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
EU publishes guidelines on protecting free expression abroad
Posted: Tue, 20 May 2014 13:44
The Council of the European Union has adopted human rights guidelines on Freedom of Expression Online and Offline.
The new guidelines seek to help the EU protect and promote freedom of expression and opinion outside the EU arena and set out a number of preventative and reactive tools to enable it to do so. They are aimed at helping EU staff and representatives contribute to preventing potential violations of freedom of opinion and expression, and are guided by "the universality, indivisibility, interrelatedness and interdependence of all human rights".
The guidelines come as part of a consultation undertaken by the EU last year, to which the NSS submitted evidence, and emphasise freedom of the media and combating violence, persecution, harassment and intimidation of journalists and other media actors.
Notably, the guidelines also observe that restricting freedom of opinion and expression, "solely in order to protect notions such as religions, cultures, schools of thought, ideologies or political doctrines" is not permitted by international human rights law. They note that freedom of opinion and expression can only be limited in strictly prescribed circumstances – such as those delineated by Rabat Plan of Action.
They also highlight the situation for a number of women's rights groups who have publicly criticized discriminatory religious tenets, and as a consequence have suffered severe harassment and intimidation, both by state and non-state actors.
As with the guidelines on freedom of religion or belief adopted by the Council just under a year ago, the EU recommends the repealing of blasphemy laws around the world, noting that, blasphemy laws "are often applied so as to persecute, mistreat or intimidate persons belonging to religious or other minorities and they can have a serious inhibiting effect on freedom of expression and on freedom of religion or belief".
The guidelines, to be applied in terms of non-EU member states, make no mention of the fact that blasphemy is still outlawed within a number of EU member states, such as Denmark, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Malta, the Netherlands and Poland.
Likewise, whilst there is an emphasis on the protection of freedom of expression online, legitimate criticism could be directed at member states such as the UK, which has in the past been seen to treat individuals severely for their free expression via social media. For example, amongst others, charging Paul Chambers for tweeting a tongue-in-cheek message about blowing up Robin Hood airport in 2010 and arresting Reece Messer in 2012 for posting tasteless messages about British Olympic diver Tom Daley (notably however, last year the Crown Prosecution published guidelines seeking to limit the prosecutions for online communication via social media).
Police compensate street preacher after arrest for preaching biblical condemnation of homosexuals
Posted: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:11
Greater Manchester Police have awarded a Christian street preacher £13,000 in compensation after he was put in a cell without food and water for 19 hours for preaching against homosexuality.
Two teenagers complained to the police that they felt insulted after hearing John Craven preaching biblical condemnation of homosexuality in a Manchester Street. Mr Craven was arrested under the Public Order Act and detained in a police cell, without access to the medication he takes for arthritis.
The Christian Institute took up Mr Craven's case and said that the police had wrongfully arrested and imprisoned him and abused his human rights. The police settled the matter before it came to court, and will have to pay in excess of £50,000 in court costs.
When the teenagers had approached Mr Craven in September 2011, they had asked him what he thought of gay people. Mr Craven quoted condemnatory biblical verses and they responded by kissing in front of him and mocking him. He was then arrested by Police Constable Alistair McKittrick for a public order offence after the two teenagers told the officer that they felt insulted by Mr Craven's comments.
In his witness statement, Mr Craven said that after the police constable dismounted from his horse, he "grabbed" Mr Craven "roughly by the arm", arresting him for "public order offences".
Mr Craven said that "The officer did not ask for my name or address...I remained calm and co-operative even though I was being handled very roughly by the police officer."
The police, however, claimed that the arrest was necessary for "a prompt and effective investigation", but Mr Craven said they failed to tell him this at the time of the arrest.
Mr Craven was arrested under section 4A of the Public Order Act 1986, which criminalises the use of insulting words with the intention of causing harassment, alarm or distress.
Section 4A requires intention to cause harassment, alarm or distress unlike section 5, which requires intention to use threatening or abusive words or behaviour.
Section 5 was recently amended by Parliament because of the large number of cases where free speech had been infringed. Campaigners – including the National Secular Society - said at the time that Section 4A might also need to be amended.
As a result of the reform of Section 5, the College of Policing has issued new guidance telling officers that they are not allowed to arrest people simply because others find their words or behaviour insulting.
Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society, said: "We fought along with the Christian Institute to have Section 5 of the Public Order Act amended to protect free speech.
"But free speech belongs to everybody, even those you disagree with, and so we support the right of street preachers to quote the Bible without having their collars felt.
"So long as they stay within the law, don't incite violence or mayhem, they should be able to make whatever point they want, and their opponents should be able to respond without causing a disturbance or calling the police. Being insulted is not a good enough reason to have someone thrown into a police cell."
