New Blasphemy Law in Ireland

Questioninggeller · 2nd August 2009, 03:55 PM

So much for repealing Blasphemy Laws. Recently Ireland passed a new one, as ABC News reports:

Quote:

New Blasphemy Law in Ireland
Monitoring the Illogic of Modern-Day Religious Persecution
ABC News
By JOHN ALLEN PAULOS
Aug. 2, 2009
...
Oddly though, almost no attention has been paid in the United Stares to the passing last month of a bill establishing a crime of blasphemy in Ireland.

Approved by the Irish parliament, it states: "A person who publishes or utters blasphemous matter shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable upon conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding 25,000 euro."

Furthermore, "a person publishes or utters blasphemous matter if (a) he or she publishes or utters matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion, and (b) he or she intends, by the publication or utterance of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage."
...

Full article: ABC News

Soapy Sam · 2nd August 2009, 04:02 PM

A top o' the mornin to yese and welcome to the 12th century.

lionking · 2nd August 2009, 04:39 PM

Oh my god!

Whoops

lionking · 2nd August 2009, 04:42 PM

Seriously, we in Australia don't have blasphemy laws I am aware of, but we do have a Racial and Religious Tolerance Act which has much the same effect:

Quote:

The purposes of this Act are-

(a) to promote racial and religious tolerance by prohibiting certain
conduct involving the vilification of persons on the ground of race or
religious belief or activity;

(b) to provide a means of redress for the victims of racial or religious
vilification;

Madalch · 2nd August 2009, 04:46 PM

Originally Posted by lionking

Seriously, we in Australia don't have blasphemy laws I am aware of, but we do have a Racial and Religious Tolerance Act which has much the same effect:

I don't think that's quite the same thing. You can't vilify or slander adherents of a particular faith, but you can vilify their deity all you want.

Apathia · 2nd August 2009, 04:50 PM

Well, I'll be damned!

lionking · 2nd August 2009, 04:52 PM

Originally Posted by Madalch

I don't think that's quite the same thing. You can't vilify or slander adherents of a particular faith, but you can vilify their deity all you want.

Yeah I know that, but blasphemy directed against a deity of a particular religion (eg Allah) would have you in trouble under this act.

a bit off-topic I agree.

Jeff Corey · 2nd August 2009, 05:01 PM

So who put the ham in Muhammed?

Beerina · 2nd August 2009, 06:18 PM

Someone should file suit to get the law thrown out (if that can be done there) using the argument that blasphemy is a crime against a god, not against humans or the religion they believe. It has nothing to do with outrage in the humans.

Thus you cannot commit blasphemy against the gods of two contradictory religions since at least one must be false. So charging you with blasphemy for talk against any god except the one(s) that actually exist cannot be blasphemy because calling, say, Odin a self-centered ass does nothing. (shut up!)

Now if they want to outlaw making fun of someone's religion to the point of outrage, they should call it something other than blasphemy.

BobTheDonkey · 2nd August 2009, 06:32 PM

While I understand and agree with the sentiments posted before...Ireland is still a religious battleground between Catholics and Protestants. We might not like the law, but perhaps it's what Ireland needs to enforce the uneasy peace it's currently experiencing?

slingblade · 2nd August 2009, 06:34 PM

Yep, nothing solves a dispute like repression.

lionking · 2nd August 2009, 08:53 PM

Originally Posted by BobTheDonkey

While I understand and agree with the sentiments posted before...Ireland is still a religious battleground between Catholics and Protestants. We might not like the law, but perhaps it's what Ireland needs to enforce the uneasy peace it's currently experiencing?

The trouble with this argument (which I don't think is that strong anyway as north and south have reconciled to a large extent) is that it will apply to heathen visitors like me.

westprog · 3rd August 2009, 08:19 AM

Originally Posted by Beerina

Someone should file suit to get the law thrown out (if that can be done there) using the argument that blasphemy is a crime against a god, not against humans or the religion they believe. It has nothing to do with outrage in the humans.

The reason for the law is that the Irish constitution had a provision against blasphemy, but there was no law that actually enforced it. Apparently an upcoming bill was potentially unconstitutional if there was no corresponding law relating to the blasphemy clause, so they brought one in. Why they made it so astonishingly draconian I don't know.

Whether there will ever be a successful prosecution remains to be seen.

Darat · 3rd August 2009, 08:22 AM

Given my experience of religious folk from Ireland I think they are right to be worried about this law...

Damien Evans · 3rd August 2009, 08:37 AM

Originally Posted by lionking

Seriously, we in Australia don't have blasphemy laws I am aware of, but we do have a Racial and Religious Tolerance Act which has much the same effect:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law_in_Australia

"It is unknown if Blasphemy is a crime in Victoria"

westprog · 3rd August 2009, 09:05 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheDonkey

While I understand and agree with the sentiments posted before...Ireland is still a religious battleground between Catholics and Protestants. We might not like the law, but perhaps it's what Ireland needs to enforce the uneasy peace it's currently experiencing?

Short answer - no, it has nothing to do with the Peace Process. I can expand if you want.

Pure_Argent · 3rd August 2009, 09:16 AM

Quote:

"a person publishes or utters blasphemous matter if (a) he or she publishes or utters matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion, and (b) he or she intends, by the publication or utterance of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage."

It is now illegal to speak in Ireland.

HansMustermann · 3rd August 2009, 09:30 AM

You know, I wonder how many hindus are offended by McDonald's menu...

I Ratant · 3rd August 2009, 09:35 AM

Originally Posted by Beerina

...
Now if they want to outlaw making fun of someone's religion to the point of outrage, they should call it something other than blasphemy.

.
Yeah, something like "rational discussion".

zooterkin · 3rd August 2009, 09:36 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheDonkey

While I understand and agree with the sentiments posted before...Ireland is still a religious battleground between Catholics and Protestants. We might not like the law, but perhaps it's what Ireland needs to enforce the uneasy peace it's currently experiencing?

This new law applies in the Republic of Ireland (Eire), not Northern Ireland.

Gord_in_Toronto · 3rd August 2009, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

You know, I wonder how many hindus are offended by McDonald's menu...

And how many Moslems by the fact that Christians don't accept Muhammad as a prophet of God?

And how many Christians by the fact that Moslems don't accept Jesus Christ as God's son.

Weren't there some problems about these issues at some point in history?

I Ratant · 3rd August 2009, 10:28 AM

A movie on Cinemax tonight:
The Reaping "A former Christian missionary debunks religious phenomena".
I expect this would fall under blasphemy.

Guybrush Threepwood · 3rd August 2009, 11:03 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheDonkey

While I understand and agree with the sentiments posted before...Ireland is still a religious battleground between Catholics and Protestants. We might not like the law, but perhaps it's what Ireland needs to enforce the uneasy peace it's currently experiencing?

Just to re-iterate what others have said, Ireland has had nearly 90 years of fairly easy peace with almost no religious conflict, so that isn't the reason for this, in fact it's very hard to say what the reason is.

It seems to be mainly there to plug a gap in the legal system since blasphemy is not allowed in the constitution, but there is no corresponding law against it. The logical thing would be to change the constitution, but this would require a referendum, and the government is already committed to one referendum this year on the Lisbon treaty, so I think the law was regarded as an easier way of removing the anomaly.

I don't think it will last long, if anyone is successfully prosecuted there will be enough outcry to get it removed, but it does make us look a bit backward on the world stage (again!)

Beerina · 3rd August 2009, 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

You know, I wonder how many hindus are offended by McDonald's menu...

Ya know, the US outlawed selling horses for horse meat, especially to other countries.

That's why laws should have expiration dates. To force elected officials to review them from time to time.

It was a ZOMG issue that some chimpanzees in government bloviated over, preening in front of the camreas, and they passed (yet another) law to make the masses of concrete canyon dwellers happy.

I Ratant · 3rd August 2009, 11:32 AM

Originally Posted by Beerina

Ya know, the US outlawed selling horses for horse meat, especially to other countries.

That's why laws should have expiration dates. To force elected officials to review them from time to time.

It was a ZOMG issue that some chimpanzees in government bloviated over, preening in front of the camreas, and they passed (yet another) law to make the masses of concrete canyon dwellers happy.

.
Such as these, passed in an frenzy by the new Congress way back when, putting even one of the architects of the Revolution in peril...
Acts
.
"There were actually four separate laws making up what is commonly referred to as the "Alien and Sedition Acts"

1. The Naturalization Act (officially An Act to Establish a Uniform Rule of Naturalization; ch. 54, 1 Stat. 566) extended the duration of residence required for aliens to become citizens to 14 years. Enacted June 18, 1798, with no expiration date, it was repealed in 1802.
2. The Alien Friends Act (officially An Act Concerning Aliens; ch. 58, 1 Stat. 570) authorized the president to deport any resident alien considered "dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States." It was enacted June 25, 1798, with a two year expiration date.
3. The Alien Enemies Act (officially An Act Respecting Alien Enemies; ch. 66, 1 Stat. 577) authorized the president to apprehend and deport resident aliens if their home countries were at war with the United States of America. Enacted July 6, 1798, and providing no sunset provision, the act remains intact today as 50 U.S.C. § 21–24. At the time, war was considered likely between the U.S. and France.
4. The Sedition Act (officially An Act for the Punishment of Certain Crimes against the United States; ch. 74, 1 Stat. 596) made it a crime to publish "false, scandalous, and malicious writing" against the government or its officials. It was enacted July 14, 1798, with an expiration date of March 3, 1801."
.
Number 4 particularly irked Thomas Paine, "malicious writing against the government" being what he did so well!

President Jefferson pardoned all those convicted under these when he took office.

westprog · 4th August 2009, 07:26 AM

Originally Posted by Guybrush Threepwood

Just to re-iterate what others have said, Ireland has had nearly 90 years of fairly easy peace with almost no religious conflict, so that isn't the reason for this, in fact it's very hard to say what the reason is.

It seems to be mainly there to plug a gap in the legal system since blasphemy is not allowed in the constitution, but there is no corresponding law against it. The logical thing would be to change the constitution, but this would require a referendum, and the government is already committed to one referendum this year on the Lisbon treaty, so I think the law was regarded as an easier way of removing the anomaly.

I don't think it will last long, if anyone is successfully prosecuted there will be enough outcry to get it removed, but it does make us look a bit backward on the world stage (again!)

The fact that there's a Lisbon referendum would mean that they could get the blasphemy provision removed for free.

An alternative would be to set the punishment as being so low as to not worry anyone. That would have been the simple and easy approach. However, the government are worried about looking soft on blasphemy. That the Greens have voted for this provision is mind-boggling. It's the point where they lost all self-respect.

Guybrush Threepwood · 4th August 2009, 07:33 AM

Originally Posted by westprog

The fact that there's a Lisbon referendum would mean that they could get the blasphemy provision removed for free.

An alternative would be to set the punishment as being so low as to not worry anyone. That would have been the simple and easy approach. However, the government are worried about looking soft on blasphemy. That the Greens have voted for this provision is mind-boggling. It's the point where they lost all self-respect.

I'm not so sure, the fact that the Lisbon referendum is the second attempt because we got the answer wrong the first time means the government can't afford to get it wrong again, if they start slipping in extra questions they may perceive that there's a risk of pissing off the public again. Especially with a hot button topic like blasphemy where 90% of people probably aren't too fussed but the 10% who are would be the noisy 10%.

westprog · 4th August 2009, 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by Guybrush Threepwood

I'm not so sure, the fact that the Lisbon referendum is the second attempt because we got the answer wrong the first time means the government can't afford to get it wrong again, if they start slipping in extra questions they may perceive that there's a risk of pissing off the public again. Especially with a hot button topic like blasphemy where 90% of people probably aren't too fussed but the 10% who are would be the noisy 10%.

I think there's a huge degree of cowardice involved. Ask the politicians responsible for this law whether they think Ireland needs a blasphemy law, and I doubt if more than one in ten would think so. It's classic Irish bad politics - "I wouldn't start from here". At least when De Valera put the stupid provision into the constitution he believed it was a good thing. Now it's just following the path of least resistance to indulge the noisy 10%.

Guybrush Threepwood · 5th August 2009, 09:24 AM

Originally Posted by westprog

I think there's a huge degree of cowardice involved. Ask the politicians responsible for this law whether they think Ireland needs a blasphemy law, and I doubt if more than one in ten would think so. It's classic Irish bad politics - "I wouldn't start from here". At least when De Valera put the stupid provision into the constitution he believed it was a good thing. Now it's just following the path of least resistance to indulge the noisy 10%.

Yup, I agree with all of that.

linusrichard · 5th August 2009, 09:33 AM

Originally Posted by I Ratant

A movie on Cinemax tonight:
The Reaping "A former Christian missionary debunks religious phenomena".
I expect this would fall under blasphemy.

OT, but there's a good thirty seconds in that movie where the main character spends about that long giving a scientific explanation for all of the Biblical plagues from Exodus.

The rest of it is okay horror fare IMO, not too terrible, not too great.

westprog · 5th August 2009, 12:42 PM

Originally Posted by Guybrush Threepwood

Yup, I agree with all of that.

Surely that violates the membership agreement?

Crazycowbob · 5th August 2009, 01:08 PM

Originally Posted by Pure_Argent

It is now illegal to speak in Ireland.

Exactly what I was thinking! It is blasphemous to my religion to speak with an Irish accent!

Guybrush Threepwood · 5th August 2009, 01:32 PM

Originally Posted by westprog

Surely that violates the membership agreement?

Sorry, still a bit new here and getting the hang of things. You're ugly and your mother dresses you funny.

Does that make up for it?

Data_Quest · 21st August 2009, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by Beerina

Someone should file suit to get the law thrown out (if that can be done there) using the argument that blasphemy is a crime against a god, not against humans or the religion they believe. It has nothing to do with outrage in the humans.

There is a campaign started in Ireland to do something about this ridiculous law (at blasphemy ie) and I, as an Irish person, will be encouraging as many Irish citizens as possible to sign up. Anyone else is welcome to join as well of course.

Ikarus · 21st August 2009, 03:07 PM

Originally Posted by Pure_Argent

It is now illegal to speak in Ireland.

You're wrong.

Until Atheism and Science are declared as beliefs that counts as a religion, you are still free to mock and insult these groups and their ideas.

Eyeron · 21st August 2009, 07:43 PM

This is a great illustration of the difference of the claims of the Christians who say America is a Christian nation because the Constitution guards us against these kinds of laws. If the Constitution was for Christians there would be no protection for citizens against blasphemy laws as one example.

2nd August 2009, 03:55 PM	#1
Questioninggeller Master Poster Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 2,552	New Blasphemy Law in Ireland So much for repealing Blasphemy Laws. Recently Ireland passed a new one, as ABC News reports: Quote: New Blasphemy Law in Ireland Monitoring the Illogic of Modern-Day Religious Persecution ABC News By JOHN ALLEN PAULOS Aug. 2, 2009 ... Oddly though, almost no attention has been paid in the United Stares to the passing last month of a bill establishing a crime of blasphemy in Ireland. Approved by the Irish parliament, it states: "A person who publishes or utters blasphemous matter shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable upon conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding 25,000 euro." Furthermore, "a person publishes or utters blasphemous matter if (a) he or she publishes or utters matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion, and (b) he or she intends, by the publication or utterance of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage." ... Full article: ABC News
	__________________ "Paranormal phenomena have a habit of going away whenever they are tested under rigorous conditions. This is why the $740,000 reward of James Randi, offered to anyone who can demonstrate a paranormal effect under proper scientific controls, is safe." --Richard Dawkins

2nd August 2009, 04:02 PM	#2
Soapy Sam NLH Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 18,092	A top o' the mornin to yese and welcome to the 12th century.
Soapy Sam NLH Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 18,092

2nd August 2009, 04:39 PM	#3
lionking Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 12,135	Oh my god! Whoops
	__________________ You must believe in free will; there is no choice. Isaac Bashevis Singer

2nd August 2009, 04:42 PM	#4
lionking Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 12,135	Seriously, we in Australia don't have blasphemy laws I am aware of, but we do have a Racial and Religious Tolerance Act which has much the same effect: Quote: The purposes of this Act are- (a) to promote racial and religious tolerance by prohibiting certain conduct involving the vilification of persons on the ground of race or religious belief or activity; (b) to provide a means of redress for the victims of racial or religious vilification;
	__________________ You must believe in free will; there is no choice. Isaac Bashevis Singer

2nd August 2009, 04:46 PM	#5
Madalch The Jester Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: The wet coast. Posts: 4,810	Originally Posted by lionking Seriously, we in Australia don't have blasphemy laws I am aware of, but we do have a Racial and Religious Tolerance Act which has much the same effect: I don't think that's quite the same thing. You can't vilify or slander adherents of a particular faith, but you can vilify their deity all you want.
	__________________ As the size of an explosion increases, the number of social situations it is incapable of resolving approaches zero. -Vaarsuvius

2nd August 2009, 04:50 PM	#6
Apathia Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,266	Well, I'll be damned!
Apathia Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,266	__________________ "to defy the authority of empirical evidence is to disqualify oneself as someone worthy of critical engagement in a dialog." The Dalai Lama "Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures." Author Unknown

2nd August 2009, 04:52 PM	#7
lionking Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 12,135	Originally Posted by Madalch I don't think that's quite the same thing. You can't vilify or slander adherents of a particular faith, but you can vilify their deity all you want. Yeah I know that, but blasphemy directed against a deity of a particular religion (eg Allah) would have you in trouble under this act. a bit off-topic I agree.
	__________________ You must believe in free will; there is no choice. Isaac Bashevis Singer

2nd August 2009, 05:01 PM	#8
Jeff Corey New York Skeptic Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,731	So who put the ham in Muhammed?

2nd August 2009, 06:18 PM	#9
Beerina Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: A floating island above the clouds Posts: 14,373	Someone should file suit to get the law thrown out (if that can be done there) using the argument that blasphemy is a crime against a god, not against humans or the religion they believe. It has nothing to do with outrage in the humans. Thus you cannot commit blasphemy against the gods of two contradictory religions since at least one must be false. So charging you with blasphemy for talk against any god except the one(s) that actually exist cannot be blasphemy because calling, say, Odin a self-centered ass does nothing. (shut up!) Now if they want to outlaw making fun of someone's religion to the point of outrage, they should call it something other than blasphemy.
	__________________ Reid Fleming, World's Toughest Milkman, in *A Day Like Any Other* The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales *now!* More, cheaper, better games, right? Right? Last edited by Beerina; 2nd August 2009 at 06:23 PM.

2nd August 2009, 06:32 PM	#10
BobTheDonkey Muse Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 913	While I understand and agree with the sentiments posted before...Ireland is still a religious battleground between Catholics and Protestants. We might not like the law, but perhaps it's what Ireland needs to enforce the uneasy peace it's currently experiencing?
BobTheDonkey Muse Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 913

2nd August 2009, 06:34 PM	#11
slingblade 63% similar to you Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: In This Fog, Who Knows? Posts: 13,777	Yep, nothing solves a dispute like repression.
	__________________ http://s47.photobucket.com/albums/f1..._jewelrycraft/

2nd August 2009, 08:53 PM	#12
lionking Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 12,135	Originally Posted by BobTheDonkey While I understand and agree with the sentiments posted before...Ireland is still a religious battleground between Catholics and Protestants. We might not like the law, but perhaps it's what Ireland needs to enforce the uneasy peace it's currently experiencing? The trouble with this argument (which I don't think is that strong anyway as north and south have reconciled to a large extent) is that it will apply to heathen visitors like me.
	__________________ You must believe in free will; there is no choice. Isaac Bashevis Singer

3rd August 2009, 08:19 AM	#13
westprog Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,176	Originally Posted by Beerina Someone should file suit to get the law thrown out (if that can be done there) using the argument that blasphemy is a crime against a god, not against humans or the religion they believe. It has nothing to do with outrage in the humans. The reason for the law is that the Irish constitution had a provision against blasphemy, but there was no law that actually enforced it. Apparently an upcoming bill was potentially unconstitutional if there was no corresponding law relating to the blasphemy clause, so they brought one in. Why they made it so astonishingly draconian I don't know. Whether there will ever be a successful prosecution remains to be seen.
westprog Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,176	__________________ "The use of anthropomorphic terms when dealing with computer systems is a sign of professional immaturity" -Edsger Dijkstra

3rd August 2009, 08:22 AM	#14
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 47,709	Given my experience of religious folk from Ireland I think they are right to be worried about this law...
	__________________ If it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart? - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn 1918-2008

3rd August 2009, 08:37 AM	#15
Damien Evans Up The Irons Tagger Join Date: May 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 11,681	Originally Posted by lionking Seriously, we in Australia don't have blasphemy laws I am aware of, but we do have a Racial and Religious Tolerance Act which has much the same effect: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law_in_Australia "It is unknown if Blasphemy is a crime in Victoria"
	__________________ And down by Kosciusko, where the pine-clad ridges raise; Their torn and rugged battlements on high, Where the air is clear as crystal, and the white stars fairly blaze; At midnight in the cold and frosty sky, And where around the Overflow the reed-beds sweep and sway; To the breezes, and the rolling plains are wide, The Man from Snowy River is a household word today, And the stockmen tell the story of his ride.

3rd August 2009, 09:05 AM	#16
westprog Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,176	Originally Posted by BobTheDonkey While I understand and agree with the sentiments posted before...Ireland is still a religious battleground between Catholics and Protestants. We might not like the law, but perhaps it's what Ireland needs to enforce the uneasy peace it's currently experiencing? Short answer - no, it has nothing to do with the Peace Process. I can expand if you want.
westprog Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,176	__________________ "The use of anthropomorphic terms when dealing with computer systems is a sign of professional immaturity" -Edsger Dijkstra

3rd August 2009, 09:16 AM	#17
Pure_Argent Certified Castlevania Fanboy Join Date: May 2009 Location: The Clock Tower Boss Room Posts: 3,820	Quote: "a person publishes or utters blasphemous matter if (a) he or she publishes or utters matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion, and (b) he or she intends, by the publication or utterance of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage." It is now illegal to speak in Ireland.
	__________________ "What is a man? Just a miserable little pile of secrets!" - Dracula, Castlevania "The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head." - Terry Pratchett, Hogfather

3rd August 2009, 09:30 AM	#18
HansMustermann Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,100	You know, I wonder how many hindus are offended by McDonald's menu...

3rd August 2009, 09:35 AM	#19
I Ratant Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 4,593	Originally Posted by Beerina ... Now if they want to outlaw making fun of someone's religion to the point of outrage, they should call it something other than blasphemy. . Yeah, something like "rational discussion".
I Ratant Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 4,593

3rd August 2009, 09:36 AM	#20
zooterkin Nitpicking dilettante Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Berkshire, UK Posts: 7,028	Originally Posted by BobTheDonkey While I understand and agree with the sentiments posted before...Ireland is still a religious battleground between Catholics and Protestants. We might not like the law, but perhaps it's what Ireland needs to enforce the uneasy peace it's currently experiencing? This new law applies in the Republic of Ireland (Eire), not Northern Ireland.
	__________________ The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell I'd eat the arse out of a dead mole if it offered a fighting chance.Terry Pratchett The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter.Thomas Jefferson

3rd August 2009, 10:02 AM	#21
Gord_in_Toronto Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 8,172	Originally Posted by HansMustermann You know, I wonder how many hindus are offended by McDonald's menu... And how many Moslems by the fact that Christians don't accept Muhammad as a prophet of God? And how many Christians by the fact that Moslems don't accept Jesus Christ as God's son. Weren't there some problems about these issues at some point in history?
	__________________ "Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick Now completely free.

3rd August 2009, 10:28 AM	#22
I Ratant Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 4,593	A movie on Cinemax tonight: The Reaping "A former Christian missionary debunks religious phenomena". I expect this would fall under blasphemy.
I Ratant Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 4,593

3rd August 2009, 11:03 AM	#23
Guybrush Threepwood Trainee Pirate Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: An Uaimh Posts: 510	Originally Posted by BobTheDonkey While I understand and agree with the sentiments posted before...Ireland is still a religious battleground between Catholics and Protestants. We might not like the law, but perhaps it's what Ireland needs to enforce the uneasy peace it's currently experiencing? Just to re-iterate what others have said, Ireland has had nearly 90 years of fairly easy peace with almost no religious conflict, so that isn't the reason for this, in fact it's very hard to say what the reason is. It seems to be mainly there to plug a gap in the legal system since blasphemy is not allowed in the constitution, but there is no corresponding law against it. The logical thing would be to change the constitution, but this would require a referendum, and the government is already committed to one referendum this year on the Lisbon treaty, so I think the law was regarded as an easier way of removing the anomaly. I don't think it will last long, if anyone is successfully prosecuted there will be enough outcry to get it removed, but it does make us look a bit backward on the world stage (again!)

3rd August 2009, 11:10 AM	#24
Beerina Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: A floating island above the clouds Posts: 14,373	Originally Posted by HansMustermann You know, I wonder how many hindus are offended by McDonald's menu... Ya know, the US outlawed selling horses for horse meat, especially to other countries. That's why laws should have expiration dates. To force elected officials to review them from time to time. It was a ZOMG issue that some chimpanzees in government bloviated over, preening in front of the camreas, and they passed (yet another) law to make the masses of concrete canyon dwellers happy.
	__________________ Reid Fleming, World's Toughest Milkman, in *A Day Like Any Other* The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales *now!* More, cheaper, better games, right? Right?

3rd August 2009, 11:32 AM	#25
I Ratant Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 4,593	Originally Posted by Beerina Ya know, the US outlawed selling horses for horse meat, especially to other countries. That's why laws should have expiration dates. To force elected officials to review them from time to time. It was a ZOMG issue that some chimpanzees in government bloviated over, preening in front of the camreas, and they passed (yet another) law to make the masses of concrete canyon dwellers happy. . Such as these, passed in an frenzy by the new Congress way back when, putting even one of the architects of the Revolution in peril... Acts . "There were actually four separate laws making up what is commonly referred to as the "Alien and Sedition Acts" 1. The Naturalization Act (officially An Act to Establish a Uniform Rule of Naturalization; ch. 54, 1 Stat. 566) extended the duration of residence required for aliens to become citizens to 14 years. Enacted June 18, 1798, with no expiration date, it was repealed in 1802. 2. The Alien Friends Act (officially An Act Concerning Aliens; ch. 58, 1 Stat. 570) authorized the president to deport any resident alien considered "dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States." It was enacted June 25, 1798, with a two year expiration date. 3. The Alien Enemies Act (officially An Act Respecting Alien Enemies; ch. 66, 1 Stat. 577) authorized the president to apprehend and deport resident aliens if their home countries were at war with the United States of America. Enacted July 6, 1798, and providing no sunset provision, the act remains intact today as 50 U.S.C. § 21–24. At the time, war was considered likely between the U.S. and France. 4. The Sedition Act (officially An Act for the Punishment of Certain Crimes against the United States; ch. 74, 1 Stat. 596) made it a crime to publish "false, scandalous, and malicious writing" against the government or its officials. It was enacted July 14, 1798, with an expiration date of March 3, 1801." . Number 4 particularly irked Thomas Paine, "malicious writing against the government" being what he did so well! President Jefferson pardoned all those convicted under these when he took office.
I Ratant Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 4,593

4th August 2009, 07:26 AM	#26
westprog Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,176	Originally Posted by Guybrush Threepwood Just to re-iterate what others have said, Ireland has had nearly 90 years of fairly easy peace with almost no religious conflict, so that isn't the reason for this, in fact it's very hard to say what the reason is. It seems to be mainly there to plug a gap in the legal system since blasphemy is not allowed in the constitution, but there is no corresponding law against it. The logical thing would be to change the constitution, but this would require a referendum, and the government is already committed to one referendum this year on the Lisbon treaty, so I think the law was regarded as an easier way of removing the anomaly. I don't think it will last long, if anyone is successfully prosecuted there will be enough outcry to get it removed, but it does make us look a bit backward on the world stage (again!) The fact that there's a Lisbon referendum would mean that they could get the blasphemy provision removed for free. An alternative would be to set the punishment as being so low as to not worry anyone. That would have been the simple and easy approach. However, the government are worried about looking soft on blasphemy. That the Greens have voted for this provision is mind-boggling. It's the point where they lost all self-respect.
westprog Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,176	__________________ "The use of anthropomorphic terms when dealing with computer systems is a sign of professional immaturity" -Edsger Dijkstra

4th August 2009, 07:33 AM	#27
Guybrush Threepwood Trainee Pirate Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: An Uaimh Posts: 510	Originally Posted by westprog The fact that there's a Lisbon referendum would mean that they could get the blasphemy provision removed for free. An alternative would be to set the punishment as being so low as to not worry anyone. That would have been the simple and easy approach. However, the government are worried about looking soft on blasphemy. That the Greens have voted for this provision is mind-boggling. It's the point where they lost all self-respect. I'm not so sure, the fact that the Lisbon referendum is the second attempt because we got the answer wrong the first time means the government can't afford to get it wrong again, if they start slipping in extra questions they may perceive that there's a risk of pissing off the public again. Especially with a hot button topic like blasphemy where 90% of people probably aren't too fussed but the 10% who are would be the noisy 10%.

4th August 2009, 04:31 PM	#28
westprog Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,176	Originally Posted by Guybrush Threepwood I'm not so sure, the fact that the Lisbon referendum is the second attempt because we got the answer wrong the first time means the government can't afford to get it wrong again, if they start slipping in extra questions they may perceive that there's a risk of pissing off the public again. Especially with a hot button topic like blasphemy where 90% of people probably aren't too fussed but the 10% who are would be the noisy 10%. I think there's a huge degree of cowardice involved. Ask the politicians responsible for this law whether they think Ireland needs a blasphemy law, and I doubt if more than one in ten would think so. It's classic Irish bad politics - "I wouldn't start from here". At least when De Valera put the stupid provision into the constitution he believed it was a good thing. Now it's just following the path of least resistance to indulge the noisy 10%.
westprog Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,176	__________________ "The use of anthropomorphic terms when dealing with computer systems is a sign of professional immaturity" -Edsger Dijkstra

5th August 2009, 09:24 AM	#29
Guybrush Threepwood Trainee Pirate Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: An Uaimh Posts: 510	Originally Posted by westprog I think there's a huge degree of cowardice involved. Ask the politicians responsible for this law whether they think Ireland needs a blasphemy law, and I doubt if more than one in ten would think so. It's classic Irish bad politics - "I wouldn't start from here". At least when De Valera put the stupid provision into the constitution he believed it was a good thing. Now it's just following the path of least resistance to indulge the noisy 10%. Yup, I agree with all of that.

5th August 2009, 09:33 AM	#30
linusrichard Master Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Lansing, Mich. Posts: 2,355	Originally Posted by I Ratant A movie on Cinemax tonight: The Reaping "A former Christian missionary debunks religious phenomena". I expect this would fall under blasphemy. OT, but there's a good thirty seconds in that movie where the main character spends about that long giving a scientific explanation for all of the Biblical plagues from Exodus. The rest of it is okay horror fare IMO, not too terrible, not too great.

5th August 2009, 12:42 PM	#31
westprog Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,176	Originally Posted by Guybrush Threepwood Yup, I agree with all of that. Surely that violates the membership agreement?
westprog Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,176	__________________ "The use of anthropomorphic terms when dealing with computer systems is a sign of professional immaturity" -Edsger Dijkstra

5th August 2009, 01:08 PM	#32
Crazycowbob Bovine Overlord Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Lubbock, Texas Posts: 1,191	Originally Posted by Pure_Argent It is now illegal to speak in Ireland. Exactly what I was thinking! It is blasphemous to my religion to speak with an Irish accent!
	__________________ "Pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space, 'Cause there's bugger all down here on Earth." Eric Idle, The Meaning of Life

5th August 2009, 01:32 PM	#33
Guybrush Threepwood Trainee Pirate Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: An Uaimh Posts: 510	Originally Posted by westprog Surely that violates the membership agreement? Sorry, still a bit new here and getting the hang of things. You're ugly and your mother dresses you funny. Does that make up for it?

21st August 2009, 11:15 AM	#34
Data_Quest New Blood Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 2	Originally Posted by Beerina Someone should file suit to get the law thrown out (if that can be done there) using the argument that blasphemy is a crime against a god, not against humans or the religion they believe. It has nothing to do with outrage in the humans. There is a campaign started in Ireland to do something about this ridiculous law (at blasphemy ie) and I, as an Irish person, will be encouraging as many Irish citizens as possible to sign up. Anyone else is welcome to join as well of course.
Data_Quest New Blood Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 2

21st August 2009, 03:07 PM	#35
Ikarus Critical Thinker Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 265	Originally Posted by Pure_Argent It is now illegal to speak in Ireland. You're wrong. Until Atheism and Science are declared as beliefs that counts as a religion, you are still free to mock and insult these groups and their ideas.
Ikarus Critical Thinker Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 265	__________________ Complacency never changed anything. Women and minorities didn't get the right to vote by being nice and quiet and trying not to "rile" anyone. Slavery didn't end because the silence about it was so deafening. - Slingblade Last edited by Ikarus; 21st August 2009 at 03:11 PM.