The mark of a truly free society is equality before the law. If it is okay to mock Christianity, then it is okay to mock each and every other religion.
If it is not okay to mock Islam, then it is not OK to mock any other religion. If it is acceptable to take the name of the Lord in vain in contravention of the third commandment in Judeo-Christian teaching, then it is acceptable to take the name of the prophet in vain.
That is genuine equality, and we simply have not got it, any more than we have it in terms of equality between races and sexes. It is widely accepted that Christianity can be ridiculed and vilified but not Islam, just as it is accepted that men can be refused employment just because they are not women and that positive discrimination in favour of blacks is acceptable just because they are not white.
Such discrimination isn’t even covert, being openly embraced in the name of “diversity and inclusion”. Christians and white men are not, of course, included.
Even a twelve-year-old child was recently sent home from school because she wore a Union Jack dress to her school’s diversity day.
I have said at conference after conference that Reform will change that and will change it immediately once Farage arrives at N010.
Angela Rayner, however, wants to double down to such an extent that there are fears that new legislation would effectively introduce a blasphemy law by any other name, thus severely dampening free speech.
Getty Images
| With radical Islam's hostile takeover near completion, white Christians need not apply - Ann WiddecombeWhy, for example, is it considered right and proper to criticise Christian priests over child abuse but not Asian grooming gangs over the same offence? Is that offence somehow less vile because of the ethnicity of the perpetrators?
Ironically, Christians have no interest in mocking the beliefs of Muslims and vice versa: it is the comics, the writers and the dramatists who lead the way.
Sometimes the mockery is gentle and funny, as in Goodness Gracious Me or the Vicar of Dibley, and sometimes it is unpleasant, brutal and unfair. The rest of us simply want to live and let live.
If Rayner goes as far as is predicted, then even rational criticism, such as all religions must face, could fall foul of the law.
This is a Christian country with a Christian heritage and culture, and that should be celebrated, but if it is acceptable to criticise the Catholic Church for its teaching on, say, abortion or contraception, then it is equally acceptable to criticise Islam for its attitude towards women.
In an ideal world, we should all be free to proclaim our faith, but should accept that with freedom comes responsibility.
It is not a contradiction to say that Charlie Hebdo should have been free to publish cartoons of the prophet Mohammed, but at the same time to say that they should never have been published.
As individuals, we should not need the state to restrain us, but should practice respect for all and all means all, not a favoured few.