Australia’s Largest Christian News Site

Sydney Archbishop Kanishka Raffel has accused Senator Pauline Hanson of “hateful words”, igniting debate over radical Islam, free speech, and whether criticism of ideology constitutes incitement under new hate speech laws.

The Anglican Archbishop of Sydney, Kanishka Raffel, recently issued a public statement in response to the comments made by Senator Pauline Hanson regarding radical Islam’s incompatibility with the values of Western democracies such as Australia. Significantly, the title of the Archbishop’s statement was, “We must reject hateful words and threats of violence”.

The statement begins by declaring that Senator Hanson’s remarks were “foolish and dangerously divisive” and then, in the second paragraph, immediately links them to “threats of violence against the Lakemba mosque”. Significantly, nothing in the public statement seeks to clarify Senator Hanson’s comments, but instead implies that her motivation was only one of hate, with the subsequent result of inciting violence.

In light of the recent hate speech laws passed by the federal parliament, these are incredibly serious accusations to make against a sitting Senator, as well as those formally associated with them. What’s more, they also demonstrate how these laws might well be weaponised and impact someone’s right to freedom of speech.

Hate Speech or Honest Debate?

Is Senator Hanson guilty of hate speech, though, due to her use of “hateful words” and inciting “threats of violence” for questioning the compatibility of radical Islam with traditional democratic values? If so, then Senator Hanson—as well as anyone belonging to One Nation—could legitimately be classified as a hate group or even a terrorist organisation.

Unfortunately, many in the media—including Archbishop Raffel, it seems—have taken Senator Hanson’s words out of context by stating that she said there were “no good Muslims”, full stop. However, Christian leaders in particular should always seek to speak truthfully by accurately representing what someone has said.

Below is a transcript of Senator Hanson’s exchange with the journalist Sharri Markson:

Senator Hanson:          Sharri, we’re in a situation where you can either go down one path, and we will reap the rewards of our tough stance against Islam and the radicalisation that we will be facing.

Or if we open up the borders and allow more into this country, we’re going to suffer. Future generations will, as other countries have, like France and Denmark and England… and Canada. All these ones who thought, ‘Oh well, we’ll welcome them.’

I’ll tell you what, I’ve got no time for the radical Islam, their religion concerns me because of what it says in the Qu’ran. They hate Westerners, and that’s what it’s all about.

You know, you say, ‘Oh, there’s good Muslims out there.’ Well, I’m sorry, how can you tell me there are good Muslims if jihad is ever called, and people must understand this. Go and research, go and understand about this.

The ones who will suffer, as those Jews did on [October 7]… when they were murdered and slaughtered. And that’s what we’ve got to realise could happen.

Sharri Markson:            Pauline, there are a lot of moderate Muslims in Australia who are, as you put it, ‘good Muslims’, but I think we agree that radical, extremist Islam that doesn’t support Australian values has no place here.

Pauline Hanson:          Correct, I did mean that.

As Senator Hanson immediately clarified, as well as in later interviews, she was not saying all Muslims were immoral people, but was instead referencing the cultural implications of fundamentalist Islam. Sadly, this is a crucial distinction that Archbishop Raffel has failed to properly understand about Senator Hanson’s argument and of which I have written about further here.

Senator Hanson expressed deep concern about the return of ISIS brides to Australia and radical Islamic immigration; she pulls back on her “No Muslim is a good Muslim” statement, qualifying it in a more moderate and nuanced way at the 3-minute mark in this video:

All Christians believe that everyone (regardless of someone’s religion) has sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (e.g. Rom. 3:23). This is not the point at issue because in a theocratic religion like Islam, being a ‘good Muslim’ is not the same thing as being a good ‘bloke’. Rather, being a good Muslim means seeking the full implementation of Sharia law upon the rest of society.

The Anglican Archbishop of Sydney should stop and consider the impact radical Islam has had in countries around the world where it has gained political power. All Muslims would acknowledge that in Australia, they are currently in an “abode of war” (Dar al-Harb). The strategy is to, by all means possible, promote the ideology of Islam until it reaches an “abode of Islam / peace” (Dar al-Islam).

Speaking the Truth in Love

There are obviously many moderate Muslims who—while being sinners like the rest of us—do morally ‘good’ acts. The real issue is, and this was the point Senator Hanson was trying to make: are ‘good’ Muslims bad for democracies such as modern Australia?

Christians in particular should first and foremost seek to represent the views of other people accurately and with fairness. To disagree with, let alone critique, the political implications of radical Islam, though, is not ‘hate speech’, but instead, an act of speaking the truth in love.

While unfortunately lacking much-needed nuance, Senator Hanson’s comments were clearly not motivated by hatred towards Muslim people, but rather out of a love for the future of Australia. And for the Archbishop of Sydney to suggest that her words were responsible for inciting acts of violence is especially egregious.

___

Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.