The Telegraph, 5th December 2024
A minority of Muslims are demanding special treatment for Islam. This should be refused
Shadowy new blasphemy laws are arising, allowed to blossom by institutional cowardice
Technically speaking, the criminal offence of blasphemy was abolished in Great Britain by the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act of 2008. Yet a growing number of incidents suggest that a shadow blasphemy law has crept into our national psyche, enforced not by statute but by a toxic cocktail of political correctness, identity politics, and institutional cowardice. This is not merely a misunderstanding of law and liberty; it is an existential threat to free speech and the fabric of British society.
Eighteen months ago, Kettlethorpe High School in Wakefield became the stage for a surreal and troubling drama. An autistic boy accidentally scuffed a copy of the Quran. What should have been a simple matter of pastoral care spiralled into a public reckoning. The headteacher summoned the police. A meeting akin to a Sharia tribunal unfolded in a local mosque, where the boy’s mother was compelled to apologise to an all-male audience, her son’s actions deemed so serious that the police recorded a Non-Crime Hate Incident. Such Orwellian absurdity should belong to fiction, yet it is reality in 21st-century multicultural Britain.
This is no isolated case. From the Rushdie fatwa to the Batley teacher forced into hiding for using a cartoon of Mohammed as part of a lesson on free speech, a pattern is clear. The Prime Minister, far from defending the British principle of robust and open debate, appears to tacitly endorse this trend. When asked in Parliament whether he would consider banning the desecration of religious texts, Sir Keir Starmer promised to tackle “Islamophobia in all its forms.” What does this mean? In practice, it sounds dangerously close to endorsing a blasphemy law, privileging Islam above other religions.
Let’s be clear: Britain is a Christian country. Yet there is no law protecting Christianity from mockery or insult, nor should there be. The principle extends to all faiths – or at least it should. Why is it acceptable to ridicule Hinduism but not Islam? Why are insults to Jewish symbols waved off, while a scuffed Quran becomes a police matter? How can Christians be arrested for silent prayer, while mobs cancel films deemed offensive to Muslims? Such double standards are untenable. They breed resentment, division, and ultimately the erosion of the liberties that define us.
It is worth remembering that free speech does not come with a guarantee of comfort. It includes the right to question, critique, and yes, offend. To enshrine the sensitivities of one group above all others is to undermine the very pluralism that allows our society to thrive.
This isn’t about Muslims as a whole. The vast majority are tolerant, peaceable, and keen to integrate. But within that community, a vocal minority demand special treatment for Islam – protection that no other faith enjoys. That demand, left unchecked, risks becoming policy. It already exerts a chilling effect on law enforcement and public debate.
Consider the child sexual abuse scandals in Rotherham and Rochdale. Authorities turned a blind eye for years, paralysed by fear of being accused of racism or Islamophobia. More recently, Sir William Shawcross’s review of the Prevent programme revealed that fears of appearing anti-Muslim stymied efforts to tackle Islamist extremism. These failures are not isolated incidents; they are symptoms of a broader cultural malaise.
Our institutions, from the police to the press, are increasingly cowed by identity politics. They see criticism of Islam not as a legitimate part of public discourse but as a threat to social harmony. This is not just wrong; it is dangerous. Without the freedom to critique and question, society becomes brittle, unable to address its flaws or adapt to change.
The challenge is not to suppress difficult conversations but to have them openly and honestly. We must be able to discuss radical imams, gender inequality, and cultural practices within Muslim communities with the same vigour that we investigate historical sexual abuse in the Church of England. To do otherwise is not just hypocritical; it is harmful to the very people we claim to protect.
The rejection of free debate in favour of enforced orthodoxy is tearing Britain apart. We cannot allow our cherished freedoms to be smothered by the twin threats of militant sensitivity and institutional cowardice. Our patriotism, our shared commitment to liberty, demands that we push back.
The stakes are high. If we do not use our freedom to speak, we will lose it. And when that happens, we will have no one to blame but ourselves.
