Article 40, clause 6, point 1 of the superb little blue book we call the Constitution states:
The State guarantees liberty for the exercise of the following rights, subject to public order and morality:
i. The right of the citizens to express freely their convictions and opinions.
The education of public opinion being, however, a matter of such grave import to the common good, the State shall endeavour to ensure that organs of public opinion, such as the radio, the press, the cinema, while preserving their rightful liberty of expression, including criticism of Government policy, shall not be used to undermine public order or morality or the authority of the State.
The publication or utterance of blasphemous, seditious, or indecent matter is an offence which shall be punishable in accordance with law.
In a totally shocking move from the government, the new defamation bill will now, it seems, contain a blasphemy offence clause. It reads: ‘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 €100,000.’
I am an evangelical Christian church leader. I do not need the law to protect me from people who say things I don’t like. I do not need the law to arbitrarily criminalise speech acts in such vague terms so that I could not criticise Scientology or even my own denomination without fear of a local Guard having to come knock on my door and ask me a few uncomfortable questions.
I think most all evangelical Christians and indeed most Christians of any persuasion in Ireland will consider this law as just plain daft. I much prefer living in a world where Dan Brown can claim that the Da Vinci Code is true and where people can draw unfunny cartoons of Mohammed and where Salman Rushdie can turn out turgid psuedo-provocative pretentious prose if he so pleases. I will happily take St. Paul’s advice in the famous “love chapter” of 1st Corinthians 13. Love, he says, “is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs”. It doesn’t particularly mind if you display your ignorance by depicting a nativity scene with Posh and Becks in place of Mary and Joseph. Love doesn’t need to vandalise the very pungent displays that depict Christ in piss.
Robert Green Ingersoll famously said, “This crime called blasphemy was invented by priests for the purpose of defending doctrines not able to take care of themselves” but he was wrong. As I see it, the crime called blasphemy was invented by Christians for the purpose of defending themselves who were not able to take care of themselves. The Irish church is, I hope, ready to step out of centuries long habit of finding their identity in temporal power. The church of the 21st Century does not need the state to fight its corner. Blasphemy happens, but when it does, it is an opportunity to turn the other cheek. And in opposition to this bill, Christians have the cool and rare chance to actually side with the humanists and hang out with them.
And besides, it is the church who are the real blasphemers.
Your Correspondent, The refusal of joy is the real blasphemy
![The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ [Hardcover]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41bh8oSh1VL._SL160_.jpg)
It was lovely to see this coming from the religious corner. Freedom of speech is important for both sides and it is nice to see that unbelievers and believers can give each other the respect of letting them speak their mind.
Zoomtard ain’t religious. I should know, I live with him!
Claireface: I’m sure it’s as tedious for you to be referred to as “religious” as it for me to called a student of business, but you know well what people mean!
You confuse people with such subtleties and it ain’t gonna catch on, sista. Christ on a bike – take the compliment
I am not sure that striving for accuracy is a bad thing there Enda. I would have thought secular humanist types tend to think of us as wooly headed know-nothings. Surely they’d appreciate a bit of specificity?
I think you should specify why the definition of religious does not fit if you seek precision.
On the topic of precision, I learned last month that there are two l’s in “wolly”.
Oh and I mostly replied to Clairebo to make my Christ on a bike joke.
surely that kinda thing is that the internet was invented for
“A religion is an organized approach to human spirituality which usually encompasses a set of narratives, symbols, beliefs and practices, often with a supernatural or transcendent quality, that give meaning to the practitioner’s experiences of life through reference to a higher power or truth.[1] It may be expressed through prayer, ritual, meditation, music and art, among other things. It may focus on specific supernatural, metaphysical, and moral claims about reality (the cosmos and human nature) which may yield a set of religious laws, ethics, and a particular lifestyle. Religion also encompasses ancestral or cultural traditions, writings, history, and mythology, as well as personal faith and religious experience.”
“Blasphemous matter” is defined as 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 he or she intends, by the publication of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage.”
WELL YOUI KNOW WHAT?
F U C K G O D!
Don’t I have to express outrage for you to have blasphemed?
I always loved Dylan Thomas’ appropriate use of the word in A Refusal To Mourn:
“…I shall not murder
The mankind of her going with a grave truth
Nor blaspheme down the stations of the breath
With any further
Elegy of innocence and youth.”
look, this is not about religion its all about economics,or trade in particular.
Ireland does not want to a repeat of the Danish cartoon fiasco.That wil cost Denmark dear for years to come.Ireland has huge interests in the middle east and one idiot publishing material that the muslims find offensive could lead to a similar boycott of goods and services. No one will be prosecuted for blasphemey in Ireland, unless of course they grossly offend the muslims,and no one is going to do that with a E100,000 fine on the cards ,It’s an necessary evil in these difficult economic times.
Will I get fined E100,000 (jailed in my case) for telling the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about an evil man who (by his own admission) takes a 6 year old child for his ‘wife’ and ‘consumates’ the marriage with the child when she is 9? …Even when that evil man is a ‘prophet’ born in the 6th century and currently revered by millions of worldwide followers? Dare I suggest that the said evil man is a paedophile, given our present-day understanding of the term?
Fintan, I am not sure it is about economics. I have such faith in the market such that everything is reduced to trade and every motivation an economic one.
Lilly, you are free to raise such topics for discussion and free to suggest it on this blog. All I’d ask is that you suggest it with the utmost respect and consideration, NOT BECAUSE IT IS A RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION, but because all conversations should take place in the context of respect and mutual consideration. Thus, the blasphemy law is irrelevant.
*** END OF IDEALISTIC TRANSMISSION ***
I have no respect for paedophiles, dead, alive – or yet to emerge – particularly when their views and writings are adhered to, and suffered by millions of child-brides the world over. And I make no apology for this.
respect is under-defined and over-demanded
Its some times meant in the sense of ‘held in high regard’ and sometimes it is seen as the most basic level of courtesy. Then as something that is to be earned rather than demanded or expected.
Well I encourage respect for human beings Lilly. And I think any conversation with Islam encouraging a Christian-style approach of internal critique is bound to fail if it is not advanced with humble respect.
Nice phrase QMonkey, and basically, this is one of the areas we disagree on; I think respect needs to be advanced to people more than it needs to be extended to ideas. This doesn’t leave one free to demean ideas but demands that one raise the conversation to actually enter into dialogue (two-way conversation) with the Other who it is anticipated, has something to teach you.
Therefore, even paedophiles deserve respect (paedophilia doesn’t).
‘look, this is not about religion its all about economics,or trade in particular.
Ireland does not want to a repeat of the Danish cartoon fiasco.That wil cost Denmark dear for years to come.Ireland has huge interests in the middle east and one idiot publishing material that the muslims find offensive could lead to a similar boycott of goods and services. No one will be prosecuted for blasphemey in Ireland, unless of course they grossly offend the muslims,and no one is going to do that with a E100,000 fine on the cards ,It’s an necessary evil in these difficult economic times.’
Even if this was true why should our freedoms suffer? I’d rather be dirt poor then live in a country with a law like this.
Anyways, I don’t care if it’s the constitution. After all the damn constitution is meant to be there to protect us! It was written in a different time and society and its content certainly seems in need of a revisit. And the way to do that is a referendum. Public sentiment is against this. I have not found one article in support of it barring the minsters own.
So why does the minster think this needs to be imposed on a resentful majority? I don’t think it’s for the above reason. Is it personal? Pop it in before ff are gone (which they seem on the way to being).
I just fail to understand in anyway….
This is the first time I have ever felt like going out and holding a placard. Ideas need to be tested and stand-up to criticism, not be afforded immunity by law. We just don’t need this in any way.
As an atheist this whole thing has come as a great shock and my only hope is that in June FF get decimated and an election is forced/called. Maybe then this backwards step won’t happen. Million in one shot I know.
If it does happen then enjoy the now lads and ladies as this is the freest you will be for a long time.
Thanks for making the post.
Well I think most Christians would be out on the streets to support your placard holding. I haven’t found a church leader or pew-occupier yet who is happy with this idea. It just seems so irrelevant. I kind of feel like sussing out whether Christians do need to generate an actual campaign instead of a few Presbyterians writing blog entries and newspaper articles…
Zoomtard, on the contrary. I think this is one of the issues we agree more than you think. I just have a problem with the wide interpretation of the word respect and what it actually means to respect someone, and who judges whether the respect has been shown? For example i might think that i am respecting a gay person if i trot out a ‘hate the sin lover the sinner’ line, but they might find it wholly disrespectful to refer to their lifestyle as sin. Likewise a paedophile. but should i care?
any validity in that ? or am i being boring
I just want to say thanks for pointing out the economy thing. I get why they are even considering it now though. Sounds humourously illogical still though, but I enjoy an ignorantly bliss out look by viewing the world around me as somewhat of a comedy and somewhat of a game.
Well maybe it will encourage you to know that one of the greatest works of Christian art and theology ever written refers to the whole of existence as the Divine Comedy.
Cool…
I will need to see where I can get the nearest, most litteral, but also least direct, translation of that work. The summary on Wikipedia was useful but short and unfortunately could easily be inaccurate. Although I tend to trust it. I am surprisingly quick to trust people have not messed with things of a more ’scholarly’ nature. I tend to assume artistic, religious, scientific, and mathematical articles are ‘good to go’.
This should come with double authority then, as a “scholarly” type who writes about things that tend to require trust; DON’T TRUST THE INTERWEB!
I read the Dover Publications copy of Dante which is cheap and (since I read it obviously) readable.
But the best little bit about comedy that I have read is actually by a modern novelist (and Presby minister) called Frederick Buechner. He wrote a lovely book called “Telling the Truth: The Gospel as Tragedy, Comedy, and Fairy Tale” which may be a big heavy going for a total theology newbie but it rocks.
Hmm… I might just have to look into getting a copy of the one published by “Dover Publications”.
I hope you meant the word (and I use that term lightly, hee hee) interweb as a joke in itself.