Here is a better one

That last one is where I draw the line.

Cain killed Abel

Im a criminal

an abusive attack on the prophet of islam. so, blasphemy then.

In this instance, no @Joshu

How?

"Capable of stirring up prejudice."

The bible isnt evidence

The context

I have defamed cain

moses killed the midianites

You're not holding a seminar, claiming to be an "expert" on the religion, where the wording of the title of said seminar implies fact.

That's the difference

Right so if I held a seminar, as an expert, say a priest.

its not actually illegal to misrepresent history in an essay or lesson

If you lied / defamed someone that would be against the law. Yes.

The seminar is typical religious BS like "God is truth" or something

and then read from the bible

Stating that Cain did in fact kill abel

Lying isn't against the law.

I can now be arrested for preaching the religion

Defamation is.

defamation of a historical religious figure?

Again, read for it yourself

https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#%7B%22itemid%22:[%22002-12171%22]%7D

but Muhammad is not pressing charge

Should imams be arrested for preaching Muhammed had sex with kids?

When put in the context it was in, yes. @system11

Which you can read in there.

They are creating blasphemy laws

and not even that

Under very specific conditions?

Sure.

laws against even preaching

Conditions hardly anyone will meet, ever?

Sure.

one person meeting the condition for "Defaming" a prophet of a religion is too much

"Under common law, to constitute defamation, a claim must generally be false" If it was a UK Court, not the ECHR I'd argue that the onus would be on the court to prove the claim to be false, not that the claim did not have enough proof. But considering it is in Europe, good luck getting a fair trial on that.

Under the conditions in which it happened, it was fine.

That is another thing slen