Islamist extremists in Bangladesh have hacked to death several atheist bloggers in recent years. In the territory it controls, Islamic State takes non-Muslims as slaves. Today it seems the greatest threat to freedom of conscience is religion itself, especially in the form of radical Islamism, which seems every bit as intolerant and tyrannical as the Inquisition in its pomp. In contrast, the modern, secular West prides itself on tolerating all religions and none, Islam included; despite fears of a misdirected Islamophobic backlash against terrorism, most people believe Muslims should be free to practise their religion without hindrance.

We like to think we have learned the lessons of the Inquisition and the religious wars of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and now value religious tolerance as the key to a peaceful and harmonious society. More than that, in the liberal tradition that has dominated Western thought since the Enlightenment, freedom of thought and speech has been seen as essential to the dignity of each individual. The philosopher John Locke argued in his 1689 Letter Concerning Toleration that the authorities had no right to tell people what to think or believe; it was unacceptable that people should ‘quit the light of their own reason, and oppose the dictates of their own consciences, and blindly resign themselves up to the will of their governors’.

Nevertheless, there are signs today that this liberal tradition is waning. It is not only Islamists who want to tell people what to believe, and nor are swords and suicide bombs the only means used to silence unwelcome ideas. Of all places, it is university campuses that pride themselves on a ‘zero tolerance’ approach to speech and beliefs deemed harmful to students, with sanctions on religious societies for holding anti-abortion events or imposing sex segregation at their own meetings. Meanwhile, there is pressure on academics to keep tabs on potentially ‘radicalised’ students. Beyond the universities, the government is increasingly seeking ways to clamp down on extremism, with complaints from Christian groups that aspects of the Prevent and British Values agenda in schools undermine values promoted in faith schools.

At the same time, equality legislation has led to demands to circumscribe religious groups’ rights, with prosecutions of those whose alleged discrimination for religious reasons against gay people, such as the recent controversy around the Christian-run Northern Irish bakery Ashers, which refused to make a cake with the slogan ‘Support gay marriage’. Meanwhile, earlier this year a family court judge ruled that the seven-year-old son of a Jehovah’s Witness should be taken into care because his mother caused the child ‘emotional harm’ by ‘immersing’ him in her ‘religious beliefs and practices’. Meanwhile, of course, many religious people themselves are not above demanding censorship to protect their own sensibilities from hurt.

So are the Enlightenment concepts of freedom of conscience and tolerance no longer relevant to the modern world?