On July 4, a group of neo-Nazis, reportedly led by Eddie Stampton, is planning to hold a demonstration (now moved from Golders Green to central London) to protest against "the Jewish occupation of Britain."

To get an idea of the rhetoric that the group might employ, I visited one website supporting this event. Here we find that adherents of this evil philosophy are calling upon their supporters to attend the gathering so as to "Stand up for the survival of the indigenous British people from Jewish instigated mass 3rd world immigration… protest against Jewish privilege, Jewish Shomrim police forces … ongoing mass Jewish immigration from France, Holohoax brainwashing … the Jewish control of the economy, banking, political parties, foreign policy, parliament, security forces, policing, academe, education, media, publishing, bookselling… sport and the Jewish promotion of pornography," all of which is blithely described as "the Jewification of Britain".

There have been passionate calls both from within Britain's Jewish communities and from across the broader political and religious spectrums for this neo-Nazi demonstration to be proscribed. A poll commissioned by the JC and published last week found that over 72 per cent of respondents want a ban on peaceful antisemitic demonstrations in Jewish areas . Well, I am not one of this 72 per cent. I do not want the demonstration banned. Utterly risible and abhorrent as I find the views of Stampton and his fellow travellers, I support their right of protest - provided that the protest is peaceful, and does not embrace a call to violence in any form.

Before I explain why, permit me to draw your attention away from the almost-comic antics of the latter-day stormtroopers led by Stampton, and ask you to consider instead the present government's grim determination to push through Parliament a "counter extremism" bill, which will give the Home Secretary the power to impose what are termed "Extremism Disruption Orders (EDOs)". These instruments of oppression could be used to ban any non-violent individuals and organisations of whose politics the Home Secretary disapproves; non-violent individuals whom the Home Secretary deems "harmful" would be subject to physical restriction orders; and broadcasters whom the Home Secretary suspects of publicising extremist material would find themselves subject to vetting controls.

Indeed, these vague EDOs appear to be so broadly defined that even supporters of traditional marriage such as my good self could be branded "extremists".

What we are talking about is censorship. I agree that in times of war this may well be necessary. But you would have to go back to the decade or so of repression that followed the Napoleonic Wars to find a comparable example, in the UK in peacetime, of the deliberate criminalisation of dissent. For that is what the legislation amounts to.

If people want to call me a bigot or a fanatic for believing in traditional marriage, that's their right. But they must not be given power to use the force of law against me in order to silence me. Or against you because, say, you publicly object to the intrusion of Islamist fundamentalism into our schools (wrongly but deliberately rubbished and dismissed as "Islamophobia"). Or against neo-Nazis because these louts cannot see their way to condoning the presence of Jews in London.

But what I find more shocking is the amount of support that the government's proposed legislation has garnered from self-styled members of the liberal intelligentsia. These worthies are gathering themselves in support of Prime Minister David Cameron's justification of the counter-extremism bill as a bulwark supporting "British values". I ask you: was suppressing non-violent free speech ever a legitimate British value?

Freedom of expression is indivisible. So is the right to give offence. The freedom of a neo-Nazi to protest against what he or she sees as Jewish influence in the UK is also my freedom to brand that neo-Nazi as a racist as well as an ignoramus.

Let the demonstration - always provided it is peaceful - go ahead. By all means mount a peaceful counter-protest. But we need to be careful lest we give the neo-Nazis the publicity to which their minute numbers do not entitle them. Instead, we should place our trust in the good sense of the British people, who I feel certain will give Stampton and his entourage the raspberry they so richly deserve.