It is with a heavy heart that, as a practising Christian, like (hopefully) the majority of Maltese, I learned that the government, in its eagerness to modernise and secularise, is planning to decriminalise the vilification of religion. This, in practice, means that, in the (much-abused) name of ‘freedom of speech’, anyone can offend, scorn, insult and actually ‘vilify’ another person’s religion, his religious beliefs and related morals with impunity.

Blasphemy (insulting God, the Mother of Jesus, and the saints) would seem to, thus, become considered an innocuous practice, like saying good morning.

This new freedom of speech is intended to apply in respect of all religions. Of course, we Maltese must show that we respect all religions and do not discriminate.

Even in a secular State, such as Malta now professes to be, freedom of religion remains important

Or do we?

Through this new piece of legislation, are we not, in effect, discriminating against a large sector of the population, such as those (possibly the majority) who still cherish and practise their religion? In fact, will we not thereby discriminate in favour of those who are atheistic, overly secularist or downright hell-bent to attack religion? For, now, they will have a ‘field day’ freely vilifying our religion, including the religion St Paul brought to us Maltese just 30 years after the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.

One’s freedom given is another’s freedom taken away. I shudder to think what will happen in artistic activities and on the stage.

So the new proposed law is less ‘liberal’ than it looks. It is liberal for some but oppressive for others. Where is the balance? Democratic laws usually seek to strike a balance but here we are going to the extreme.

By removing punishment for vilification of religion, the proposed law will, in effect, be discriminatory against those who wish to practise their faith freely and without interference and without being embarrassed because of it.

This new freedom will have a profound impact on activities of public worship. There must be some checks and balances inserted in the law to prevent serious incidents. It should at least be an offence not only to disrupt but to obstruct, interfere with or in any way cause embarrassment or offend any group gathered together for, or during, a public religious function, whether outdoors or in places of worship.

Places of worship should not fall within the ambit of this law, which, in any case, is harmful not only to the spiritual well-being of the faithful but also to civil society as a whole.

There should be provisions to restrain theatrical representations that constitute ‘blasphemy’.

This new freedom will, no doubt, be indiscriminately used and abused of mostly by those who are inclined to hate, deride or seek to suppress religious practices for their own ends.

This includes certain secret societies, satanic sects, ‘militant atheistic categories’ and some extreme secular movements determined to distract and obstruct people, especially the young, from the practice of any faith but, particularly, the Christian religion.

What about freedom of thought and freedom of religion? Will these be guaranteed? If I am not free to think, feel, act and believe in accordance with my faith because I am constantly or frequently heckled, challenged and even insulted and made fun of because of my faith, is that true freedom?

And if, during the actual practice of one’s beliefs, such as making the sign of the cross in public, attending an open-air Mass or participating in a religious procession, one constantly risks encountering someone (an individual or a group) who can feely and liberally show disdain, ridicule and vilification without having any redress, is that not a State-sanctioned intrusion into freedom of thought and freedom of religion?

Even in a secular State, such as Malta now professes to be, freedom of religion continues to be important.

Joseph Pace is a lawyer and a member of Men for Christ