Blasphemy - An ecumenical matter

shane7218

It's about time this ridiculous law is removed from the constitution in my opinion. Does anyone think there will be any opposition to its removal ? (Aside from the enlightened folks at IONA)

Mint Aero

Careful now

Jesus Wept

Down with this sort of thing.

Smiles35

I'm all for the free gob, really. But I really want sedition kept for a rainy day.

kneemos

A three legged dog walks into a bar and says...

silverfeather

Has it ever been used against anyone in practice?

darkpagandeath

silverfeather wrote: »

Has it ever been used against anyone in practice?

Sure some of our none Catholic members of the community threatened legal action did they not after Paris... Stating the blasphemy law's we have.

dxhound2005

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Sure some of our none Catholic members of the community threatened legal action did they not after Paris...

I think they are non Protestant as well.

catallus

Blasphemy is the least of our worries.

It's the lack of holy water which is the main threat.

Totofan99

The constitution was basically written by Archbishop McQuaid. It should be rewritten to remove all mention of religion. Religion has no place in a constitution. Just my opinion, of course.

Totofan99

Notwork Error wrote: »

Your opinion has no place in the constitution!

You could be right. But Ireland is supposed to be a secular state.

FreaksAndGeeks

The law realistically would never be enforced today so nobody really cares about it imo

macker33

shane7218 wrote: »

It's about time this ridiculous law is removed from the constitution in my opinion. Does anyone think there will be any opposition to its removal ? (Aside from the enlightened folks at IONA)

Its a good law, i like it, of course nobody obeys it and its never enforced.
Why get rid of it, it isnt doing any harm?

kneemos

silverfeather wrote: »

Has it ever been used against anyone in practice?

It was used against me in a training match.
I swerved and tapped in between its legs.

DrGreenthumb

Well god is a cúnt, let bishop Brennan bring on some charges and I'll give him a good kick up the arse

darkpagandeath

macker33 wrote: »

Its a good law, i like it, of course nobody obeys it and its never enforced.
Why get rid of it, it isnt doing any harm?

A group threatened to take Media to court over blasphemy. After recent happenings in France. Needs getting rid off.

kneemos

darkpagandeath wrote: »

A group threatened to take Media to court over blasphemy. After recent happenings in France. Needs getting rid off.

I think it's actually impossible to win a case of blasphemy.
Forget the name of the site that some guy created specifically to take the piss out of the law.

Anyhoo another referendum to remove it.

Smiles35

I remember that. Then Miriam 'O Callahan said the spokesman wanted to live under differnt laws. Working as intended for some of this stuff tbh.

macker33

Well you know a country is fvcked in the head when it will protect gays but not christians.

El Weirdo

macker33 wrote: »

Well you know a country is fvcked in the head when it will protect gays but not christians.

Christians aren't protected here?

Have Romans been throwing them to the lions again?

jimgoose

Didn't that only come in recently courtesy of some Fianna Fail clodhopper??

Knasher

macker33 wrote: »

Why get rid of it, it isnt doing any harm?

It was, rather infamously, used by Pakistan in front of the UN to try and promote a blasphemy law in other countries. I'm not sure I'd agree that the law is harmless when it is providing support to counties that execute people for it.

o1s1n

macker33 wrote: »

Well you know a country is fvcked in the head when it will protect gays but not christians.

How is it not 'protecting' Christians?

GAAman

kneemos wrote: »

A three legged dog walks into a bar and says...

I'm lookin for the man that shot my paw....

gormdubhgorm

Ah jayus? What will I say if there is no blasphemy then will be no "Ah Jayus's" anymore?.
On the plus side there will be one fewer commandment to learn...

Not a NSA agent

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Ah jayus? What will I say if there is no blasphemy then will be no "Ah Jayus's" anymore?.
On the plus side there will be one fewer commandment to learn...

You can't say ah jaysus until it's removed, you're oppressing macker!

gormdubhgorm

It is funny how nobody say's "Ah Mohammed" maybe that is because they don't know what he looks like no one has ever seen his face

So it would be "is it yourself" or whatever the Arabic equivalent is!

It is all very confusing didn't Van Morrison write a song about the Muslims called the "Sunni side of the street"?

mickydoomsux

macker33 wrote: »

Well you know a country is fvcked in the head when it will protect gays but not christians.

Protect them from what?

Sane people ridiculing their childish stories and backwards opinions?

valoren

It's not just applicable to a deity though and that's the problem with it.
Any religious or 'things' considered holy fall under the blasphemy remit.

It's about as practical to everyday life as the 'law' in Harry Potter saying don't use magic in public where 'Muggles' could see it.

Akrasia

Has everyone forgotten Boards.ie's own Blasphemygate from 2013?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057057881

Blasphemy laws have a chilling effect on the public discourse, and they also have the potential to be used to stifle free speech. All it takes is a well funded religious group to threaten legal action and they can frighten media outlets into censoring their content.

gramar

macker33 wrote: »

Well you know a country is fvcked in the head when it will protect gays but not christians.

What did the Chirstians ever do for us?

RobertKK

I don't mind if it is removed, there is talk about replacing it with religious tolerance laws instead, something some people on this forum lack.

So maybe what you have is better than what will replace it.

Given the lack of tolerance by some, there will be protection of religious views, given religious freedom is a human right.

endacl

RobertKK wrote: »

I don't mind if it is removed, there is talk about replacing it with religious tolerance laws instead, something some people on this forum lack.

So maybe what you have is better than what will replace it.

Given the lack of tolerance by some, there will be protection of religious views, given religious freedom is a human right.

As is freedom from religion.

seamus

RobertKK wrote: »

I don't mind if it is removed, there is talk about replacing it with religious tolerance laws instead, something some people on this forum lack.

So maybe what you have is better than what will replace it.

Given the lack of tolerance by some, there will be protection of religious views, given religious freedom is a human right.

Freedom of religion is already adequately protected by the constitution and our anti-discrimination laws.

Removal of the concept of blasphemy from the constitution would not affect people's right to have or practice religion.

There is no viewpoint in this world that should be legally protected from criticism or mockery.

RobertKK

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Protect them from what?

Sane people ridiculing their childish stories and backwards opinions?

Do people think posts like this are helpful in bringing people together?

Is this a sign of tolerance of other people?

After hours really needs to be renamed to the "anti-catholic forum". Its becoming unreadable when every second thread is full of vile insults towards Catholics. Its a pity the blasphemy laws couldn't be applied to stop it....

keeponhurling

shane7218 wrote: »

It's about time this ridiculous law is removed from the constitution in my opinion. Does anyone think there will be any opposition to its removal ? (Aside from the enlightened folks at IONA)

Why do you think this in an important issue and needs removing?

Abusing other people's religions rarely brings about a positive impact, and often promotes hatred.

You're perfectly entitled to ignore religions if you like.

PopePalpatine

Brecken Screeching Viola wrote: »

After hours really needs to be renamed to the "anti-catholic forum". Its becoming unreadable when every second thread is full of vile insults towards Catholics. Its a pity the blasphemy laws couldn't be applied to stop it....

Need some ointment? Why not Zoidberg's Butthurt Cream?

The_Valeyard

Brecken Screeching Viola wrote: »

After hours really needs to be renamed to the "anti-catholic forum". Its becoming unreadable when every second thread is full of vile insults towards Catholics. Its a pity the blasphemy laws couldn't be applied to stop it....

It's not really anti-Catholic as such, just now and then the A&A warriors jump forum for a rambling keyboard crusade.

Akrasia

RobertKK wrote: »

Do people think posts like this are helpful in bringing people together?

Is this a sign of tolerance of other people?

Ridiculous beliefs are open to ridicule. The alternative is that we should 'respect' all the stupid opinions that people have?

Scientists don't 'respect' arguments that are ridiculous. If someone says the earth is 6000 years old because of what they were told by their religious leaders the scientist is perfectly within his rights to laugh at them.

First someone should be educated, but if they refuse to accept reality, then laughter and ridicule are perfectly legitimate methods to contain the virus of ignorance from spreading to others

George Carlin and Bill Hicks turned more people away from religion than all the respectful debates' combined

Allowing the ridiculous to be ridiculed is essential for free speech and democracy.

Allowing anything to be ridiculed is essential in a free society, especially because there are few things more ridiculous than someone who is clearly wrong trying to ridicule someone who is clearly right.

The absurdity of a creationist trying to laugh at a evolutionary biologist only makes the creationists position even more ridiculous.

The truth will prevail when all ideas are freely expressed. This is why the first order of business in any cult or religion is to get people to stop reading and listening to people who don't agree with them

endacl

Brecken Screeching Viola wrote: »

After hours really needs to be renamed to the "anti-catholic forum". Its becoming unreadable when every second thread is full of vile insults towards Catholics. Its a pity the blasphemy laws couldn't be applied to stop it....

I think, given our history, much of the comment on the topic has been fairly restrained.

If you like, I could do you up some proper vile...?

mickydoomsux

RobertKK wrote: »

Do people think posts like this are helpful in bringing people together?

Is this a sign of tolerance of other people?

I don't want to be "brought together" with mentally ill people.

galljga1

Brecken Screeching Viola wrote: »

After hours really needs to be renamed to the "anti-catholic forum". Its becoming unreadable when every second thread is full of vile insults towards Catholics. Its a pity the blasphemy laws couldn't be applied to stop it....

It is just an attempt to balance the books after two thousand years of inflicting nonsense on the world. A long way to go yet.

PopePalpatine

Brecken Screeching Viola wrote: »

After hours really needs to be renamed to the "anti-catholic forum". Its becoming unreadable when every second thread is full of vile insults towards Catholics. Its a pity the blasphemy laws couldn't be applied to stop it....

Oh please, your kind would use anti-blasphemy laws to whitewash the abuse your church has inflicted on this country.

mickydoomsux

Brecken Screeching Viola wrote: »

After hours really needs to be renamed to the "anti-catholic forum". Its becoming unreadable when every second thread is full of vile insults towards Catholics. Its a pity the blasphemy laws couldn't be applied to stop it....

Why doesn't GOD stop it?

He did a good job stopping the Yes vote last Frid....... oh, right.

P_1

RobertKK wrote: »

Do people think posts like this are helpful in bringing people together?

Is this a sign of tolerance of other people?

It's a fundamental concept of freedom of speech Robert. You are entitled to hold and express your opinion, equally I'm entitled to ridicule said opinion. The fact that said opinion would be religious in nature is no different to you holding a particular opinion on Brian Cody's latest tactics.

galljga1

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Why doesn't GOD stop it?

He did a good job stopping the Yes vote last Frid....... oh, right.

You are not suggesting that God is.......... No, I can't say it, not even on AH.

RobertKK

The thing is an intolerance of religion in this country is mostly focused at Catholics.
There is a lack of education by some who show this intolerance, as seen last Friday when complaints were made that a bible was present on the table where election/referendum officials were, this was out of ignorance, taking offense at a book.
We need people to be educated on all sides.
The Catholic Church accepts evolution, but look at this forum, one would think they didn't.
I believe we should accept that people have different views, they can express these views, but I don't believe it is right when people go out of their way to offend others.
The thing is there is no point reporting posts on this site that belittle people who have a religious faith.
This is an accepted intolerance. I don't mind people not wanting religion in their lives, that is how they feel, but it is wrong when a person goes out of their way to belittle people without cause or need.
It only causes trouble because someone has a problem with what someone else believes. The same person causing that trouble would take offense if they were being told what to believe and what not to believe.
I think before any blasphemy law, the people who run this site should enforce a right for varied opinion on religion but should crackdown on posts which are nothing more than trolling, but which seem to be constantly allowed.
It is the only accepted intolerance...freedom of speech and expression comes with a responsibility, and some people are not big enough to be responsible with this right on this forum.

galljga1

P_1 wrote: »

It's a fundamental concept of freedom of speech Robert. You are entitled to hold and express your opinion, equally I'm entitled to ridicule said opinion. The fact that said opinion would be ridiculous in nature is no different to you holding a particular opinion on Brian Cody's latest tactics.

Corrected that for you, spellchecker can be a pain in the ass.

The_Valeyard

galljga1 wrote: »

It is just an attempt to balance the books after two thousand years of inflicting nonsense on the world. A long way to go yet.

Atheist soviet governments did a good job on that in only 60 years.

galljga1

RobertKK wrote: »

The thing is an intolerance of religion in this country is mostly focused at Catholics.
There is a lack of education by some who show this intolerance, as seen last Friday when complaints were made that a bible was present on the table where election/referendum officials were, this was out of ignorance, taking offense at a book.
We need people to be educated on all sides.
The Catholic Church accepts evolution, but look at this forum, one would think they didn't.
I believe we should accept that people have different views, they can express these views, but I don't believe it is right when people go out of their way to offend others.
The thing is there is no point reporting posts on this site that belittle people who have a religious faith.
This is an accepted intolerance. I don't mind people not wanting religion in their lives, that is how they feel, but it is wrong when a person goes out of their way to belittle people without cause or need.
It only causes trouble because someone has a problem with what someone else believes. The same person causing that trouble would take offense if they were being told what to believe and what not to believe.
I think before any blasphemy law, the people who run this site should enforce a right for varied opinion on religion but should crackdown on posts which are nothing more than trolling, but which seem to be constantly allowed.
It is the only accepted intolerance...freedom of speech and expression comes with a responsibility, and some people are not big enough to be responsible with this right on this forum.

It is predominantly a catholic country, logically, that would be the religion most open to attack particularly with the plethora of lunatic fringe groups attached to it.
Personally, I believe christianity is nonsense, thus if someone spouts nonsense based on 'the book', I feel free to query it. If that is offensive, tough. Have you considered that I and many others find what is preached to be offensive. The fact that this is protected by blasphemy laws is ridiculous.