Blasphemous libel proposal

Free Speech IE

I was absolutely gobsmacked when Ahern came out with his proposal re the blasphemous libel legislation. I am currently involved in trying to bring together like-minded people to fight the proposal. A group of us are hosting a public meeting in Waterford this Thursday, 21st May. Further meetings across the country are to follow. If anybody from the legal profession is interested in speaking at the Waterford event, please get in touch. The details are as follows:

BLASPHEMY IS A VICTIMLESS CRIME

PUBLIC MEETING

VENUE: THE TOWER HOTEL, WATERFORD CITY
DATE: THURSDAY 21st MAY
TIME: 8 -10pm


A public meeting will be held in The Tower Hotel, Waterford City, to oppose the Government’s proposed revival of the blasphemy laws.

The meeting was planned on a new Irish website - http://blasphemy.ie - which also includes examples of material that could become illegal if the new law is passed.

The Waterford meeting is the first of several to be held around the country, organised by Atheist Ireland, an advocacy group for an ethical and secular Ireland.

Speakers will include:

Michael Nugent, chair of Atheist Ireland and co-author of I Keano

Barry Grant, Waterford resident and writer/videomaker.

Other speakers to be confirmed.


Local politicians will be invited, including Deputy Brendan Kenneally, Chairman of the Select Joint Committee for Justice, as will Deputy Brian O'Shea, also a member of said committee.

“Most Irish people, regardless of their religious beliefs, do not want this law to be passed” said Barry Grant. “This meeting will give Waterford people an opportunity to voice their opinions.”

Further information:

blasphemyireland@gmail.com

Campaign website: http://blasphemy.ie

PDN

Free Speech IE wrote: »

I was absolutely gobsmacked when Ahern came out with his proposal re the blasphemous libel legislation. I am currently involved in trying to bring together like-minded people to fight the proposal. A group of us are hosting a public meeting in Waterford this Thursday, 21st May. Further meetings across the country are to follow. If anybody from the legal profession is interested in speaking at the Waterford event, please get in touch. The details are as follows:

BLASPHEMY IS A VICTIMLESS CRIME

PUBLIC MEETING

VENUE: THE TOWER HOTEL, WATERFORD CITY
DATE: THURSDAY 21st MAY
TIME: 8 -10pm


A public meeting will be held in The Tower Hotel, Waterford City, to oppose the Government’s proposed revival of the blasphemy laws.

The meeting was planned on a new Irish website - http://blasphemy.ie - which also includes examples of material that could become illegal if the new law is passed.

The Waterford meeting is the first of several to be held around the country, organised by Atheist Ireland, an advocacy group for an ethical and secular Ireland.

Speakers will include:

Michael Nugent, chair of Atheist Ireland and co-author of I Keano

Barry Grant, Waterford resident and writer/videomaker.

Other speakers to be confirmed.


Local politicians will be invited, including Deputy Brendan Kenneally, Chairman of the Select Joint Committee for Justice, as will Deputy Brian O'Shea, also a member of said committee.

“Most Irish people, regardless of their religious beliefs, do not want this law to be passed” said Barry Grant. “This meeting will give Waterford people an opportunity to voice their opinions.”

Further information:

blasphemyireland@gmail.com

Campaign website: http://blasphemy.ie

I, like many Christians, am totally opposed to the proposed blasphemy law. However, the title of your meeting 'Blasphemy is a Victimless Crime' and a lot of the stuff on your website seem purposely designed to alienate people like me.

I don't think blasphemy is funny or clever, but I am opposed to it being made illegal. There are plenty of other things that I find distatesful or immoral, but on principle I think the State (or the Church) has no business enforcing Christian morality upon non-Christians.

It's unfortunate that you appear unable to seek common cause with people like me and instead you set up a website that celebrates Dawkins' petty vindictive tirades against religion and crap such as 'Jerry Springer the Opera'.

While it might give you pleasure to take an opportunity to stick two fingers up at religion, resisting that temptation might have created a broader-based coalition incorporating Christian leaders & community leaders. I hope that this massive misstep does not backfire on you and open the door for Ahern's folly to become law.

ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI

PDN wrote: »

I, like many Christians, am totally opposed to the proposed blasphemy law. However, the title of your meeting 'Blasphemy is a Victimless Crime' and a lot of the stuff on your website seem purposely designed to alienate people like me.

I don't think blasphemy is funny or clever, but I am opposed to it being made illegal. There are plenty of other things that I find distatesful or immoral, but on principle I think the State (or the Church) has no business enforcing Christian morality upon non-Christians.

It's unfortunate that you appear unable to seek common cause with people like me and instead you set up a website that celebrates Dawkins' petty vindictive tirades against religion and crap such as 'Jerry Springer the Opera'.

While it might give you pleasure to take an opportunity to stick two fingers up at religion, resisting that temptation might have created a broader-based coalition incorporating Christian leaders & community leaders. I hope that this massive misstep does not backfire on you and open the door for Ahern's folly to become law.

While, as a fairly strong-minded atheist, I would totally disagree with PDN's opinions towards blasphemy, and agree with yours towards it, I do agree looking at the blog that it could be somewhat alienating to Christians who disagree with the law, as well as maybe a few 'moderate' atheists who prefer to appear cuddly.

While obviously it's your choice whether to suppress some of your stronger opinions for the purposes of pragmatism at the expense of showing your true emotions, it is perhaps something that should be borne in mind?

Personally, if it were my blog I would keep it much as you've kept yours, but then, contrary to more sensible people I rarely care about hiding my contentious ideological positions in front of others regardless of outcome...

Free Speech IE

PDN wrote: »

I, like many Christians, am totally opposed to the proposed blasphemy law. However, the title of your meeting 'Blasphemy is a Victimless Crime' and a lot of the stuff on your website seem purposely designed to alienate people like me.

I don't think blasphemy is funny or clever, but I am opposed to it being made illegal. There are plenty of other things that I find distatesful or immoral, but on principle I think the State (or the Church) has no business enforcing Christian morality upon non-Christians.

It's unfortunate that you appear unable to seek common cause with people like me and instead you set up a website that celebrates Dawkins' petty vindictive tirades against religion and crap such as 'Jerry Springer the Opera'.

While it might give you pleasure to take an opportunity to stick two fingers up at religion, resisting that temptation might have created a broader-based coalition incorporating Christian leaders & community leaders. I hope that this massive misstep does not backfire on you and open the door for Ahern's folly to become law.

I, personally, have no interest in gratuitous attempts to cause offence among religious people (although how that can be pre-empted or quantified is a major part of my problem with this legislation). The site is not mine, it is run by Michael Nugent of Atheist Ireland, so I can only give my opinion on its content. I feel that Michael is merely trying to give examples of what may be covered by the proposed legislation. I feel that this is valid in terms of opening up a debate and crystallizing the concept for people. I would agree with you wholeheartedly that the Jerry Springer Opera was 'crap', but I still aspire to live in a society where individuals are free to make their 'crap' operas without fear of prosecution.

When you say that you don't think blasphemy is funny or clever - I feel that you are referring to intentional blasphemy there (please correct me if I am wrong). Minister Ahern wants there to be proof of 'intent' in the proposed legislation - but how do we prove that? A Christian would actually be unintentionally blaspheming against Islam by claiming that Jesus Christ is the son of God. Who gets to decide whether the intent was there on not after a 'substantial number of adherents of that religion' have complained - the DPP? And what is a 'substantial number'? Is it 10%, 20%, 50%? If a person were to blaspheme agaist the Sikh guru or their holy book and 400 people protested, that would be roughly 50% of the Sikh population of Ireland - a very substantial number.

I will certainly be seeking to create a 'broader-based coalition incorporating Christian leaders & community leaders'. Alienation of religious believers who are opposed to the legislation was the first concern I voiced when I came onboard with this campaign as this will be a 'dead duck' if it becomes an Athiest-only issue or an Athiest v Religious issue. I was delighted to hear Fr Brian Darcy come out against the proposed legislation on Spirit Moves last Sunday. He laughed when he looked back at his assertion that the Life of Brian was blasphemous, at the time of its release. Of course, it was, and is, blasphemous but is also incredibly funny. He also pointed out that it made fun of the some of the dogma of the various churches more so than it did of Jesus Christ. By the way,Michael Nugent will be a guest on the show this Sunday.

I suppose we will have to agree to disagree in regards to 'Blasphemy is a victimless crime'. I think this sums it up perfectly. If God - the only true victim - is offended, he is well positioned to take action.