Public has no right 'not to be offended' over religious matters

People have no right 'not to be offended' over matters of religion, and those who kill others or themselves 'are not martyrs', according to the chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

Addressing the annual Theos lecture on religion and contemporary society, Baroness O'Neill of Bengarve spoke out over controversies such as the Charlie Hebdo attacks and universities who banned 'transphobic' speakers, saying freedom of expression cannot be secured if society supported a right not to be offended.

Baroness O'Neill said speech believed to be offensive to a belief or religion should only be prohibited if it transgressed other laws, such as defamation or incitement to hatred.

'Any supposed right not to be offended would founder on the fact that offensiveness is subjective, and would put others' freedom of expression wholly at the mercy of the sensibilities of possible audiences, including audiences who may include some who are hypersensitive, paranoid or self-serving - or worse,' she said.

Speaking about attacks on satirical cartoonists, such as in the case of Charlie Hebdo or the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, the baroness highlighted how some had argued direct action was justifiable because of the offence.

However, those who described themselves as 'martyrs' for taking violent action against those whom they considered had offended their faith were wrong, she said.

'Killing a person whose speech offends and oneself is not martyrdom: it may be murder and is certainly suicide. Martyrdom is a matter of suffering for one's beliefs, or being killed for one's beliefs - and there are good reasons to use the term correctly and carefully...

'The noble army of martyrs must be turning in their graves as they read some current religious, political, and journalistic uses of the term.'

Baroness O'Neill said there must be more engagement between those who offend and those who feel offended to try to educate those who caused such deep affront whether intentional or not.

She also praised the classicist Mary Beard who had tracked down someone who had trolled the academic online as providing 'a model way of dealing with offensive speech'.

In addition, the EHRC chair called for further legislation to clarify what a religion or belief actually entails a suggestion that was welcomed by Elizabeth Oldfield, director of Theos.

'The current situation is deeply ambiguous with opposition to foxhunting recognised as a belief but not support for it,' she said.

'Baroness O'Neill's lecture was a timely reminder of the need to maintain freedom of religion in and of itself - she was clear that subsuming it into other existing rights is likely to "have costs and rouse many fears".'

John van der Luit-Drummond is deputy editor for Solicitors Journal
john.vanderluit@solicitorsjournal.co.uk | @JvdLD