Sir Keir Starmer Under Pressure to Scrap Angela Rayner’s Plan to Roll Out Official Definition of Islamophobia
Keir Starmer is under fire to ditch Labour’s Islamophobia definition, with fears it could curb free speech on grooming gangs. The Sun has the story.
Top Whitehall staff are considering ways to “quietly drop” Labour’s manifesto promise, the Sun understands.
But insiders said that binning the definition will require Downing Street, who are still wedded to the idea.
They said the main stumbling block is the huge number of MPs whose constituencies can be swayed by Muslim voters.
A Government source told the Sun: “We want to bury the Islamophobia definition – we believe that current equalities laws already fully cover issues around prejudice against Muslim people.”
Campaigners have warned that a new islamophobia definition would crush freedoms to criticise political Islamism – and would even risk the ability to talk about grooming gangs.
Worth reading in full.
Stop Press: Communities Secretary Steve Reed, who has inherited Angela Rayner’s plan to roll out an official, state-approved definition of Islamophobia, has told the Telegraph he will overrule advisers on defining Islamophobia if it stifles free speech. “People don’t have a right not to be offended,” he says.
Stop Press 2: Jacob Mchangama has written a good comment piece for the Telegraph on why it’s a calamity for free speech that the knifeman who attacked Hamit Coskun for burning a copy of the Koran has been given a suspended sentence.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Islamophobia: a made up word.
Phobia, meaning irrational fear or dislike
Based on the available evidence not least of which is the thousands of female white children who have been systematically abused by predominantly Islamist men, it would appear that a fear or dislike of Islam is far from irrational.
Islamophobia: law specifically designed to cover up any crime committed by Muslims.
What else could possibly be its purpose?
Protecting minorities? Bollox. Jews are openly abused and nobody cares. Christian preachers are arrested by the police.
They returned from the ride, with New Labour inside,
And the smile of the face of the tiger.
“You have a choice – you can convert to Islam, pay the jizya, or die.”
“But I don’t even agree with Islam.”
“I perceive your criticism of muslimness. Before you die, the law of the land says you’re under arrest for racist Islamophobia.”
“It’s a fair cop officer – our elected Parliament passed the law, and Sharia operates alongside it.”
Are you talking about the religion of peace?
If we turned the tables and treated Muslims the same way they’d treat Christians in their countries of origin ( e.g Pakistan, Afghanistan, Syria etc ) then we wouldn’t even have any problems in the first place because they wouldn’t want to come. What better deterrent? Coming over here no doubt elevates the status they had back home so they get a superior quality of life as soon as their feet touch the ground. I hate Islam, though I don’t hate all Muslims because I know there are decent ones out there, but if you’ve proven that you have no respect for us and have no intention of integrating ( and how much more proof than the Pakistani rape gangs do we need? ) then remigration it is, I don’t care if you’ve got citizenship. Revoke the bloody thing, especially if you’ve committed a crime. This slimeball in Germany illustrates well how the rates of sex crimes are increasing all over Europe. They come over here with their entitled attitudes, thinking their needs take precedence over the safety and rights of females and that the law is in the wrong if they don’t facilitate this degenerate behaviour. But they don’t… Read more »
That’s exactly it.
Mark of the beast?
Definite no no and a line in the sand. How can you have a law to protect a religion that is alien to the vast majority and not have one to protect the official religion of the country! Absolutely ridiculous! We abolished the blasphemy laws, and now we want to introduce one’s to protect a completely different religion! Really?
We just don’t need backdoor blasphemy laws that our two-tier justice system will only use to protect one group.
The recent decision to in effect, let off an attacker armed with a knife, kicking his victim on the floor, with a warning (suspended sentence) was absurd.
Why can this man walk away from a brutal knife attack when the courts have vowed to crack down on knife crime. He even lied to the police claiming to have brandished a cake slice in his anger, as opposed to a kitchen knife.
He was only charged by our two-tier justice system with common assault. Meanwhile a housewife gets 31 months for an unpleasant media post.