During the past five to 10 years, the expression Islamophobia has come to play a prominent role in the political landscape.
Politicians use it incessantly, as do business people, teachers, health sector workers and community activists.
Yet it is a word currently without a legal definition and, as such, it is prone to incorrect interpretations by many.
Some like to place the term in the same category as antisemitism.
The Tories were embroiled in a row over comments made by Lee Anderson while he was still a member of the Party in February
PA
The critical difference is that antisemitism is a hatred of Jews simply for being Jewish.
It focusses on Jews as people, rather than aspects of Judaism.
The mirror image is not Islamophobia but anti-Muslim hatred, which relates to a loathing of Muslims simply for their religion.
It is fair to treat anti-Muslim hatred in the same vein as antisemitism and punishments for these two odious types of behaviour should be similar.
So what might Islamophobia actually be, and should it be a concern? Taking the word literally, it is a degree of fear about aspects of Islam, or possibly concern or criticism regarding some religious practices of Islam.
What might be the parallel meaning if Judaism was being considered? To answer this, one needs to consider whether there are people who have no hatred of Jews as individuals whatsoever, but who have concerns about aspects of Judaism.
The answer is yes, at least to some extent. Examples include those who reject Leviticus 18:22 which states that it is an abomination for a man to lie with another man the way he does with a woman.
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS:
- Michael Gove to appoint new anti-Muslim hatred adviser ahead of new extremism definition next week
- 'Is criticism of Islam Islamophobic?' Fierce debate breaks out as Bev Turner blasts 'we've got to bring people together!'
- Lee Anderson row sparks fiery Islamophobia debate: 'Islam is an idea, it should be open to criticism!'
Kemi Badenoch warned the Labour Party risks creating a “blasphemy law” due to its definition of Islamophobia
PA
Additionally, there are those who believe circumcision of an eight day old boy is inhuman and those who reject religious slaughter according to Jewish law as being cruel to animals.
Yet nobody in UK Jewry is arguing for such criticisms to be illegal.
Then there is Christianity. Jews especially do not believe that Jesus Christ was the son of God, and nor do atheists and others.
Yet such people in today’s world are not accused of being “Christianophobes”, nor are there calls from even the most devout of Christians for it to be blasphemic to make such a suggestion.
So we are faced today with one religion, Islam, which will brook no criticism of its religious tenets or practices.
Islamist fundamentalists wish to make it illegal for anyone to make negative remarks about any aspects of Islam.
Lee Anderson refused to apologise for his comments regarding Sadiq Khan
PA
In discussions about such a legal definition, some have wanted to go much further, for example claiming that it is Islamophobic to oppose the creation of a Palestinian state in the Middle East.
In recent times we have witnessed some Islamic practices that have horrified many, but the details of these pale into insignificance against a much more fundamental overarching principle, namely freedom of speech.
Of course, freedom of speech should end where hate speech begins, but ours would be a very sick and intolerant society if we are not permitted to criticise religions and their laws, Islam just as much as Judaism, Christianity or any other faith.
Where this comes to an end, of course, is where such criticism spills over into hate speech directed at individuals or collective groups, yet it is excessively restrictive to imply that a verbal attack on certain religious principles should be construed as an attack on its adherents.
Such a linkage undermines the perfectly reasonable exercise of freedom of speech.
In conclusion, the legalisation of a definition of Islamophobia designed to limit severely our abilities to express our views which do not disseminate hatred against people of any faith or none must be opposed at all costs.
