Religion

The National Gallery has removed a picture from an upcoming major exhibition from its website over claims of antisemitic portrayal of Jews.

Albrecht Dürer's Christ Among the Doctors from 1509 depicts a story from the Gospel according to Luke of Jesus on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem for Passover, alongside a caricature of Jewish men from the synagogue.

The National Gallery had initially displayed the artwork prominently on its website advertising the upcoming exhibition without mentioning its portrayal of Jews. After the gallery was alerted to the fact by Jewish News reader Ralph Harris, it removed the picture online and highlighted the antisemitic representation in its gallery. A spokesperson said:

We are aware that the representation of the Doctors may cause offence and both the wall texts and the audio guide in the exhibition will acknowledge and address caricature and antisemitic portrayal in the painting.

We have removed the image and accompanying text from our online gallery of selected exhibited works as we felt that in this format there was not adequate space for the interpretation required for this work.

A Video on Demand ad for Salesforce, seen on All4 on 4 May 2021, began with a voiceover, stating, And now, a mini meditation. It then featured a woman working from home, trying to focus on her job despite her noisy home environment. The voiceover continued, Inhale serenity, exhale whatever's happening here. Now bring your focus back to your customer, Tom. The woman was then shown starting to levitate off her chair, in the lotus position, saying the name Tom in an extended fashion, with a long Om sound. The still-levitating woman then drifted out of the house, to a peaceful woodland setting, to carry on communicating with her customer online.

Three complainants, who believed that the ad mimicked a spiritual practice, in particular through the use of the elongated Om sound within the name Tom, challenged whether it was likely to cause serious or widespread offence.

Salesforce told us the ad was intended to be a humorous, non-religious portrayal of yoga and meditation, and was not intended to depict any specific religious group. They said they did not believe the ad would cause serious or widespread offence to viewers in general, or viewers of a particular faith.

In relation to the use of the elongated Om sound, Salesforce said that their research and understanding of the word indicated that it had been widely adopted as the unofficial symbol of yoga, and was increasingly associated with yoga, meditation and the wellbeing movement. They told us that they believed the use of the Om sound to be a common practice in non-religious yoga lessons. Salesforce said that they do not view the use of Om in their ad as depicting a sacred symbol or tenet of any faith, but rather as an aid to meditation, which they considered to be part of everyday usage of the word.

ASA Assessment: Complaints not upheld

The ASA noted that the ad was set in the context of a busy home-working environment, and considered viewers would understand that the character was attempting to relieve her stress and combat distraction by using techniques widely associated with yoga and meditation.

We acknowledged the complainants' concerns that some people might have objected to the depiction of meditation and the use of the Om sound in the context of the ad. However, we considered that viewers would be likely to interpret the ad as being a humorous representation of meditation practices which were widely associated with non-religious wellness or mindfulness techniques, used to help combat stress and maintain focus, and as a way of dealing with the pressures of working from home.

In that context, we considered that viewers were unlikely to find the use of the elongated Om sound in the name Tom to mimic or mock a specific spiritual practice, and we considered that the ad was unlikely to be seen as being derogatory to any specific religion. We therefore concluded that the ad was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence, and did not breach the Code.

Benedetta is a 2021 France/Belgium/Netherlands historical romance by Paul Verhoeven
Starring Virginie Efira, Charlotte Rampling and Daphne Patakia

A 17th-century nun in Italy suffers from disturbing religious and erotic visions. She is assisted by a companion, and the relationship between the two women develops into a romantic love affair.

When US Catholics got wind of the fact that provocative film director Paul Verhoeven's latest film, Benedetta , contains scenes in which a statue of the Virgin Mary is used as a dildo, Catholic reacted with outrage, and the Catholic League, headed by Bill Donohue, expressed horror over the glowing reviews the movie was garnering.

At the weekend the movie premiered at the 59th New York Film Festival, and those attending it had to run the gauntlet of noisy protesters who claimed the movie was blasphemous. It was reported that the protesters were repeatedly saying Hail Marys into megaphones.

The perennial Hindu whinger Rajan Zed is complaining about a UK beer label.

Kali Yuga East India Porter brewed by Nottingham based Bang the Elephant Brewing Co uses the Hindu goddess Kali's image on its East India Porter beer can.

Zed said that inappropriate usage of sacred Hindu deities or concepts or symbols or icons for commercial or other agenda was not okay as it hurt the devotees. He added:

Breweries should not be in the business of religious appropriation, sacrilege, and ridiculing entire communities. It was deeply trivializing of immensely venerated Hindu goddess Kali to be portrayed on a beer label.

Hindus were for free artistic expression and speech as much as anybody else if not more ...BUT... faith was something sacred and attempts at trivializing it hurt the followers.

Kurt Westergaard was a Danish cartoonist famous for creating the controversial cartoon of a terrorist, although not the Islamic religious character Muhammad as it is often claimed, wearing a bomb in his turban.

This cartoon was the most contentious of the 12 Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons, which met with strong reactions from Muslims worldwide who condemned the act, including Western countries.

After the drawing of the cartoon, Westergaard received numerous death threats and was a target of assassination attempts. As a result, he was under constant police protection.

In his later years, Westergaard had to live with a bodyguard at secret addresses.

Speaking to Reuters news agency in 2008, Westergaard said he had no regrets about his drawing. He said the cartoon had generated important discussion about the place of Islam in Western countries with secular values:

I would do it the same way (again) because I think that this cartoon crisis in a way is a catalyst which is intensifying the adaptation of Islam. We are discussing the two cultures, the two religions as never before and that is important.

The Minister for Indonesian Tourism and 'Creative' Economy Sandiaga Uno has announced plans to ban Fortnite in the country after the discovery of a user-created map that allegedly allows for players to destroy a building resembling the Kaaba, a sacred site for Muslims.

Epic Games made a statement on the Fortnite Middle East Facebook page clarifying that the map was in fact created by a community member in creative mode and the building cannot be destroyed on the map. We would like to emphasize that our team respects all religions and works closely with our game content makers to provide a safe gaming experience for all our players.

Prior to the statement by Epic, Sandiaga said that he heard the structure could be destroyed on the map and players would be awarded weapons and advancement through the level for destroying it.

The national police of Indonesia are working to track down the creator of the map.

Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill
Debated in the House of Commons on Monday 5 July 2021

Labour MP Naz Shah said in a Parliamentary debate:

Yes, people can go out and debate, discuss, disagree and even respectfully and vehemently oppose any historical figure, but when they defame or vandalise in a mob-like fashion statues of people like Winston Churchill who mean so much to millions of Britons who hold his efforts during the second world war so close to their hearts, that does threaten the cohesive nature of our nation. We cannot pretend that a western liberal democracy like Britain does not consider feelings when it comes to such situations while at the same time today passing a law through Parliament giving such importance to protecting statues based upon commemorative feelings.

As a Muslim, for me and millions of Muslims across this country and a quarter of the world's population who are Muslim too, with each day and each breath there is not a single thing in the world that we commemorate and honour more than our beloved Prophet, Mohammed, peace be upon him. But when bigots and racists defame, slander or abuse our Prophet, peace be upon him, just like some people do the likes of Churchill, the emotional harm caused upon our hearts is unbearable, because for 2 billion Muslims, he is the leader we commemorate in our hearts and honour in our lives, and he forms the basis of our identity and our very existence. In fact, the noted playwright George Bernard Shaw said about the Prophet, peace be upon him:

He was by far the most remarkable man that ever set foot on this earth. He preached a religion, founded a state206laid down a moral code, initiated numerous social and political reforms, established a powerful and dynamic society to practice and represent his teachings and completely revolutionised the worlds of human thought and behaviour for all times to come.

To those who say it is just a cartoon, I will not say, It's only a statue, because I understand the strength of British feeling when it comes to our history, our culture and our identity. It is not just a cartoon and they are not just statues. They represent, symbolise and mean so much more to us as human beings.

In conclusion, while this law would now protect civil order and emotional harm when it comes to secular and political figures such as Oliver Cromwell and Churchill and does not necessarily put other figures that many people in modern Britain hold close to their hearts, such as Jesus, the Prophet Mohammed, peace be upon him, Moses, Ram, Buddha, Guru Nanak and many others, it does show that we recognise that there is such a thing as emotional harm. Finally, we must ask ourselves: when striking the careful balance to protect such emotional harms, can there and should there be a hierarchy of sentiments?

The BBC published a report advocating government censorship of adult material in the name of preventing access by under 18s.

The BBC highlighted criticism of the government's failed age verification law by a concerned father and a student. The BBC misleadingly failed to mention that the concerned father was also a campaigning clergyman.

The BBC chose to foreground two people for their slanted reporting, one of them a man named Ioannis Dekas, only described as a father of four sons who allegedly became concerned after he found one of his boys had accessed pornography.

The report however, completely neglected to mention the fact that Dekas is a clergyman, which seems material to his participation in her piece. Dekas is listed online as Campus Pastor of Doxa Deo Community Church in London. His Twitter biography reads, Passionate about God, my family, the local Church, worship, music and Chelsea FC.

The BBC reporter also quoted another supposed authority who turns out to be the mouthpiece for a religiously-inspired nonprofit. Vanessa Morse is only identified as the head of the Centre to End All Sexual Exploitation. The group is not further characterized by the BBC in any manner that would be relevant to their opinions on the subject. In fact CEASE UK is a religiously-inspired sex work abolitionist group with an avowed mission to eradicate all pornography.

Pakistan s prime minister Imran Khan has called on Muslim-majority countries to lobby Western governments to criminalise insulting the religious character Mohammed. He said in a televised address:

We need to explain why this hurts us, when in the name of freedom of speech they insult the honour of the prophet. When 50 Muslim countries will unite and say this, and say that if something like this happens in any country, then we will launch a trade boycott on them and not buy their goods, that will have an effect.

Khan argued that insulting Mohammed should be treated in the same way as questioning the Holocaust, which is a crime in some European countries.

The address seems to be part of a response to violent protests by the radical religious group Tehrik-e-Labaik Pakistan (TLP) over protests against France over a row about French school children being taught about Mohammed cartoons that wound up the muslim world a few years ago.

Ofcom has imposed a fine of £125,000 on Loveworld Limited after a programme broadcast on its religious service Loveworld Television Network featured inaccurate and supposedly potentially harmful claims about the Coronavirus without providing adequate protection for viewers. This was the second time in a year that the broadcaster rules on accuracy in news, and harm in its coverage of the Coronavirus.

Ofcom considered these breaches to be serious, repeated and reckless, warranting the imposition of a statutory sanction beyond the direction to broadcast a statement of our findings that Ofcom issued in its Decision published 15 January 2021.

Ofcom's investigation found that the 29-hour programme, Global Day of Prayer , included statements claiming that the pandemic is a planned event created by the deep state for nefarious purposes, and that the vaccine is a sinister means of administering nanochips to control and harm people. Some statements claimed that fraudulent testing had been carried out to deceive the public about the existence of the virus and the scale of the pandemic. Others linked the cause of Covid-19 to the roll out of 5G technology.

Ofcom was particularly concerned that this breach followed previous, similar breaches in 2020 during the investigation of which, Loveworld Limited gave Ofcom a number of assurances as to how it would improve its compliance procedures.

Update: Ofcom jabs don't work

20th April 2021.  See article from ofcom.org.uk

Twice Ofcom has jabbed at Loveworld over silly coronavirus theories but clearly this hasn't worked as Ofcom have been offended again. Ofcom writes:

Ofcom has found Loveworld Limited in breach of broadcasting rules on its religious service, Loveworld for a third time. Ofcom found that during two episodes of a current affairs programme, Full Disclosure , presenters made a number of materially misleading and potentially harmful statements about the coronavirus pandemic and vaccines, which were made without scientific or other credible basis, and which went without sufficient context or challenge. Ofcom's investigation has found these programmes breached Rules 2.1 and 2.2 of the Broadcasting Code .

It is legitimate for broadcasters to discuss and scrutinise the public health response to the coronavirus pandemic -- including the potential side effects of vaccinations -- and it is in the public interest to do so. But Loveworld's presentation of misleading claims without sufficient challenge or context risked potential serious harm to viewers, particularly at a time when people were likely to be seeking reliable information relating to the UK's vaccination programme.

This is the third time that harmful coronavirus-related content on Loveworld has broken Ofcom's rules. We recently imposed a £125,000 fine on the channel for a breach which also related to claims about the coronavirus pandemic. We have directed Loveworld to broadcast a summary of Ofcom's decision, and are now considering whether to impose any further sanctions.

One of the most illogical, unjust and unreasonable of the rules of PC culture is that muslims are granted the privilege of the authorities turning a blind eye to violence and threats of violence. Credible fear of violence is very much a trump card in governing people's behaviour, and so an informal modern day blasphemy prohibition has been allowed to trump historic rights to free speech.

The latest example from Batley in York is described by campaigners petitioning in support of a well meaning teacher who was caught up in a supposed transgression of the UK's de facto blasphemy law. The petitioners explain:

Keep the Religious Studies Teacher at Batley Grammar School.

The teacher was trying to educate students about racism and blasphemy. He warned the students before showing the images and he had the intent to educate them. He does not deserve such large repercussions. He is not racist and did not support the Islamiphobic cartoons in any manner.

This has got out of hand and due to this, students have missed out on lessons because of peaceful protestors . Them blocking off entrances did not allow teachers to work or enter the school. Think of those who would be affected due to this lesson spiralled out of hand? Teachers, The School, The Community, Children, the RS Teacher's family and his own financial stability since he will no longer be able to land a job due to the fact that his reputation has been tarnished.

See petition from change.org

The National Secular Society has urged Scotland's justice minister not to renege on a commitment to ensure a strengthened level of protection for free speech on religion in the current hate crime bill.

A vital free speech provision around religion has yet to be determined, even though it had appeared to be settled and a final vote on the legislation is likely to be just days away.

The NSS has long warned that plans to criminalise 'stirring up hatred' on the grounds of religion within the bill pose a threat to freedom of expression.

The Scottish parliament's Justice Committee had agreed to an amendment to protect expressions of "antipathy, dislike, ridicule and insult" of religion or belief during previous consideration of the bill. However, this now appears to be under threat after the launch of a last minute consultation on freedom of expression provisions in the bill. The consultation, which closed on Monday, lasted just four days.

The NSS and Edinburgh Secular Society have now jointly written to Humza Yousaf, Scotland's cabinet secretary for justice, over the issue.

The NSS said a free speech clause covering religion that only protected "discussion or criticism" would be "too imprecise" and go "nowhere near far enough to protect robust debate, satire, comedy and commentary about religions or beliefs".

It added that the law should "in no way serve to criminalise people for their opposition to ideas or protect people's beliefs from antipathy, dislike, ridicule and insult".

The letter argued that the "wide consensus and strong support" for the additional protection for speech about religion or belief should be reflected in the legislation. And it says it would be "unconscionable at this late stage to renege on additional free speech protections already agreed to".

Nergal is the frontman of the heavy metal band Behometh. He has just been fined about £3,500 for blasphemy for allegedly stamping on artwork that depicts the Virgin Mary.

Nergal posted the photograph from a shoot for his Me And That Man project on Facebook in 2019.

He has now disputed the presumably lower court claim and the case is now expected to proceed to a full trial. If found guilty the frontman could face up to two years in prison.

Conservative legal group Ordo Iuris and an organisation known as Towarzystwo Patriotyczne (The Patriotic Society) claim to have notified authorities that Nergal had allegedly offended the religious feelings of four people, including a politician from Poland's ruling conservative coalition, when he first posted the photo.

The prosecutors' evidence was said to have been backed by the witness testimony of an 'expert' in religious studies who deemed that treading with a shoe on the image of the Mother of God is an offence against religious feelings.

The Scottish government is struggling to find  way of protecting free speech in a disgraceful blasphemy/hate crimes bill.

An amendment was recently proposed to tone down the destruction of free speech The Scottish government is now seeking further suggestions.

Earlier this week the Scottish parliament's Justice Committee approved several amendments to the bill, one of which would provide greater protection for freedom of expression on religion. But these proposals seem to have stalled due to parliamentary/party resistance.

Now the committee issued a call for views on four new options for freedom of expression protections, which have been proposed by the justice secretary who clearly has little interest in free speech. Only two of the options contain the agreed amendment on free speech on religion. The other two substantially dilute protection for freedom of expression on religion in comparison.

The committee has requested that views on the proposals be submitted by 10:00 this coming Monday (22 February).

The original amendment proposed that a conviction for stirring up hatred on religious grounds would require the prosecution to demonstrate that the accused had behaved in a manner which is threatening or abusive and intended to stir up hatred.

One of the new amendments would have provided greater protection to expressions of antipathy, ridicule, dislike or insult of religion or belief. But two of the four options now proposed only say behaviour would not reach the threshold for prosecution solely on the basis that it involves or includes discussion or criticism of religion.

National Secular Society chief executive Stephen Evans said the Scottish government's position was perplexing and farcical. He commented:

The level of protection for freedom of expression on religion in this bill appeared settled. The agreed amendment was a significant step in the right direction and the Scottish government shouldn't be reopening this.

This episode simply reinforces legitimate concerns that the bill will unacceptably intrude on freedom of speech. With this in mind, and amid a deeply confused and rushed process, MSPs should press pause on the relevant section of this bill.

Ofcom has fined Khalsa Television £50,000 in relation to its service KTV for failing to comply with our broadcasting rules. A £20,000 penalty relates to a music video. A £30,000 penalty relates to a discussion programme.

Music video

On 4, 7 and 9 July 2018, KTV broadcast a music video for a song called Bagga and Shera. Ofcom found that the music video was an indirect call to action for Sikhs living in the UK to commit violence, up to and including murder. It also included brief flashes, which, when slowed down, revealed frames of on-screen text. It appeared therefore to be seeking to influence viewers by conveying a message to them or otherwise influencing their minds without their being aware, or fully aware, of what has occurred.

Discussion programme

On 30 March 2019, KTV broadcast a live discussion programme, Panthak Masle. Ofcom found that this programme provided a platform for several guests to express views which amounted to indirect calls to action and were likely to encourage or incite the commission of crime or lead to disorder. Ofcom also found that it included a reference to the proscribed terrorist organisation the Babbar Khalsa, and which in our view could be taken as legitimising it and normalising its aims and actions in the eyes of viewers.

Sanctions

Ofcom has imposed the following sanctions on the Licensee:

• financial penalties of £20,000 and £30,000;

• a direction to broadcast a statement of Ofcom's findings on a date and in a form to be determined by Ofcom; and

• a direction not to repeat the music video or the discussion programme.

A new Amazon Prime series, Tandav ,  has resulted in calls for censorship in India.  Several politicians have complained about scenes that offended religious sensitivities.

Tandav is an Indian political drama along the lines of the Netflix series House of Cards . The main character of the series is a power-hungry politician who will do anything to become India's prime minister.

MP Manoj Kotak, a member of the ruling Hindu nationalist party Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), wrote on Twitter that he had contacted the Ministry of Information requesting it to ban the controversial web series. According to Kotak, the show seemed to be deliberately mocking Hindu gods.

Ram Kadam, another BJP member, went to the police in Mumbai to file a complaint, accusing Amazon of trying to outrage religious sentiments and publishing material that can cause harm.

A police investigation has already been launched in the state of Uttar Pradesh against Amazon's chief of Indian Prime Aparna Purohit and the show's director Zafar.

The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has announced that it would contact Amazon about the show.

 

Update: Tandav censored

21st January 2021. See article from hindustantimes.com

One scene from Tandav has particularly caught the attention of a few people, which shows actor Mohd Zeeshan Ayyub playing the role of (a modern day) Lord Shiva in a college play. Netizens claimed that it hurts religious sentiments. Another contentious scene involves characters played by Anuup Sonii and Sandhya Mridul, and the two talk about castes.

Tandav film makers have now agreed to censor out the material that offended the easily offended.

Pakistan is threatening to prosecute non-Pakistanis in foreign countries for breaking its blasphemy laws online.

The decision seems to be focused on Ahmadis, an Islamic offshoot whose beliefs are considered blasphemous in Pakistan. The Pakistan Telecommunications Authority (PTA) sent a legal notice to the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA demanding that it shuts down its website, trueislam.com, or get charged with blasphemy, a crime that carries a ten-year prison sentence.

The website trueislam.com is run by a US-based organization. So the legal notice is the government's way of saying that the Pakistan Blasphemy Laws can apply to non-Pakistanis and beyond the Pakistan territory.

On January 14, the US House Foreign Affairs Committee tweeted that it was very concerning to see Pakistan using attempts to apply its controversial cybercrime laws to repress Americans' freedoms of speech and worship well outside of Pakistan's own borders.

It is unlikely that the US will allow any such interference in US free speech but it Pakistan could arrest offending AMericans  if they travel to Pakistan or any other country friendly with Pakistan. And of course relatives of offending Americans who live in Pakistan could be persecuted.