There is a proposed amendment to Irish defemation legislation including an updated blasphemy Libel law. Go here.
As TheObserver and Gary C point out. The article says:
"Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern proposes to insert a new section into the Defamation Bill, stating: “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.”
“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.”
Where a person is convicted of an offence under this section, the court may issue a warrant authorising the Garda SÃochána to enter, if necessary using reasonable force, a premises.
As TheObserver and Gary C point out. The article says:
"Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern proposes to insert a new section into the Defamation Bill, stating: “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.”
“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.”
Where a person is convicted of an offence under this section, the court may issue a warrant authorising the Garda SÃochána to enter, if necessary using reasonable force, a premises.
Comments
http://www.atheistmissionary.com/2009/04/i-wonder-if-jesus-started-to-smell-on.html
So, will the Catholics, Protestants, and Muslims all be taking turns on filing complaints against each other? That way the police could organize their workload by, say, regularly raiding in turn church and mosque offices on different days of the week. ;)
Huh... finally!! What is "any" religion... Is the church of the FSM "any" religion? If so, i think this law opens many ways to annoy some other religions :)
If religious people hate you because of something you say, you should be fined up to 100,000 Euros for inciting these people to hate you?
"However, a spokes-man for the minister said he was merely acting on the advice his department received from successive attorneys general and was solving a long-standing legal problem. This was because the Constitution already demands that there be a law against blasphemy. Article 40 says either publishing or speaking in a blasphemous way would be an offence."
This the article 40 referenced in the quote:-
"Article 40
6. 1° 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"
Even the most fanatical RCC followers do not support this bill because it will give further ammunition to rival religious groups, such as Irish Muslim convert Mujhaaid. and his supporters.
It doesn't stop people criticising religious views; even politicians have publicly condemned some of the more outrageous statements made by clerics, in particular, muslim clerics.
But, obviously an anti-vilification law could be used against someone attacking a religion.
I expect the Irish have something similar in mind, but, by focusing only on religion, they miss the point in my view and will create a can of worms.
Regards, Paul.
see e.g. http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/mystery-surrounds-reform-of-our-laws-on-blasphemy-1725637.html (I can't see who wrote this but it's from our largest-selling broadsheet newspaper)
Also see the Irish Times' comments and letters section (at www.irishtimes.com) , as well this interesting report today: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0501/1224245756970.html "The main churches were not consulted about the proposal to define the offence of blasphemous libel in the Defamation Act, The Irish Times has learned."
It should be obvious to anyone who has two brain cells to rub together, that there will be a need for ultimate control so as to suppress the public at large from speaking out when the juggernaut of reality finally comes crashing through their front door. Religion-based methodologies of blind acceptance and adherence to the prevailing State dogmas, as originally constructed under the influence of the Roman Church, will be called into force to stifle any resistance to the crumbling of the so-called "morality of the State".
Exactly what "morality" does the State base its workings on? Take a hard look at the Irish Constitution, and you should begin to put the pieces of the puzzle together.
Once we unheedingly pass over into being a society of hobbled serfs, then the pain will finally hit the brain....but by them we will have nothing left to lose.
This law should be rejected as a devious ploy to limit the public's right to free speech. Remember George Orwell's 1984? He may have been a little off on the timing front, but not so far on the methodologies.
Hmmm...wise government? If they were so wise, how come we're now in the upper league of basket-case economies in Europe?
There are sufficient laws in this counrty to protect individuals from defamation, so to use subjective and religiously-grounded words like blasphemy ( http://dictionary.reference.com/dic?q=blasphemy&search=search )then how can such a thing be enforced or tested in reality when it is dependant on such vague terms as "causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents"? What exactly does "a substantial number of adherents" mean?
Does it mean that if a small sect of religious inclination who follow a different deity than the mainstream, and feels offended by anyone who is not of their persuasion, can call on such a law to allegedly protect them, and turn it into a form of perverse bullying?
The Irish Constitution is based on Christian ideas of a god only, and not on any other deistic following, despite its failing to define "God".
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.
Emmm... WHAT? just compare the 1st and last paragraphs...
Bad laws don't fade away...they lay dormant until some nutter with an agenda decides it might suit their purposes. This law is medieval in its substance, seditious in the root of its leanings, and completly at varaince with anything that might be considered reasonable.
Anyone know when it will be considered/voted upon?
Does this sound like a state that accepts the free will of its public, or one that feels threatened, needing to control?
From the looks of things, not much has changed since the Irish Constitution was founded. In an era when most countries are abolishing such archaic laws, some idiot decides it would be high time to start creating and enforcing blasphemy legislation!
Ask yourself "Why?"
Considering that most if not all religions are based completely on belief, which in turn could be based on basically anything any madman could dream up, the ramifications of such a religiously based law are immense. Anything could be deemed blasphemous to anyone. And as has been mentioned before, how many adherents is a substantial number anyway? If a religion has two adherents and they are both outraged, isn't that a substantial number of adherents to that particular religion, and therefore grounds for conviction under this proposed law?
As a good friend of mine once said:
"Bulls**t baffles brains."
I'm definitely going to contact the main politicians who are showing at least some level of sense by questioning this medievalist nonsense.
Lucky England-Germany for at least breaking the holly biscuit a little, a least that has helped it's people re examine their place in existence from another more rational point of view!
I recently heard a priest say that maybe the downturn in the economy would cause people to "realise the error of their ways", and return to the "true faith" once more. It will be be interesting to see if and how Irish journalists deal with the proposed law change.
Are you people losing your minds?
Why not just do it the way your ancestors did and simply eviscerate the offenders?
I mean, if you are going to act like superstitious living in shit morons, do it right!
Blasphemy Law, indeed!
What a bunch of wankers!
The Iron mask was heated in an open fire until red hot, then put upon his head.
The scourge, also red hot, was then applied to his back.
After the mask had cooled, it was removed from the sinner, taking skin (and usually eyeballs) with it.
The prisoner's mouth was then opened and red hot pincers were used to remove the prisoner's tongue.
It is interesting to note that the Holy Trinity was designed not to cause death, so that the maimed, blinded and mute prisoner could live out his days as a burden to his family and as a testimony to what happens when one lets his tongue wag too freely.
Blasphemy is a victimless crime, because it offends only an imaginary diety!
All the more reason not to have such a primitive and subjective law on the statute books. As a species we seem to have degenerated into a collective of sheeple who are supposed to kowtow to the whims and fantasies of godmongering types who hide their inadequacies behind a veil of self-righteousnes and arrogance. The fact that an attempt is being made to slip fundamentalist laws that pander to the ranks of blind believers who have in recent weeks been shown to be amongst the lowliest of crawling things on the face of the earth, is symptomatic of the maliase of wilful blindness that hangs as a pall over not only the Irish nation, but over similarly afflicted and morally compromised peoples. The fact that governments still seek to prop up the peddlers of such leaning, is suggestive of their continued desire to harness the forces of indoctination and political corrrectness to keep people in a state of fear when things get tougher, as they surely will. When the public begin to finally and belatedly detect the enormity of the river of muck that is coming their way, the powers that be will need the tried and tested methodologies of religious censorship such as blasphemy laws to try to enforce public order.
Any nation that bows to these kinds of laws, deserves everything it gets.
Except that one day I realized there are potential victims: the priestly class, who will go on living their soft life only if the flow of donations from the gullible continues: "A sudden thought."
That's the core issue here when you take all the selfrighteous, and the frills and frocks away from these princes of darkness.
I wonder what the statistics are for the number of churches built, and the priests who died from starvation during the Irish famine.
I think that you will find that one of them will approach or equal zero whilst the other will quickly shoot towards the top of the chart.
Despite all the facts shown to them, the majority of blind believers will continue to pay homage to the god that allegedly favours these maladjusted ones, as their ability to think with any degree of reason seems to have been silenced by the generations of brainwashing and fearful following of meaningless rituals.
Has it occured to anyone else that those most likely to blaspheme against a given religion are its own members. How often do you hear the word 'Jesus' mentioned in worshipful way as opposed to other less pious references.
Well, it seems that the general theme of this medievalist law is that blasphemy is any act or statement that intends to deny the existence of the particular deity of any religion. However, as the Irish Constitution (and the Judiciary, who must swear an oath to the deity) only recognise the Christian god, (being of the three-in-one variety, it automatically sets itself up as blasphemous to other deists, such as Muslims, who only see their deity as a unitarian entity.
Politicians in Ireland have always facilitated the use of religious indoctination on the populace, as it serves to condition the collective mind into following rote methodologies of behaviour, which equally apply when they believe that they are exercising their free will "selection" of political masters according to varying levels of imaginary and false promises that have no real substance, as is the case in religions.
The human mind does not separate its thinking into religious vs real-world methodologies, but rather it applies what it considers and preceives as acceptable actions and reactions to previously conditioned training. These methodologies are first used when we are children, when we have no real sense of reason, and so we tend to simply accept the "you'll do what's good for you" prompt in an unquestioning manner, when it comes to other life choices, such as in election campaigns.
Have you never noticed the way that both priests and politicans use subtle imagery and promises of reward and a better life, despite there being little or no evidence of their being able to actually fulfill these pledges?
When this country goes deeper into mentdown, as it surely will, the State will need to use any and every form of control to deal with the "containment of the public". Religion is the one and sure tried and tested methodology of using fear to control disenters, heretics (those who choose). The gods of political correctness have succeeded in convincing us that we really shouldn't express our opinions in public, for fear of "offending" someone who cannot actually prove that their viewpoint is true and valid. Are we people or sheeple?
To a point you are correct, but the way that this very subjective and religiously biased law has been introduced to give this enhanced right to followers of religion only is what must be questioned. There are adequate defamtion laws in play already and the idea that anyone can defend a god is absurd in the extreme.
How would you describe "grossly offensive"? If someone says that they don't believe in Allah or God, then the follower of that sect might well feel that is "grossly offensive". To make such subjective and open laws on the basis of what someone might or might not "feel" is looking for trouble.
Tommy Tiernan's screwed!
Anyone else seen the movie Franklyn where religion is law? This could be the first step...