Isn't a religion which calls for punishment of non-belief, impiety, apostasy, female uppityness, blasphemy and heresy a standing hate crime? Isn't a religion which labels non-believers by the derogatory term "kafir" a hate crime? Isn't demanding that expressing hostility to a hate crime such as that be banned through the UN a hate crime in itself?

The LEGAL term "hate crime" should apply only to expressions of ridicule or hostility to human beings in the basis of accident of birth or physical difference. Everyone has a right to protection from this. But no ideology does, and a religion is an ideology just as atheism is.

The hoo-ha over 'the film' is a hate crime where it has been expressed by violence. Seeking to proscribe remarks - no matter how cack handed they are - because they are responded to by violence is giving in to violent bullies. Instead, proscribe the violence and punish the bullies.

I find the notion of blasphemy laws, let alone global blasphemy laws monumentally scary. A giant step back wards.

How can being 'offended' take away or reduce a person's belief in their own religious convictions?

What about my right, as an Atheist, not to be 'offended' by religious people? I'm being offended all the time and I don't even have a deity to pray to to smite these characters down.

So they have God on their side AND they want man made laws on their side. Sounds like a bit more spiritual reflection is needed and praying and trust in their Gods.

Well put, Emperor Julian.
Even Cicero could not have said it better.

Good thoughtful article. Thankyou.
For me the key ideas of my sort of society are free speech, democracy and equality of all. It is those things that all of us have because we are heirs of generations of people who have stuggled against intolerance, prejudice and domination. I put it badly but you all know what I mean.
The big immediate point relevant to this article is that when a reference is made to international human rights we are faced with an overarching ambiguity: which set of Human Rights, the Eleanor Roosevelt inspired set of 1948(?) that are based on the assumption that each of us has rights simply because we are human? Or the so called Cairo Declaration which is the Islamic version of Human Rights. In that document we only have the rights allowed to us under Sharia Law. They are hence not human rights at all but a sort of religious hand out.The Islamic countries will act on their own set of rights, and they are totally different. And for me far far worse and a threat to all that I hold dear.

"Cultural relativist arguments have traditionally arisen when non-Western countries attempt to resist the recognition of co-called "Western" human rights standards, for example those regarding women's rights, same sex rights, political freedoms, or the death penalty. (The last example demonstrates that it is in fact simplistic to view human rights as Western concepts given the US is one of the most prolific remaining users of the death penalty)."

Garbage; the crucial thing is due process and equality before the law; after that the result may be the death penaly for the convicted; or future victims like Jill Meagher.

There is no equivlence between an execution in China, Iran, Saudia Arabia etc and the US. To say otherwise is a dreadful example of cultural relativism.

Be interesting to see where it lead if religion became truly subject to constraints around hate speech.

From what I've seen of the teachings of Islam there is plenty in there which qualifies.

I'm more familiar with the Christian protestant teachings which claims that all people are so bad that they deserve an eternity of torment and suffering (excused if you are part of their faith). Teaching that claims that the best any of us can do is just dirty rags before their god. Teachings that in the old testament which demanded violence against people for all sorts of infractions against the demands of their god. Bulk hate speech.

If there was some kind of universal blasphemy laws then it would be interesting to see how those laws coped with the claims by each faith about different faiths. Would it be blasphemy to make claims which attacked the belief that there is no deity or would blasphemy laws on protect the sensitivities of those who believe in an unproven god?

R0bert