And again, double standards and political-correctness win out.
Sure, it's irritating to have a group of Christians walking around handing out leaflets, but it's no hate crime. Also, I doubt that Muslims would be forbidden from doing that, since to deny thme that right (sorry, priviledge) would offend them.
Muslims and their ability to be offended by anything (apart from the clerics, who know better but like to rabblerouse) are classic reminders that just because you find something offensive, doesn't make it offensive or intended-to-be-offensive! Examples include:
The Three Little Pigs,
Teddy Bears,
a picture of Mohammed (especially one of him standing there doing something mundane),
and two Christians preaching in a "Muslim area".
And when is it a "Mussim" area anyway? It's just an area - no religious group owns it, and there are others who live there who aren't Muslim. Again, it is not a "Muslim area", it is an ENGLISH area, if you really must describe it with something.
Not that I wish to turn this into a culture row, or anything, but another good example is the St. George flag. Now, if you believe it is a symbol of racism, then you're perfectly okay to say that, since it isn't a hateful opinion, but just a normal, non-hateful opinion. However, people can be wrong.
Opinions are only opinions.
Someone may find it offensive, but that doesn't make it offensive, does it? No, no, and no.
And how they thought of it as a symbol of racism is beyound me; just because a generation of people who flew the flag were racist, it doesn't mean the flag is racist, onr does it mean the entire race is racist (in case you hadn't guessed, that WOULD be a racist stereotype).
In this particular case, the only thing one could find offensive about the flag is that it celebrates a bloke who commited animal cruelty toward a dragon!
And what about the flag of, say, Turkey? That contains the Islamic Moon, and that's allowed to be flown, despite the fact that Islam IS offensive and oppressive.
This is an example of "offensiveness" that many Britons will identify with, and again, it proves my point: just because I find something offensive, doesn't make it so - it has to be ARGUABLE that it is offensive.
I mean, say a fifth of the population found pink offensive? Would that make it offensive? Would local Councils pass laws forbidding the wearing or use of pink? Nope!
So why here?
(And, also, how is dealing with Islam an issue of race? Islam is a religion and "cultural" foundation, not a race or ethnic group. Anyone with a brain cell can see this.)