And so the light of freedom continues to dim around the world lest the followers of the decidedly no-peaceful “Religion of Peace” become outraged.

The editor and publisher of a top English-language Indian daily have been arrested on charges of "hurting the religious feelings" of Muslims. The Statesman's editor Ravindra Kumar and publisher Anand Sinha were detained in Calcutta after complaints.

Muslims said they were upset with the Statesman for reproducing an article from the UK's Independent daily in its 5 February edition.

The article was entitled: "Why should I respect these oppressive religions?"
It concerns the erosion of the right to criticise religions.

In it, the author, Johann Hari, writes: "I don't respect the idea that we should follow a 'Prophet' who at the age of 53 had sex with a nine-year old girl, and ordered the murder of whole villages of Jews because they wouldn't follow him."

Now those are historical facts, attested to by Muslim sources. Why is it that stating that one is unwilling to follow the teachings of such a depraved individual constitutes a criminal offense? I personally think it constitutes common sense, as well as evidence that one adheres to superior system of moral values.

Interestingly enough, there have been no attempts to prosecute those who claim that Jesus was not the Son of God but merely a prophet, that he is inferior to Muhammad, and that he was a follower of the teachings of Muhammad even before the coming of that false prophet. As a Christian I am outraged by such statements, which are part and parcel of Islam and which hurt my religious feelings those of many other followers of Christ around the world. Could it be because we don’t find it necessary to riot and murder when we hear such offensive views expressed, but that we instead respect the basic human right to speak and believe free of government oppression or coercion – or the threat of violence by the followers of a barbaric faith that demands respect that it neither earns nor deserves.