Minister to Amend New Blasphemy Law
May 19, 2009 by Michael Nugent
The Minister for Justice, Dermot Ahern, is to amend his new blasphemy law by providing, as a defence, that a person accused of blasphemy can “prove that a reasonable person would find genuine literary, artistic, political, scientific, or academic value” in the blasphemous matter.
He is not proposing to reduce the fine of €100,000, the onus of proof is on the defendant to prove this new line of defence, and the police may still seize and destroy blasphemous statements. The Minister’s proposed blasphemy law now reads like this:
- 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.
- For the purposes of this section, a person publishes or utters blasphemous matter if (a) he or she publishes or utters 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 (b) he or she intends, by the publication or utterance of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage.
- It shall be a defence to proceedings for an offence under this section for the defendant to prove that a reasonable person would find genuine literary, artistic, political, scientific, or academic value in the matter to which the offence relates.
The revised amendment has been published on the Oireachtas website. The All-Party Committee on Justice will discuss it tomorrow, Wednesday May 20. We in the campaign against the blasphemy law would welcome your opinions on this development as we consider our response to it.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
In the Old Testament God frequently tells people to slaughter the Amalekites including their children and infants. In fact King David is given his thrown as a reward for a some particularly thorough butchering. The modern Amalekites are the peace loving council of advisers in the . I suspect that they may look forward to the new Blasphomy law so that they can get the Bible banned.
One redeaming feature of the old testament God is that at least when you are dead he will pretty much leave you alone.
The same cannot be said of Jesus who promises to torcher people for eternity for all sorts of minor offences for example he says ‘anyone who says “you fool” should fear the fires of hell’.
One thing that many religions have in common is that they blaspheme eachother’s gods and the monotheistic religious texts are remarkably intollerant of other faiths.
The Koran justifies killing people who loose their faith.
I suspect that if the blasphomy law is passed, then the first cases to be brought to court will be by people who want the Bible and the Koran banned.
My question of the day for those who have studied the bible: how many times in the gospels does Jesus ask people to gauge out their own eyes?
In the Old Testament God frequently tells people to slaughter the Amalekites including their children and infants. In fact King David is given his thrown as a reward for a some particularly thorough butchering. The modern Amalekites are the peace loving council of advisers in the Reformed Pastafarian Church. I suspect that they may look forward to the new Blasphemy law so that they can get the Bible banned.
One redeeming feature of the old testament God is that at least when you are dead he will pretty much leave you alone.
The same cannot be said of Jesus who promises to torture people for eternity for all sorts of minor offences for example he says ‘anyone who says “you fool” should fear the fires of hell’.
One thing that many religions have in common is that they blaspheme each-other’s gods and the monotheistic religious texts are remarkably intolerant of other faiths.
The Koran justifies killing people who loose their faith.
I suspect that if the blasphemy law is passed, then the first cases to be brought to court will be by people who want the Bible and the Koran banned.
My question of the day for those who have studied the bible: how many times in the gospels does Jesus ask people to gauge out their own eyes?
( a previous version of this comment was submitted with a broken link and a couple of typos )
Not good enough until he ads ‘comedic’. Then the only people prosecutable will be members of other religions.
The law is still absurdly vague and interpretable, though.
well satiric would do
I am convinced that my lack of belief in all gods and the rational by which I live my life, and the scientific knowledge that underpins my values and beliefs, will when publicly expressed by me, almost certainly be deemed by someone to be deeply offensive. This will put me firmly in the category of suspected criminal.
The right to freedom of speech is an absolute essential in a free and healthy Democracy. I cannot accept that there can be any “sacred” areas where the right to freedom of speech is to be curtailed and diminished. A limited Freedom of Speech is no freedom at all but a mockery, for it puts one person above that of another.
I gave up all belief in things superstitious and irrational as a young man. I wish to express to you my horror at the idea that someone who still adheres to beliefs which are utterly unverifiable, utterly untestable and which constitute an assault on my critical faculties, can use these “personal beliefs” as a basis to make me a criminal for expressing mine.
This is especially so because I base my ideas on the rational, on facts which are verifiable, testable and which in the light of future knowledge can be amended to encompass a greater understanding of life. No religious belief will ever entertain this principle and nor can it, for I believe that greater understanding and knowledge is the death knell of superstition.
As a consequence I fear that this proposed legislation will in time and very soon at that, make criminals of those of us who seek to defend the rational against the irrational. There is nothing surer. This is because about the only thing left for the belivers in superstition to rally behind is their ability to be offended. Let us fight against this nonsence being considered a crime. Sadly things are worse now with these new amendments where the accused have to prove their innocence. A reactionary dying kick of a right wing F.F. Government.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2009/0702/1224249909022.html
Fine reduced to €25k
Kind of like a government ’swear jar’ isn’t it?