Berkley Center

Although historically a Christian nation, religion does not seem to hold a prominent position in British politics or culture. I came to the United Kingdom expecting a country where religious beliefs are respected and do not serve as a source of controversy or division; my expectations have by and large been met. Political debates during this election period have not placed emphasis on questions of abortion or gay marriage, with their strong religious undertones. The Islamic Society at the London School of Economics (LSE) recently hosted "Experience Hijab Day" on campus, when numerous girls of various faiths sported blue hijabs in honor of International Women's Week and Muslim beliefs. Former Prime Minister Tony Blair publicly endorsed last week’s National Hindu Students Forum Sewa (selfless service) Week, praising the value of service in Hinduism. I have found that the dominant reactions to others’ religious beliefs are respect, acceptance, or apathy. When this apathy persists even in the face of radical statements and actions that threaten or oppose religious tolerance, it becomes a cause for concern.

A recent incident on campus exemplifies this issue. An article by Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa, a reader in LSE's Management Department, published in February stated that “half of Muslims worldwide are terrorists or active supporters of terrorism.” The director of the LSE, Sir Howard Davies, when asked to respond to this statement, said he “found these views ‘disagreeable’ but he was not about to censor what the faculty writes.” Some students spoke out about their disapproval of the school’s mild reaction to Kanazawa's views, which they insist are not based on empirical fact but merely opinion. After extended debate at the Student Union General Meeting, a move to denounce Kanazawa's views fell through. I found it surprising that outside of two articles in the newspaper, not much more attention was given to this strong and contentious statement made by an academic in one of London's leading universities.

In my previous letter I cited the public's angry reaction to the British National Party's (BNP) hateful and divisive statements as an example of the great importance placed upon equality and diversity in British society. Kanazawa's less prominent but equally objectionable public statement of religious intolerance has not been met with a reaction that parallels that elicited by the BNP. Respect for free speech is the primary justification for this inadequate response. This incident at the LSE is one of several cases I have found in the United Kingdom in which unfair treatment of or statements against a religious group have been justified and accepted as actions or statements in defense of such democratic values as free speech and equality before the law.

In January of this year, Nigel Farage, a leader of the Independence Party, stated that the party planned to prohibit Muslim women from wearing a niqab in public places and buildings. Farage responded to critics by saying that the policy was not radical and should “appeal to people who want to live in a country where there is one law and that law applies to everybody.” In February, an employee of British Airways who was not allowed to wear her cross at work went to court to appeal a ruling by the Employment Appeal Tribunal that stated that the British Airways policy did not constitute religious discrimination. The woman lost the appeal, and the judge stated that a “blanket ban may sometimes be the only fair solution” when an employee holds beliefs that may be opposed by others in the workplace.

In each of these cases, religious rights have taken a back seat to more widely shared values of freedom of speech and equal treatment under the law. Taken independently, these incidents do not seriously detract from the overall accepting and tolerant quality of British society. They do raise the question of what would happen if and when a choice between democratic and religious rights is posed with greater stakes at play.