This article analyses whether an incitement to religious hatred law can ever be reconciled with the effective protection of free expression on the basis that freedom of expression and religion are rightly viewed as two fundamental cornerstones of any modern liberal democracy.  Both represent vital components in the realization of personal autonomy, providing an important basis for the determination of political structures and thus it is argued may ultimately advance the Millian truth principle. In an era where societies attempt to embrace multiculturalism the conflict between these two values is of particular resonance.
Norris takes the debate from an examination of the guiding rationale justifying the need for an incitement to religious hatred law to whether such laws can in theory be specifically tailored to ensure that free speech values are not unduly sacrificed.  Highlighting practical safeguards necessary to ensure an incitement law strikes the appropriate balance between religious and expressive freedoms.