Not really, since the person who wrote the play, and the people who are protesting against the play all come from the Sikh culture.

The culture issue is a big red herring, so is the idea that the issue is complicated and all the other flimsy attempts to disguise the issue at stake here. The simple and basic right of freedom of expression is just that - simple.

It would not have mattered what the play was trying to say or what those who were trying to prevent it were trying to say. The right of freedom of expression - guaranteed by legislation to all those who live in the UK - means that both sides have the right to say exactly what they wish to - but neither side has the right to prevent, limit or inhibit the other's right to say it. Nor should those that make this attempt have excuses made for them.

There are many other tactics that are used by those who would try to justify and limit this freedom and they are all baloney. I suggest that Kevin's problem is that he is worried that a clear and simple outright defence of freedom of expression in this matter, may make it difficult to continue to support its limitation by others elswhere.

You can dress-up the quibbles and try to make them more presentable. By questioning the language used or limit where or when it can appear (in order to protect children, old folk or the cat) but accepting the freedom that you may have, to say and do as you wish - is also open to everyone else - is scary concept. It is obviously far too scary for some of us...................