Written submission from the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain (HCL0015)

 

About the Council of Ex Muslims of Britain

 

  1. The Council of ex Muslims of Britain (CEMB) is a human rights and freedom of expression organisation, championing the rights of Ex Muslims, freethinkers, blasphemers, apostates and minority groups within Muslim majority countries. CEMB has an in depth understanding of the persecution faced by apostates and freethinkers, particularly in Muslim majority countries. CEMB demands that human rights be put before religious rights. CEMB challenges some of the harmful and outdate ideas within Islam, such as the execution of apostates, the rights of women and LGBT’s. Islam says that apostate and Blasphemers should be killed. Our organisation is made up of people who have publicly renounced Islam in order to break the Taboo that comes with doing so.

 

Opening Statement

 

  1. The Council of Ex Muslims of Britain (CEMB) opposed bigotry, prejudice and discrimination towards individuals or groups belonging to any religion or race. The preservation of the rights and safety of Muslims is essential and CEMB supports the efforts of the APPG on British Muslims in its efforts towards this.    

 

  1. CEMB does however have concerns about the use of the term Islamophobia and the proposed definition, which wrongly conflates criticism of Islam with bigotry towards Muslims. We believe that preventing criticism of Islam will:

      infringe on the right to free speech

      impact social cohesion

      will not solve the issues identified in the APPG on British Muslims report

 

Free speech, Islamophobia vs Anti- Muslim Bigotry

 

  1. An individual’s freedom of speech and freedom of expression deserve to be protected, however their ideas and belief require no protection. Ideas do not have feelings and cannot be harmed, hence require no protection. The right to freedom of speech and expression are markers of a secular liberal democracy and this must be protected.

 

  1. The Council of Ex Muslims of Britain (CEMB) firmly stand against the notion that any ideas or beliefs should be prioritised or safeguarded from criticism.  

 

  1. The term Islamophobia has entered the mainstream and often wrongly conflates legitimate criticism, discussions around various interpretations and sects with bigotry towards Muslims. There is an urgent need to separate the criticism of Islam and very real bigotry towards Muslims, as both are often lumped together under the same banner of Islamophobia.  

 

  1. In our professional experience, coming out as an Ex Muslim is a process. One does not wake up one day and think “I am going to be an atheist from now on”. This is partly due to the indoctrination from an early age and the risks associated with being an Ex-Muslim. Coming out is a long and difficult process, which in most cases entails mental health crisis’s and fear of being ostracised from one’s family and community at best and risk of being put to death at worst. As part of their journey, many ex-Muslims analyse Islam under a microscope, the pros and cons. Ex-Muslims become some of the most dedicated critics of Islam, which is part of their journey towards apostasy. Denying Muslim apostates, the right to analyse and criticise Islam, is an encroachment on their basic human rights to live and think how they choose. Furthermore, to claim that by criticising Islam, Ex-Muslims, apostates and blasphemers are encouraging harm to Muslims, fails to acknowledge that fact that they come from Muslim families and still very much care about the impact on their Muslim loved ones.

 

  1. There is a difference between criticising the faith and encouraging harm. By putting the two in the same bracket, the wrong people will be criminalised. 

 

  1. Accusations of 'Islamophobia' are often used to silence debate about and within Islam. Apostates, secularists, freethinkers and even secular liberal Muslims opposing religious and gender segregation in schools, forced hijab wearing, forced fasting and other harmful religious practices have all been condemned as 'Islamophobic'.

 

  1. False claims of islamophobia are often levelled when apostates, secularists, freethinkers and secular liberal Muslims discuss and explore the notion of LGBT, women and minority rights within Islam. Even LGBT and women’s rights groups are tarnished as bigots when they challenge the outdates ideas of Muslim cleric and Imams. The APPG on British Muslim’s definition of Islamophobia, will make it more difficult to Muslims within and free thinkers outside of Islam to drive any progressive change, without accusations of bigotry.

 

  1. Shamefully, anti-Muslim bigotry still exists in the UK and CEMB wholehearted condemns such behaviours. However, the suggested APPG definition of Islamophobia will only be exacerbated the identified problems, due to the vague and unworkable definition proposed.

 

  1. The APPG’s recommendations categorise important and fact based discussions around confirmed elements within Islam as “Islamophobic”, such as how Islam was spread, the fact that Islam does have a political wing and Mohammed’s marital history.

 

  1. The APPG document suggests that Islamophobia should be defined as a form of racism,

“Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a a type of racism that

targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness”

Expressions of Muslimness are effectively Islamic practices, such as fasting, hijab, proselytising and many other religious practices, which must be open to debate and scrutiny.      

 

  1. By criticising and debating such practices, we mean no harm to the individuals carrying out those practices. A similar example of such a matter was the debate around smoking. When discussing the matter of the harms of cigarettes and smoking, it was clear that the discussion was focussed on smoking, rather than vilifying smokers. In a similar manner, when debating or criticising Islam, many can separate the matter of Islam from the individuals that practice it.

 

  1. The APPG report claimed that they are keen to stress the need to avoid shutting down criticism of religion and are in favour of freedom of speech, within the constraints of their suggesting. However, the five tests suggested in the report to help determine whether speech is Islamophobic, along with the obscure definition suggested by the APPG will increasingly make legitimate debate about Islam very difficult.  

 

  1. Though confronting prejudice and bigotry on the grounds of race or religion are essential, the suggested obscure and vague APPG definition of islamophobia will undermine free speech and restrict critical public debates, further worsening existing prejudices identified in the APPG report. Civil rights are hard won and must not be compromised in attempt to safeguard and prioritise a set of ideas over individual liberties.    

 

  1. Ultimately, the role of government must be to ensure equality for all, safeguarding against abuse when it happens and not prioritising specific ideas over others, undermining equality, unity and community cohesion. Lastly to ensure that open, honest and unrestricted debate about ideas can occur, without accusations of bigotry, due to differences of opinions and ideas. 

 

 

 

January 2019

 

 

Laws to punish difference of opinion are as useless as thy are monstrous. Differences of opinion on politics are denounced and punished as seditious, on religious topics as blasphemous, and on social questions as immoral and obscene. Yet the sedition, blasphemy and immorality punished in one age are often found to be the accepted, and sometimes admired, political, religious and social teachings of a more educated period.

Charles Bradlaugh

___________________________________________________