Blasphemy now illegal in Ireland

[Black Eye Guy]

Fianna Fà¡il have really taken the biscuit with this one.

So technically, could you or I be fined for what we say in this thread?

Hadn't though of that, from what I gather we could be (but mostly kilely wouldn't be)

They won't pay for the "pricey" referendum but had no problem holding as second vote for the Lisbon Treaty even though we had already voted against it! They have no problem handing over hundreds of millions of NAMA but this is the first law that will come into pass in 2010? THIS is how we set the tone for the decade?

Dermot Ahern says he would have prefered to do away with the dodgy law althogether but the cost of a referendum to change the constitution was too much? If that is the case and he had no choice but to clarify the law then why is the fine so high? Why not make it a moot law and have the fine at a penny or something like that? Until it could be removed from the constitution it should have been made a law of no consequence.

I was one of those people who didn't know allot about lisbon, but I remeber it being said that it would give the Dail the power to make decisions with a referendum, would that be right?

This raises an even bigger issue for me though. Given the recent findings in the Murphy Report are those that speak out against the Catholic Church going to be fined? Finally those that were abused have been given a voice but this law robs that from them too.

There is a part written after the bit I quoted of the law that says something like if you are able to justify the blasphemy then it's ok (Although what constitutes justifying it, lol!)

 

[Kean]

Hadn't though of that, from what I gather we could be (but mostly kilely wouldn't be)




I was one of those people who didn't know allot about lisbon, but I remeber it being said that it would give the Dail the power to make decisions with a referendum, would that be right?



There is a part written after the bit I quoted of the law that says something like if you are able to justify the blasphemy then it's ok (Although what constitutes justifying it, lol!)

The government argued that Lisbon would allow them to run the country more efficiently BUT it also handed over a trump card to Europe so the EU could decide to introduce a new law ( unlike this one where it is the clarification of an old law) that we don't want but we wouldn't have a leg to stand on. Very similar to Home Rule to be honest.

Also Flannen, and I mean no disrespect here, but considering the way Church had a death grip of silence on the people of Ireland for the last 90 or so years I think it is absolutely appalling that people who are finally able to tell their story could now get fined thousands of euros for telling the truth.

 

[Bluebird]

You might not see it, but some people do. To some people, including myself, religion makes up as big a part of their identity as race does.

I know that, but there doesn't need to be an extra law then. I find it unnecessary.

You might think it divides people, but my experience of it is that it can also bring people together.

I'm not saying it can't be a good thing to individuals, but organised religion imo isn't a good thing.

As much as I find the whole fining thing a bit strange, I don't think there's anything wrong with trying to get people to think a little bit more before going out of the way to say things which will intentionally upset and hurt another person. For instance, 'make believe god' is really not necessary. I'm not actually meaning to sound like I'm having a go here, I'm really not. You are absolutely entitled to your opinion and beliefs so please give me the same opportunity. This new law is strange but something needs to be done to encourage people to be more tolerable.

I'm all for people having their opinion and their beliefs 🙂, but this is sorta what this law is against. But getting people to think a little bit more shouldn't be done with fines and penalties. Why is religion so important that we punish people for having a different opinion or making a joke?

 

[Flannen]

Are different opinions being punished here? I didn't think that was the case. But the way in which you deal with that is. And a joke might be a harmless joke to you, but you might upset someone else with it. I'm not saying that means every joke should be ruled out, not by any means, but people do not take the time to think about whether what they are going to say is going to offend or upset someone else.

And I guess it depends on the way you take this law as to the differing opinions here. I took it as being about individual faith and religion not The Church so I guess I'm looking at it as, yes for trying to encourage people to be less ignorant as opposed to institutionalised religion taking a hold again.

And I'm not sure that I agree that this law means that you will be punished for telling the truth, but like I said I've taken a different approach to it.

 

[Bluebird]

Are different opinions being punished here? I didn't think that was the case. But the way in which you deal with that is. And a joke might be a harmless joke to you, but you might upset someone else with it. I'm not saying that means every joke should be ruled out, not by any means, but people do not take the time to think about whether what they are going to say is going to offend or upset someone else.

And I guess it depends on the way you take this law as to the differing opinions here. I took it as being about individual faith and religion not The Church so I guess I'm looking at it as, yes for trying to encourage people to be less ignorant as opposed to institutionalised religion taking a hold again.

And I'm not sure that I agree that this law means that you will be punished for telling the truth, but like I said I've taken a different approach to it.

I try not to offend people in general, I hope I've never offended people here with my opinions. Before I say something I think 'that may offend someone' so I don't say it. A bit of consideration and all that. Anyway, the point is I don't think it should be punishable by law - to me, that is going too far.

I don't think it's encouraging people to be less ignorant. I mean, I have religious people in my family, I wouldn't make crass jokes about religion around them, I wouldn't say I'm an ignorant person (I know you weren't implying that, just saying). I just don't like people being told what they can and can't say about religion.

 

[Flannen]

I try not to offend people in general, I hope I've never offended people here with my opinions. Before I say something I think 'that may offend someone' so I don't say it. A bit of consideration and all that. Anyway, the point is I don't think it should be punishable by law - to me, that is going too far.

I don't think it's encouraging people to be less ignorant. I mean, I have religious people in my family, I wouldn't make crass jokes about religion around them, I wouldn't say I'm an ignorant person (I know you weren't implying that, just saying). I just don't like people being told what they can and can't say about religion.

I, by no means, agree that it should be something punishable by law. I said before I think it's a really sad state of affairs that that is what it has come down to.

And maybe it's just because I've interpreted the article differently but I don't think it's about what you can and can't say. It's not that far away from the laws about racism etc, I don't think. In just the same way you can't (as in shouldn't) discriminate because of skin colour, age, sex etc, you shouldn't when it comes down to religion. BUT, and I absolutely do not mean this in a condescending way, if you don't see religion as particularly important, you're unlikely to think of it in the same way as me. Again, I do not agree that this is something that should now be punishable by law financially but no one, no matter what they're beliefs are should be subject to abuse and poor treatment because of it.

It will be interesting to see how this all affects comedians and topical news programmes like Mock the Week, it could certainly snowball very quickly because it's really difficult to establish the line between something that could be considered offensive and something that can't.

And as for whether anything in this thread would be considered punishable by this law, the way I've read it, I don't think so. It's not saying you have to agree with any one religion or that you can't disagree with their teachings, I just see it as it saying basically don't publish or incite hate towards it or massively offend that group of people. Personally, I think it's more about public expression than private. But I might be being too optimistic, who knows? 😉

 

[Skanky Vamp]

Okay, but.. looking at this from a different angle, could not anyone that espouses the virtues of Christianity could be considered to be blaspheming say, for instance, The Church of Satan? Granted, that is an overly simplistic view, and what of neo-pagan religions that say Jesus was just a man? That itself is blasphemy. And of course the reverse is true as Baphomet is considered by most the symbol of Satan, would stating that not be considered blasphemy? or does blasphemy only imply to the majority which is being offended?

What about comics or satirists? Are they given a pass as it is their profession to blasphemy or should they look to a new profession?

Could the movie Dogma now be considered blasphemy in Ireland? Will it be banned?

 

[Bluebird]

I, by no means, agree that it should be something punishable by law. I said before I think it's a really sad state of affairs that that is what it has come down to.

And maybe it's just because I've interpreted the article differently but I don't think it's about what you can and can't say. It's not that far away from the laws about racism etc, I don't think. In just the same way you can't (as in shouldn't) discriminate because of skin colour, age, sex etc, you shouldn't when it comes down to religion. BUT, and I absolutely do not mean this in a condescending way, if you don't see religion as particularly important, you're unlikely to think of it in the same way as me. Again, I do not agree that this is something that should now be punishable by law financially but no one, no matter what they're beliefs are should be subject to abuse and poor treatment because of it.

It will be interesting to see how this all affects comedians and topical news programmes like Mock the Week, it could certainly snowball very quickly because it's really difficult to establish the line between something that could be considered offensive and something that can't.

And as for whether anything in this thread would be considered punishable by this law, the way I've read it, I don't think so. It's not saying you have to agree with any one religion or that you can't disagree with their teachings, I just see it as it saying basically don't publish or incite hate towards it or massively offend that group of people. Personally, I think it's more about public expression than private. But I might be being too optimistic, who knows? 😉

I think the difference is is that I see the race laws as much much more important. Just a difference of opinion then, we'll agree to disagree. 🙂

 

[Skanky Vamp]

"Kean agrees: The law applies to all religions not just Christianity."
In theory, yes, but in practice it would be much more difficult to 'charge' one with blasphemy against a non-Abrahamic religion, simply because the saturation is fewer and numbers less.

 

[Bluebird]

I think they should go the whole way back, and make blasphemy a crime you can be executed for. That'll solve the problem of people being offended.

 

[Skanky Vamp]

How would it solve people being offended? Now, if you make being OFFENDED a crime you can be executed for, that would solve the problem of people being offended!

:hanged:

 

[Washburne]

As I see it there's a lot of different discussions about this subject but I need help clearifying one thing. Forget about the fine, or punishment in general, for a moment. If you don't like that it's against blasphemy how do you reason? That it's about something you don't care about (in this case religion)? Or you think that you should be able to say what ever you want, whenever you want. to whomever you want? Or should it be forbidden to say certain things and just to certain people? And if so there is the line and who draws it?

I think the law as it seems has many flaws but I doubt it's easy to simplify it. And I see no wrong in the bottom line of it (as seen by me) but how they handle it surely is wrong.

Should a law like this have to be made? Of course not. But there's many things in this world that aren't as they should. And when they aren't you try to fix it. As pointed out earlier you can speak your mind in different ways.

 

[bunchofmulch111]

Wow, I'm not even atheist, but I joke about religion A LOT. Thank god I live in a South Park country (however unfunny that show often is). This is just basic freedom of speech, I'm sorry.

 

[Bluebird]

As I see it there's a lot of different discussions about this subject but I need help clearifying one thing. Forget about the fine, or punishment in general, for a moment. If you don't like that it's against blasphemy how do you reason? That it's about something you don't care about (in this case religion)? Or you think that you should be able to say what ever you want, whenever you want. to whomever you want? Or should it be forbidden to say certain things and just to certain people? And if so there is the line and who draws it?

I think the law as it seems has many flaws but I doubt it's easy to simplify it. And I see no wrong in the bottom line of it (as seen by me) but how they handle it surely is wrong.

Should a law like this have to be made? Of course not. But there's many things in this world that aren't as they should. And when they aren't you try to fix it. As pointed out earlier you can speak your mind in different ways.

I think people should generally be allowed to say whatever they want, within reason. It would never be my intention to offend someone on purpose, might surprise some people, but I use a bit of common sense from time to time. Wish more people used a bit of common sense. Anyway, the whole point of this thread is that blasphemy is being punished. I know that in Ireland there was always a blasphemy law, just never put into practice or well defined enough to prosecute people. This is going backwards.

Laws discriminating against people I can understand. Everyone agrees people exist, so therefore there's no problem. Also, why can't I take someone to court for offending my atheism? Because religion is so well respected by the law, for some bizarre reason.

 

[Tueuse de Vampires]

If you don't like that it's against blasphemy how do you reason? That it's about something you don't care about (in this case religion)?

It's not about not caring about religion. Religion is a belief, not a fact, there's so proof for it at all, so why shouldn't I be allowed to say what I want about it?
If blasphemy is a crime, then so is bashing anything else that is just a belief. If people tell me it's ridiculous of me to believe in conspiracy theories and it's bloody stupid, they'd be commiting the exact same crime, although I'm sure there's no law against that. I don't see why religion shoudl get an extra status. My beliefs are as important to me as religion is to other people. Now, if you included every single belief in tha tlaw, it would seriously messy and I think we'd all agree it would be bad. So, instead of including every single belief into the law, the law should be abolished altogether.

On a different note, I don't get what's so bad about bashing any beliefs anyway. Beliefs are personal, and the nature of beliefs (that it's not fact, so you don't have any definite proof for it) makes it impossible to convince everyone of a specific belief. Why do people try to force their beliefs on others, or, in this case, protect a single belief (here it's religion) from tohers? It doesn't make any sense! A belief is just a belief, it's nice to have them, and if you have strong faith in that belief you'll hold on to it no matter what, it shoudln't even bother you if people are bashing the belief.

 

[Flannen]

I read that law as being something that would actually include atheism. It's considered a religion, right? So I figured, that maybe Bluebird, you could use that law against someone bashing your atheist beliefs? Who knows.

I don't really see how this is forcing your belief on other people either. And bashing another religion is exactly the same as a religious person trying to force their opinions on to you.

Maybe if people didn't think there was a problem with hating on and mocking what another person believes then there would be no need for a ridiculous step like this to be taken.

But to me, all it is asking is for people to show a little more respect, it's not asking you to change your opinions, or convert or agree with one or any religion, it just asks for people to respect what someone else believes, no matter what.

As for having no proof? Sure there might not be scientific fact, but a lot of religious people could give you 'proof' as to why they believe in what they do if they chose to do so.

 

[Bluebird]

I read that law as being something that would actually include atheism. It's considered a religion, right? So I figured, that maybe Bluebird, you could use that law against someone bashing your atheist beliefs? Who knows.

Even if that were true, the difference is, I wouldn't. My beliefs are important to me, but I wouldn't punish others for bashing them.

I don't really see how this is forcing your belief on other people either. And bashing another religion is exactly the same as a religious person trying to force their opinions on to you.

That's not exactly the same at all. Trying to force your beliefs on someone is not the same as bashing what they believe. Two different things altogether. I don't care what other people believe, that's up to them. I just want to have the basic right to say what I want about religion. Or anyone to say anything about anyone's beliefs without being fined for it.

Maybe if people didn't think there was a problem with hating on and mocking what another person believes then there would be no need for a ridiculous step like this to be taken.

But to me, all it is asking is for people to show a little more respect, it's not asking you to change your opinions, or convert or agree with one or any religion, it just asks for people to respect what someone else believes, no matter what.

I've never wanted to mock anyone's religion, it's not about that. It doesn't 'just ask' for people to be respectful to beliefs (religion mainly), it forces because it's now law.

 

[Flannen]

Even if that were true, the difference is, I wouldn't. My beliefs are important to me, but I wouldn't punish others for bashing them.

There's nothing to say that a person who follows any other religion is going to do the same either. If it's a law then surely it is going to be enforced by the police and government. This might be a law about religion but it doesn't mean that the people who follow any religion are to blame for it, which I'm getting a sense of.

That's not exactly the same at all. Trying to force your beliefs on someone is not the same as bashing what they believe. Two different things altogether. I don't care what other people believe, that's up to them. I just want to have the basic right to say what I want about religion. Or anyone to say anything about anyone's beliefs without being fined for it.

It seems to be that because I don't think the reasons behind this law are wrong I therefore must think people should be punished for it, which I absolutely do not. And they really aren't that different. Belittling everything that someone else stands for, for no reason at all when you think about it; if you don't care about it, why have anything to say about it, just let it be, to me (who has a lot of experience) forcing your opinions on to them.

I've never wanted to mock anyone's religion, it's not about that. It doesn't 'just ask' for people to be respectful to beliefs (religion mainly), it forces because it's now law.

That's a fair enough point. It's just a lot of what I've been getting from your posts is that you're angry at religion/s for this. When they in fact did not make this law. So it's not them you should hate.

Like you said earlier, we really should just agree to disagree or we'll go round in circles. 🙂

 

[Skanky Vamp]

My problem is again, it is more government. It has nothing to do with race, religion or creed to me, it is simply additional steps to limit the personal freedoms of people. We need LESS government, not more.

 

[Bluebird]

There's nothing to say that a person who follows any other religion is going to do the same either. If it's a law then surely it is going to be enforced by the police and government. This might be a law about religion but it doesn't mean that the people who follow any religion are to blame for it, which I'm getting a sense of.



It seems to be that because I don't think the reasons behind this law are wrong I therefore must think people should be punished for it, which I absolutely do not. And they really aren't that different. Belittling everything that someone else stands for, for no reason at all when you think about it; if you don't care about it, why have anything to say about it, just let it be, to me (who has a lot of experience) forcing your opinions on to them.



That's a fair enough point. It's just a lot of what I've been getting from your posts is that you're angry at religion/s for this. When they in fact did not make this law. So it's not them you should hate.

Like you said earlier, we really should just agree to disagree or we'll go round in circles. 🙂

Yeah, the whole point of the thread is about this law. If it was a general thread about religion then I wouldn't have anything to say, I'm not religious and have no problem with religious people. But there seems to be a lot more respect towards religion than most other things, seems unfair.

I just don't like laws that stop people's freedom of speech.