How do you answer the concerns of Christians that it will restrict their right to criticise gay “lifestyles”?
The government has answered those concerns in the way they framed the legislation and, as far as I’m concerned, they got the balance right. The fact that there is a requirement for intent and that it must be threatening language or behaviour seems to me to exactly answer the point. It means anyone who is expressing themselves in a reasonable way, even if what they’re saying is wholly abhorrent to most right thinking people, will not be get caught under this law, unless what they’re saying is an incitement to hatred against a whole class of people. That’s what we were trying to achieve. If you want to get legislation that works then you have to secure at least broad agreement about its content and so I was concerned that we did ensure as far as possible that people were happy with what emerge. Last year Lib Dem peer Lord Lester successfully amended the religious hatred bill to protect freedom of speech. Will something similar happen here? Well, Lord Lester’s amendments on the religious
