The reaction to the Danish cartoons in the Muslim world gave rise to the question whether religious beliefs or religious feelings enjoy sufficient legal protection or whether a new balance between freedom of speech and protection of religion seems necessary. The author argues that religious freedom and peaceful co-existence of various religious groups is best secured by the secular constitutional state. Only by not identifying with one religion can it guarantee equal freedom to all religions. The secular constitutional state does not only respect religious freedom but also protects it against attacks by others. But the secular constitutional state cannot immunize religious beliefs from criticism, ridicule or denial of dick creed. Neither can it protect religious beliefs against an interpretation or presentation of their dogmata or symbols that differs from their self-understanding. Any limitation of free speech needs a secular justification. However, this does not prevent the state from protecting individuals or religious groups against speech that incites to hatred or humiliates persons or groups of persons because of their religion. The Danish cartoons were not of that sort.

Enthalten in:
Theologische Literaturzeitung; 2008/6 Monatsschrift für das gesamte Gebiet der Theologie und Religionswissenschaft (2008)

---

Serie / Reihe: Theologische Literaturzeitung

Personen: Grimm, Dieter

Schlagwörter: Religion Verfassung Pressefreiheit Religionsschutz