http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom...United_Kingdom
Quote:
United Kingdom citizens have a negative right to freedom of expression under the common law.[98] In 1998, the United Kingdom incorporated the European Convention, and the guarantee of freedom of expression it contains in Article 10, into its domestic law under the Human Rights Act. However there is a broad sweep of exceptions including threatening, abusive or insulting words or behavior intending or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress or cause a breach of the peace (which has been used to prohibit racist speech targeted at individuals),[99][100][101] sending another any article which is indecent or grossly offensive with an intent to cause distress or anxiety (which has been used to prohibit speech of a racist or anti-religious nature),[102][103][104] incitement,[105] incitement to racial hatred,[106] incitement to religious hatred, incitement to terrorism including encouragement of terrorism and dissemination of terrorist publications,[105][107] glorifying terrorism,[108][109][110] collection or possession of a document or record containing information likely to be of use to a terrorist,[111][112] treason including compassing or imagining the death of the monarch or advocating for the abolition of the monarchy (which cannot be successfully prosecuted),[113][114][115][116][117] sedition,[114] obscenity,[118] indecency including corruption of public morals and outraging public decency,[119] defamation,[120] prior restraint, restrictions on court reporting including names of victims and evidence and prejudicing or interfering with court proceedings,[121][122] prohibition of post-trial interviews with jurors,[122] scandalising the court by criticising or murmuring judges,[122][123] time, manner, and place restrictions,[124] harassment, privileged communications, trade secrets, classified material, copyright, patents, military conduct, and limitations on commercial speech such as advertising.
Using United Kingdom as a start. It would be interesting if there are interesting laws in other countries.
I guess the questions are;
Does this actually say that religion cannot be discussed inter religiously? Mainstream religions are anti-religious of other religions by nature. A holy book could be considered an indecent article which causes anxiety in other persons.
Religion is obviously a stressor or motivator in breach of the peace all over the world.
In multi-cultural societies is it better off just making sure that religions is not in public areas?
If a time comes where there is global government, what is going to happen? Because how can people come together democratically when the very creeds that are lived by are in opposition? Of a basis where mental damage occurs?
Is there intent to cause stress and anxiety in those who are spreading theological ideas?
BTW: Sorry for making two concurrent threads.
