There's a lot of parochial nonsense and apologia here.

"The incoherence of the Islamic texts and incompatibility with modernity means that they cannot withstand critical examination. Should this happen, the identity and coherence of their communities is threatened. For this reason, Muslims will not give up easily on this issue, though in this instance, thanks to the two pastors, they have failed."
-Oh yes, no bias there whatsoever. A person who starts by holding a priori that Islam is incompatible with modernity, and cannot stand any critical examination (read: admitting it is incoherent), is not debating on merits and in good faith. What a joke!

As someone who holds very critical views of the Koran and the mainline Hadiths, this is ridiculous indulgence. I’ve heard of playing to your audience’s prejudices, but if this is what passes for intellectual rigour in Christian circles these days, it’s no wonder that ministries have to resort to being more and more reactionary to keep up numbers. Only the Christadelphians seem particularly concerned about intellectual honesty anymore.

"And we always need to remind ourselves that the Muslim is our neighbour in need of Christ, even as we are disconcerted by specific Islamic teaching or reflect upon the terrible ongoing persecution of Christians in majority Muslim lands."

-Lovely and condescending.

"But how are Australians, and Christians in particular, to made aware of the challenge and ambitions of Islam?"

-How very telling. Of course the author is worried about Christians in particular. If the concern here was genuinely about robust debate, and not just preserving the last vestiges of Christian chauvinistic cultural superiority, then it wouldn't be Christians “in particular.”

Speaking of the monolithic ambitions of the Islam betrays the author’s prejudice. Not only does it admit blatant ignorance about the chasm of difference between the various categories of Islam, and the fact that there is no one single voice, it apes the same bigotry that has often been levelled at the Jews. If anyone where to speak so about “Jews” and “ambitions of Judaism” it would be rightly condemned as a anti-Semitic caricature

The silence from the left of politics on this denial of free speech was incredible. Where was Bob Brown, Kevin Rudd and the democrats. While at the same time we had the left defending and making a hero about a bloke who took up arms against Australia and yet being totally silent about the denial of natural justice in our own backyard. The hypocrisy is incredible!

If you're expecting reasonable secular people to be sympathetic to Catch the Fire Ministries, and other outlets of fundamentalist invective and dispenationalist conspiracy, you'll be waiting a long time. Most sane people can see through their veneer of outward Christian respectability, to the ugly parochial cultural warriors inside. Whatever the stupidity of the laws, there’s nothing untoward about them receiving censure.

That’s just the problem: there are reasonable arguments to be made against the Victorian legislation, but those arguments are obscured when agents of hatred try to disguise their attacks on Islam, as if they weren't being made in bad faith, with due regard for the diversity within Islam. With free speech comes some responsibility.

I’m not sure what you’re trying to prove by bringing up David Hicks though. I thought we were talking free speech, not habeas corpus? The Hick allegation is a standard attack from conservatives who so often confuse the issue of fairness with personal virtue. When they see anyone making an impassioned plea on behalf of an undesirable person, they (so unlike Jesus) can’t seem to get past the person, and see the abstract principles behind it. When the legal profession, teachers, doctors, philosophers - advocate the rule of law, they can't really be concerned about the demands of justice against arbitrary improsonment or camp x-ray, they must actually love and excuse Hicks. They suffer from the magic moral decay which everyone but conservatives, with their magic moral certainty, do not suffer.

Frankly I'm fed up with these kind of nonsense false dichotomies. You don't have to support the person to support the rule which abets justice for the undesirable. There is absolutely no need to apologise for that.

If anyone should be apologising it's the reactinaries, whose grasp of the elements of civil society and limited government appear to be so tenuous that they could throw out the law for mob rule, whenever it is convenient to their moralising sentiments.

The issue is extremism, not Islam, and it doesn't matter if it's intolerant Christian fundamentalism, Islamic extremism, Hindutva, Jewish irredentism or anything else - this is the curse of the modern era as we retreat into the past rather than head boldly into the mosaic of the future. It is simply not true to say that mostly Christians had a hard time under Islam - most of Islamic history, Jews and Christians were tolerated (yes, taxed too, but accepted as People of the Book) while the Christians set up the Inquisition or the Crusaders slaughtered Jews, Muslims and Eastern Christians for 200 years. Have a look at the Golden Age of Islam, especially in Spain, before 1492. Fortunately there's a lot of good people getting together in the Abrahamic tradition but sadly we don't hear much about it, except on Compass, and there are many moderate voices of Islam who get ignored in favour of the hate merchants.

Peter D. Jones, Hobart

BBoy. Surprised to see a blogger such as yourself pushing the view that any wowser offended by criticism should be able to have the critic arrested, fined and maybe gaoled. You should be looking in a mirror and examining how these lefty group-think contortions have taken you down this path.

This is probably what Runner was getting at, when wondering where the Bob Brown's etc were when the s**t hit the fan. I'm amazed that you still put solidarity with the left ahead of decency. Not only are these Muslims being too precious by half, but a person like you defending their right to silence their "competition", is puzzling. It's sad, and I'm not being sarcastic or ironical. You've really lost your "moral compass" on this one BBoy. Hope you sober up. Cheers.

My imaginary friend is better then yours.