Both Islam and Christianity have forbidden their adherents to read certain books. To deny God has been called heresy with penalty of death. Scientists and philsophers have been condemed silence or even death for heresy if their findings contradicted Holy dogmas.
Look what is happening now in Islamic states. Look at the attempts in th USA by religious zealots to stop teaching evolution, or prevent women expressing their need for freedom of choice with abortion.
Religion threatens our freedom to choose to not believe in the writings of middle eastern trying to bring order to uneducated desert tribes.
Even though you are free to chose your religion and beliefs, some religious organisms can become a threat to freedom of expression; it also happens with some social groups though. Using as example homosexuality, some religious groups condemn them and make them a target of discrimination and hate, even though it is still a form of expression. Using another example, if an artist decides to produce a really controversial piece of art, that offends a certain group, this group can decide to take action and censor it as it happened with "Bacchante and Infant Faun" by Frederick MacMonnies which had to be removed from its original place because of the Women’s Christian Temperance Union in 1894. It might be an old example, but it is a way of looking how religious groups actions can affect freedom of expression.
Religion is not inherently a threat to the freedom of expression, but when those with a religious agenda get power, they often try to stifle forms of expression that go against their own religious belief. For example, some Muslims try to suppress anyone who makes a film against their beliefs; ultimately, this is not a problem with Islam (or any other one religion) but with the mentality that religion in general creates.
People can directly state that freedom of expression is a stupid idea and provide reasons for it, which is threatening. For religion, take the middle east for example - the divide between Jews and Muslims creates a threat to both of their freedoms of expression because of contradicting dogmas. Religion can be enforced 1984 style and suppress other people's opinions if it illegally stems from the government. After all, religion is the number one cause for wars, and surely the losers felt a bit of expression suppressed.
Freedom of expression seems to be such a valid human right that when initially asked if one believes it, your sure to find plenty of yes answers. The Christian churches of Europe helped to train most of Europe in what the church declared moral and just, therefore appeasing generations and keeping them under control. Their freedom of expression was undermined. However, this isn't the case with all religions. The Buddha, in the creation of Buddhism, declared to listen or read what he has written and decide for yourself. Buddhism does not tell you what to believe, it offers you ideas and let's you chose.
Religious people have there own beliefs and faith, however the majority of religious people are forced to conform to the ideas of their culture, family and holy values. Faith is only a belief but when that belief stops a person from expressing themselves through creativity or speech you know that their religion clearly is not a positive thing for them or anyone else.
Nobody really is sinless, so you never really know when someone will express something in a way that is inherently sinful. Besides, being religious cannot be imposed on a person but is rather their own choice. Everyone who is a Christian made the choice themselves. Even Billy Graham has a chance of doing that.
To ignore the responsibility to choose is to ignore the purpose of reason, to think that the religion is the cause of discord is to misunderstand the very idea of study. People need to choose before they can act it is a misapprehension that we won't decide, we must decide on something and the conflict comes not from the dogmas but the fact that whatever idea each of us have someone else will have a different and often unrecognisable idea.
This is a difficult answer to come by. It all depends where you are living. If you happen to be living in a Radical Islamic Nation the answer there is definitely yes. In most rational societies religion is not a threat to freedom of expression. If you studied most of the major religions of the world you will find that they represent unknown authors expressing their freedom of expression.
Religion is not harmful to freedom of expression, the only people potentially limited by it voluntarily subscribe to it (which is an expression in itself). Religion can be abused as a vehicle for people to further their own prejudices but religion itself is not the problem. If it were not one religion, it would be another as people will always find a way to be obnoxious about their beliefs. We cannot ban all religions as that would be such a gross limitation of expression in itself.
Freedom of religion is freedom of expression. People who are religious just want to practice their religion and not to be judged. Everyone still has their own certain rights. Nobody is going to take that from them and they shouldn't always be worrying about it. It is childish and I might even say stupid.
Freedom of expression is the foundation of a free society. In order to truly be free, citizens must be allowed to express their thoughts and beliefs without fear of state persecution. For this reason, the state cannot interfere with the free transmission of ideas, even those which criticize state policy. The right to practice one's religion is part of freedom of expression, rather than opposed to it.
No - religion is a way to express ourselves and as long as we can manage to do that peacefully, I think it's not a threat. Some nations and peoples have more trouble controlling their way of expression, but taking away religion from society would be far more dangerous in the long run.
When Christianity was introduced, it offended the religious beliefs of others.When Islam was introduced it offended and reviled the religious beliefs of others.I find it personally infuriating, such that I lose control of my actions and am no longer accountable.I'm kidding, of course, but I found it very disturbing to even imagine having such a notion of displaced personal responsibility.It is an extraordinarily foolish government that starts playing the game of film critic, so as to make the doomed attempt to appease people who see any criticism of Muhammad as a capital crime.
Having an opinion and expressing it, positive or negative, about Muhammad or any other claimed authority is a primary human right.