Being an arse is not very polite but it should not be against the law.
We have laws (the Racial and Religious Hatred Act of 2006, I think) against inciting religious hatred. What about plain hatred? I don't think that one kind of belief - or any other mechanism for the classification of people - should be preferred when it comes to passing laws against inciting hatred towards people so classified.
You will note that it is the hatred against persons that is illegal, not against the belief itself. In other words: hate the religion, love the sinner.
If the girl was intending to be an arse, that's fine. If her _intention_ (much harder to prove) was to cause others to hate a group of people based upon their religion, then she falls foul of this. I'd say that was nigh-on impossible to demonstrate.
Incidentally, there is a ray of hope in all this:
[[[ 29J: Protection of freedom of expression
Nothing in this Part shall be read or given effect in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents, or of any other belief system or the beliefs or practices of its adherents, or proselytising or urging adherents of a different religion or belief system to cease practising their religion or belief system. ]]]
no subject
We have laws (the Racial and Religious Hatred Act of 2006, I think) against inciting religious hatred. What about plain hatred? I don't think that one kind of belief - or any other mechanism for the classification of people - should be preferred when it comes to passing laws against inciting hatred towards people so classified.
The act itself is here:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/1/schedule?view=plain
You will note that it is the hatred against persons that is illegal, not against the belief itself. In other words: hate the religion, love the sinner.
If the girl was intending to be an arse, that's fine. If her _intention_ (much harder to prove) was to cause others to hate a group of people based upon their religion, then she falls foul of this. I'd say that was nigh-on impossible to demonstrate.
Incidentally, there is a ray of hope in all this:
[[[
29J: Protection of freedom of expression
Nothing in this Part shall be read or given effect in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents, or of any other belief system or the beliefs or practices of its adherents, or proselytising or urging adherents of a different religion or belief system to cease practising their religion or belief system.
]]]
Well, thank god for that.