Ireland Bans Blasphemy

Originally posted by TaraLou
Surely a friend wouldn't report you?

Well i suppose friend of a friend is a better term What i mean is basically being overheard making a joke could end up with you in court. At least the law seems open to that situation.

Originally posted by TaraLou
As for the comedians, it is becoming more dangerous to expose ridiculous censorship these days.

But the Irish are a feisty lot, and they won't put up with this for long - maybe they will vote out these idiots.

You think they will huh? Because this is a country that first said no to the lisbon treaty and then voted yes after the politicians brow beat them into it. And yes comedians are finding their jobs harder, slowly but surely they have had to take more and more care.

Consider Jimmy Carr who made a joke about the soldiers coming home, now lots of the soldiers laughed it off, only a few people got annoyed, mostly those who didn't have any family members in the war!

Once again, either it is ok to make fun of everything or nothing, you can't pick and choose what is allowed and the fact politicians seems to support these stupid laws just worries me. This goes beyond simple political correctness where individual words are changed or banned, we are actively banning the discussion of entire ideas.

[edit on 2-1-2010 by ImaginaryReality1984]

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


You are so right that it is OK to make fun of everything or nothing.

It is also OK to be PC about everything or nothing and in my country "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others" (George Orwell, "Animal Farm"). Having said that, I don't believe it is OK to be PC at all - we should treat others with dignity and try not to offend them, but the truth lives on, regardless of PC. "The truth will set you free."

One of the most dangerous aspects of the rise, and rise of religious law governing against religious intolerance was established at the UN - the Saudis were pushing hard for laws against intolerance and were in heading up the department on religious intolerance - as it turned out questioning the validity of stoning people for religious offences, questioning issues such as justifiable rape, pre-pubescent marriage - (12 year old girls), victims of rape requiring a third party witness who MUSt be a male etc, etc, etc were deemed to be religiously intolerant.

The point of Ireland moving in this direction is not so much that it is disgusting in itself - rather that it condones this type of intolerance in the eyes of the emerging world. It sets a very, very dangerous precedent.

For those under the illusion that this represent only a mild and difficult to enforce ruling you are absolutely kidding yourself - for example - cctv security footage meant only to address national security issues have been used to prosecute people failing to recylce properly - while anti-terror laws designed to offer time to gather evidence against potential terrorists have been used against children - yes children.

These laws are never a basis from which things only get better - ever. They always get worse.

I find it appalling that there are some amongst us here who advocate this type of thing - or even have the asinine mendacity to defend it any way - truly appalling.

Originally posted by 13579
reply to post by audas

 

Australia is still a Colony and has no constitution!! Northern Ireland is not a catholic Majority

But that is true???

AUS is still a part of the commonwealth? its has no real constituion because of the fact the queen is your head of state?

and northen Ierland is not a catholic majority? the biggest party in NI is the DUP?

and besides that its runs its self now just like AUS does? sure the queen is head of state but who cares?

she dont make laws does she? We the people do? its only history.. and she still can take over the EMPIRE if she so wanted but never would its pointless even if she said she would?

we dont live in the past anymore mate.. sorry to burst ya bubble

What you say, or think, or hope, dream, fantasize about is completely and utterly irrelevant so why don't you stop presenting your inner dream scape as though it had any bearing on reality at all - it is utterly irrelevant.

The facts, are the facts are the facts are the facts ok = AUSTRALIA HAS A CONSTITUTION - IT IS CALLED THE AUSTRALIAN CONSTITUTION - The HIGH COURT of Australia - the most powerful court in the country decides exclusively on constitutional matters.

Secondly and finally we are talking about RELIGION not POLITICAL AFFILIATION - the DUP is a political party not a religion - please stop posting you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about - none - it is incredibly frustrating having to fill someone in on the fundamentals of life when trying to have discussion regarding the deeper political ramifications of religious dogma - please. If you have a genuine question you want answered then ask away - but please stop trying to make points about things you do not understand.

reply to post by FirstRonin


Oh Sweet Lapdancing Jesus! Thank the Gods that I do not live in Ireland! Considering the number of Fundies I tick off on a regular basis in the religious forums, I'd be on death row within a month on this one!

Since Ireland is a Catholic country, maybe this is to prevent anyone from accusing Father Patrick of the 'bottom's up boogie' of little Sean??? Just a thought!

Oh yeah, and Mohammed can bite me too!!! (If I was the slightest bit artistic, I'd draw a picture of the rat b@stard and post it here too!)

*Blasphemy- Fun for the whole family!!!

reply to post by Iamonlyhuman


You are right I was incorrect about blasphemy law in US. Thanx for correcting me

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
Oh Sweet Lapdancing Jesus! Thank the Gods that I do not live in Ireland! Considering the number of Fundies I tick off on a regular basis in the religious forums, I'd be on death row within a month on this one!

Nah not death row, just prison. See you wouldn't be able to pay all of those fines (i assume) and if you could they would just continue to pile up until you were poor so they would ship you to prison instead.

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
Since Ireland is a Catholic country, maybe this is to prevent anyone from accusing Father Patrick of the 'bottom's up boogie' of little Sean??? Just a thought!

Oh yeah, and Mohammed can bite me too!!! (If I was the slightest bit artistic, I'd draw a picture of the rat b@stard and post it here too!)

*Blasphemy- Fun for the whole family!!!

See now this is the problem, as you are not religious (and netiher am i) when we say such things it is seen as bullying and intolerant. The argument is that we can't understand how much that upsets some people. My response to that argument is simply that i have every right to upset anyone with any view i care to entertain as long as i do not cause any physical harm. My second response is that if their faith is so strong and they know they are right then why do they go upset when i say they are not? Seems very strange.

Finally there are times when people upset me a great deal, i get annoyed with creationists lying and abusing science, truly i get very angry over it so why can't i invent a law so they can't teach it ever again? Or hey what about daily life, should i be able to take out a law that prevents women from forcing men to go shopping with them? I mean that experience is very upsetting for the majority of our gender

It's the same thing that we here in America call "hate crimes" .... dumb, pointless, only serves to rile people up .. but hey, thats PC for you.

reply to post by JaxonRoberts


ironically..... it was not religious "fundies" that proposed the law.. the guy who wrote this law was a member of the liberal leaning party.. and was even a member of the European Liberal coalition.

It's Political Correctness ... not religious .. and again, it's no different than America's "hate crime" laws.

Simple solution:

1. Create a new religious group whose belief is that there is no one God (leave it at that) being vague is perfectly normal for religious groups
2. Have meetings of said group, ensure there is a "book" to believe in. A physics book re-written for the layman for example.
3. Give the group a name and make sure everybody puts that down on every form they can.
4. Sue anybody for blasphemy! that criticises this new religion , which would be all other religious groups !!!!!!!!!!!!!

reply to post by FirstRonin



If only it had have been as quick to stop its abusive Nun's and child molesting priests. You have to love a religion that actively supports these kinds of activities and still they (children of god) flock to partake in the religion drug to take away their mortal fears. If they'd only move to UFO's then at least we'd see a lot less children being scared for life.

Didn't the jews (and their sympathisers) introduce a similar law (well statute, cause common law isn’t as stupid or profitable)that means you can go to jail/fined if you question the Holocaust? I guess the next is one that questions, Global warming or Government, or isn't that already in place?

And perhaps this is why certain European countries (France, Germany) have been giving Scientology such a hard time over the last couple of years or so.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of scientology, but if their "faith" is going to be subject to the same protections as other "major faiths" then they would wield a lot more power.

Now, if in future I put my faith down as "Jedi" would I be given the same protection in law?

I doubt it - this is designed to stop fundies of major religions squabbling and killing over minor differences in abrahamic faith.

In some ways it could be considered a good thing, but FORCING people to be "tolerant" never works - it usually has the opposite effect...

Originally posted by budski
And perhaps this is why certain European countries (France, Germany) have been giving Scientology such a hard time over the last couple of years or so.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of scientology, but if their "faith" is going to be subject to the same protections as other "major faiths" then they would wield a lot more power.

The clear difference is that scientology has actively involved itself in criminal actions. From tax fraud to plain theft and intimidation. Let them have their insane faith, i don't mind that at all but i do mind all of their criminal actions.

Originally posted by budski
Now, if in future I put my faith down as "Jedi" would I be given the same protection in law?

I doubt it - this is designed to stop fundies of major religions squabbling and killing over minor differences in abrahamic faith.

In some ways it could be considered a good thing, but FORCING people to be "tolerant" never works - it usually has the opposite effect...

This won't stop fundies because by their very nature they just can't stop and surely if they want to spout off some blasphemy at another religion they are protected because under their own religion it is not blasphemy.

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


Oh, puhlease,

pretty much every "faith" has practitioners/adherents who engage in practices which are not legal, intimidatory or morally questionable - with the RCC being one of the worst culprits.
And before you question this as being official policy of scientology as opposed to catholcism, I suggest you read Crimen Sollicitationis for a view of real intmidatory, illegal and morally questionable tactics.

Much as I dislike scientology, they have as much right as any other "church" to protection of their beliefs.

Originally posted by budski

Much as I dislike scientology, they have as much right as any other "church" to protection of their beliefs.

I did not state they didn't have as much right to their beliefs as any other church. I only said that any country has every right to prosecute criminal acts commited by their organisation.

So once again, this law is a stupid law and people should be able to ridicule any religion they wish. As long as it doesn't get violent of course.

reply to post by FirstRonin


OMFG!!!!!!
Are they serious?

Originally posted by audas

Originally posted by simon75

in fact the vast a majority were Irish - deported from northern Ireland as part of the British pogrom to dilute the northern Irish with English and protestant blood

[edit on 1/1/10 by simon75]

I have no objection to being corrected when the correction is in fact right - however as has been evidenced in this thread over and over again - people are simply making up facts, have no idea of history, logic or the English language - here are two links which well and truly corroborate what I was saying -

en.wikipedia.org...
www.historyonthenet.com...

Please read what you said above as it pertains to Northern Ireland - that Northern Ireland was populated by the English, this is not the case.

The links you posted are relevant to all of Ireland, not just the North. The link about History of Northern Ireland had little or no relevance to Northern Ireland in most of the early timelines (except 1610 and the plantation). If you read the wikipedia link fully (especially the section Ulster Plantation 1606 onwards) you would have seen this:

"James VI of Scotland had become King of England in 1603, uniting the those two crowns –also of course gaining possession of the Kingdom of Ireland – an English possession. The Plantation of Ulster was sold to him as a joint "British", i.e. English and Scottish, venture to pacify and civilise Ulster. So at least half of the settlers would be Scots. Six counties were involved in the official plantation – Armagh, Fermanagh, Cavan, Coleraine, Donegal and Tyrone."

In fact most of those that went to Ulster were Scots and not English (a majority?). I never mentioned that the rest of Ireland was not occuppied by the English, as this was the case and there is plenty of evidence to support this, but YOU specified in your post to which I replied that it was Northern Ireland and not all of Ireland.

Thx

reply to post by FirstRonin

Jesus Christ was crucified on a cross for the Talmudic crime of blasphemy...the alleged crime calling himself GOD. Aside from the wrongheadedness of government endorsing ANY religious law, let alone those that carry penalties, our Congress and President recognized a group of talmudic laws that prohibit blasphemy and ("thoretically") prescribe capital punishment. And by talmudic law, believing and expressing that Jesus Christ IS GOD is blasphemy.
Don't hit the snooze button on this folks.