He does make
some good points.
All religions should be open to criticism and the laws of state should always be higher then the laws of religion.
However, it is important to make a distinction between offending people and causing hatred.
Offending People:
*note* All of the below is purely hypothetical.
If I drew a 1000m wide picture of the baby Jesus being raped then a lot of people would be offended. That would make me tactless and a git, but I should be allowed to do it and not be scared of people seeking revenge!
If I drew a 1000m wide picture of Mohamed dressed as a woman then a lot of people would be offended. That would make me tactless and a git, but I should be allowed to do it and not be scared of people seeking revenge!
Offending people can make you a tactless git, but it needs to be allowed so that peoples views can be challenged. What ever you say will offend someone in some way anyway!
You can't ban people from being offended either. People should be allowed to be offended as long as they are peacefully offended.
If you just offend a group people then no one will hate the people you are offending because of it.
Causing hatred:
*note* All of the below is purely hypothetical.
If I drew a picture of Jesus killing some Iraqi children alongside some American forces, then a lot of people would be offended. At the same time, some other people might agree with the messages in the image and this might cause them to hate Christians. No one should be allowed to create something that causes hatred in this way.
If I drew a picture of Mohamed as a terrorist (as in a Danish magazine), then a lot of people would be offended. At the same time, some other people might agree with the messages in the image and this might cause them to hate Muslims. No one should be allowed to create something that causes hatred in this way.
If you use slander to cause hatred against a group of people then that hatred can lead to acts of violence against them.