number of factors are likely to be relevant, including the intention of the person making the statement, the context in which they are making it, the intended audience, and the particular words used."
The guidance notes that "freedom of expression is protected more strongly in some contexts than others."
Anglican vicar denounces Charlie Hebdo as “vile”, says religion should be protected from ridicule
Posted: Mon, 2 Feb 2015 16:38
An Anglican vicar has described the French satirical, anti-racist magazine Charlie Hebdo as a "nihilistic little rag" and compared their cartoons to the anti-Semitic publications of Nazi Germany.
Writing in the parish magazine of Presteigne in Powys, Wales, the Reverend Stephen Hollinghurst said he doesn't think "those poor cartoonists deserved or 'asked for' what they got", before adding, "looking at the other hand, did they really have the right to attack, ridicule and offend."
He states that Charlie Hebdo attacked "virtually anyone in their nasty magazine" which he described as "a thoroughly unpleasant, nihilistic little rag despite its recent acquisition of almost sacred status."
The vicar begins his piece by questioning if freedom of speech is "really a fundamental, absolute, unconditional human right" and goes on to state: "I do find myself asking why it is, quite rightly, unacceptable, to offend, attack, ridicule or otherwise persecute people on grounds of their race, colour or sexuality, it is apparently ok to do so because of their religious beliefs or practices."
He states that this is a "double-standard almost universally accepted in the modern, sophisticated, liberated Western World" and questions "do we really have the right to say what we like about (or to) whoever we like?"
Extraordinarily, Reverend Hollinghurst goes on to compare Charlie Hebdo's satirical cartoons with the anti-Semitic propaganda of Hitler's Germany. Hollinghurst claims it is "ironic" that the West condemns the "summary murder of people because of their (in this case, Jewish) faith, whilst defending to the hilt the right of others (cartoonists in this case) to ridicule and offend people of faith and their beliefs."
The Anglican vicar asks readers, "didn't the Holocaust begin with vile anti-Semitic cartoons? Is there that much difference?"
He adds, "I'm not sure I have the answers."
The newsletter was sent to the National Secular Society by a concerned parishioner who received it in the post. He described the commentary as "jaw-dropping" and said that Hollinghurst's "vehemence in the cause of intolerance and against freedom of expression" was "giving respectable cover to violent extremists."
He added that the vicar's rant "makes me wonder if he grasps what racism or sexism or anti-Semitism actually are, or the implications … for those in this neighbourhood (and elsewhere) who live at risk of violent prejudice."
Also see: Bishop of St Asaph describes French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo as "gratuitously offensive"
