Oxford University Press Offensive Speech, Religion, and the Limits of the Law

Review All in all, this is an important text on an important topic. Balancing competing ideas about what is necessary in public life is not, as the author concludes, a straightforward, linear affair but this has made an important contribution to the ongoing debate. ― Max D Winthrop, Law Society Gazette Product Description Is the government ever justified in restricting offensive speech? This question has become particularly important in relation to communications which offend religious sensibilities. It is often argued that insulting a person's beliefs is tantamount to disrespecting the believer; that insults are a form of hatred or intolerance; that the right to religious freedom includes a more specific right not to be insulted in one's beliefs; that religious minorities have a particularly strong claim to be protected from offence; and that censorship of offensive speech is necessary for the prevention of social disorder and violence. None of those arguments is convincing. Drawing on law and philosophy, this book argues that there is no moral right to be protected from offence and that, while freedom of religion is an important right that grounds negative and positive obligations for the state, it is unpersuasive to interpret constitutional and human rights provisions as including a right not to be caused offence. Rather, we have good reasons to think of public discourse as a space for the expression of all viewpoints about the ethical life, including those which some will find offensive. This is necessary to sustain a society's capacity for self-reflection and change. About the Author Nicholas Hatzis is associate professor in law at the University of Nottingham. Previously, he was research fellow at Lady Margaret Hall, University of Oxford and referendaire at the Court of Justice of the European Union.