Should religion be something you can denigrate?

The Herald reports:

New Zealand has imposed some of the world’s strictest blasphemy laws by stealth, a Humanist group says.

The new Harmful Digital Communications Act, intended to stop cyber-bullying, could have the effect of landing a person in jail for two years for committing blasphemy, the New Zealand Humanist Society said this week.

Not really, as it hs to be ham to an individual, not harm to a religion. But they raise a useful point:

The Act stated digital communications “should not denigrate an individual by reason of his or her colour, race, ethnic or national origins, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or disability.”

You can’t choose your colour.

You can’t choose your race.

You can’t choose your ethnic or national origin.

You can’t choose your gender.

You can’t choose your sexual orientation.

You can’t chose whether to be disabled.

But you do choose your religion.

Religion seems the odd one out to me.

If someone choose to be a Scientologist, I reckon I should be able to mock them for that choice, just as I can mock someone if they choose to join the National Front.