LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Graham Linehan and Arthur Matthews back anti- blasphemy law campaign
Father Ted creators back challenge to the blasphemy bill | World news | The Observer
Graham Linehan and Arthur Matthews back anti- blasphemy law campaign
Father Ted creators back challenge to the blasphemy bill | World news | The Observer
have faith in ted.
We must have a referendum to remove the ban on blasphemy from the Constitution.
On the same day as Lisbon. It's easily done.Originally Posted by FutureTaoiseach
Dermot Ahern should be categorised as a class 2 relic, like the Holy Stone of Clonrichert.
He could then meet the same fate, although the insertion might be undertaken voluntarily on his part.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I completely abhor the proposed law but I wonder is that a smart move. If they say something that people find offensive then they might encourage the view that such a law is needed.Atheist Ireland said this weekend that it will publish a statement blaspheming all the major religions in Ireland, including Christianity and Islam. The group said it would be a calculated challenge to the law.
The campaign should in my view concentrate on the principle of freedom of speech and not on religion. It will be playing into the minister's hands if he can point to an example of irresponsible offensiveness.
The danger in this law is not so much that people will lose the right to offend but that legitimate and serious criticism will be defined as offensive and thus silenced. Of course the two go together and both have to be allowed but the case should be made for serious freedom of speech rather than the right to blasphemy for the sake of it.
Whatever they say I will defend their right to say it but from a tactical point of view I'd say, careful now!
They may encourage among those who get offended, but I would imagine it will be designed to only offended real practicing religious people, and everyone else will just ignore it.
If they do it right, they will get the right group upset about it, who will respond quoting the Blasphemy law, and raise awareness that such legislation exists.
Generally speaking, the ridiculing of beliefs or politics has lead to increased tolerance and freedom of speech.
*************, *********, ********, **** <3 USA
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Even though I have a Christian outlook, I think this law is ridiculous and should be opposed. No belief system is above questioning and indeed criticsm.
Can you imagine how much more the abuse within church institutions might have been suppressed had such anti-freedom of speech legislation been in place? "Sure you can't tell anyone a priest did that - it'd be BLASPHEMOUS!"
This law is a bad, bad move in my opinion.
“A healthy social life is found only, when in the mirror of each soul the whole community finds its reflection, and when in the whole community the virtue of each one is living”
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
The anti-blasphemy law means that not only will silly clowning like Father Ted be banned but any reference serious or comical to religious could encur the wrath of an accusation of blasphemy.
If a Protestant clergyman questioned the actual presence of Jesus in the Catholic sacramental rite of the eucharist he would be guilty of blasphemy.
If a Catholic asked whether there were more than 12 apostles and if there were any women apostles he/she could be accused of blasphemy for questioning the truth of the Gospels.
If a group of theologians began a discussion into the divinity of Jesus - Was just a man? Was equally God and man? Was he aware of his own divinity or did he only find out after his resurrection? Is the resurrection just a parable or myth? Is the moral message of Jesus more important than the supernatural? etc etc.
They would be accused of blasphemy.
If a born again Christian was preaching his faith in the street and a Muslim was trying to preach his faith at the other side of the street they could each accuse eachother of blasphemy.
Easons stock bibles, korans, talmuds, philosophy and atheist texts on their shelves and is therefore guilty of blasphemy.
It's quite shocking that any Government would try to silence debate on religion after the Ryan Report. There is no public appetite for this and it just makes the Government look like a corrupt bunch of fools who are so far out of touch with reality that they really need to just resign.
I mean, what the hell are they trying to do ? Cover-up more child abuse allegations perhaps ?!
This kind of things simply cannot be allowed to happen, it is utterly ridiculous and it is destroying the international reputation of the country and making us look like a social backwater (again!).
When a Government starts implementing deeply unpopular legislation that is being driven by something other than the national interest and the greater good, it's time to demand a general election.
We simply cannot have the national agenda set by a bunch of religious nut jobs lobbying in the background. We've been there, done that and have the the 35,000+ completely destroyed adults as a result.
Reply With Quote