Atheists in the Pub Dublin Meetup

Atheists in the Pub will be hosted today, Thursday January 21st, at 7.30pm in the Mont Clare Hotel, junction of Clare St. and Merrion Square, Dublin. It’s an informal social gathering of members of Atheist Ireland and any members of the public who want to drop along and meet some like-minded people.

We’ll be discussing ideas for the campaign to have the blasphemy law repealed and how to widen the campaign to take in the whole area of removing faith from the Irish Constitution. We have a Constitution in which rather than us having the right to worship god, god has the right to be worshipped by us.

So bring pen and paper so we can leave with a list of ideas and hopefully volunteers to carry those ideas out!

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Atheist Ireland’s 25 Blasphemous Quotes

From today, 1 January 2010, the new Irish blasphemy law becomes operational, and we in Atheist Ireland begin our campaign to have it repealed. Blasphemy is now a crime punishable by a €25,000 fine. The new law defines blasphemy as publishing or uttering matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby intentionally causing outrage among a substantial number of adherents of that religion, with some defences permitted.

This new law is both silly and dangerous. It is silly because medieval religious laws have no place in a modern secular republic, where the criminal law should protect people and not ideas. And it is dangerous because it incentives religious outrage, and because Islamic States led by Pakistan are already using the wording of this Irish law to promote new blasphemy laws at UN level.

We believe in the golden rule: that we have a right to be treated justly, and that we have a responsibility to treat other people justly. Blasphemy laws are unjust: they silence people in order to protect ideas. In a civilised society, people have a right to to express and to hear ideas about religion even if other people find those ideas to be outrageous.

Publication of 25 blasphemous quotes

In this context we now publish a list of 25 blasphemous quotes, which have previously been published by or uttered by or attributed to Jesus Christ, Muhammad, Mark Twain, Tom Lehrer, Randy Newman, James Kirkup, Monty Python, Rev Ian Paisley, Conor Cruise O’Brien, Frank Zappa, Salman Rushdie, Bjork, Amanda Donohoe, George Carlin, Paul Woodfull, Jerry Springer the Opera, Tim Minchin, Richard Dawkins, Pope Benedict XVI, Christopher Hitchens, PZ Myers, Ian O’Doherty, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor and Dermot Ahern.

Despite these quotes being abusive and insulting in relation to matters held sacred by various religions, we unreservedly support the right of these people to have published or uttered them, and we unreservedly support the right of any Irish citizen to make comparable statements about matters held sacred by any religion without fear of being criminalised, and without having to prove to a court that a reasonable person would find any particular value in the statement.

Campaign begins to repeal the Irish blasphemy law

We ask Fianna Fail and the Green Party to repeal their anachronistic blasphemy law, as part of the revision of the Defamation Act that is included within the Act. We ask them to hold a referendum to remove the reference to blasphemy from the Irish Constitution.

We also ask all TDs and Senators to support a referendum to remove references to God from the Irish Constitution, including the clauses that prevent atheists from being appointed as President of Ireland or as a Judge without swearing a religious oath asking God to direct them in their work.

If you run a website, blog or other media publication, please feel free to republish this statement and the list of quotes yourself, in order to show your support for the campaign to repeal the Irish blasphemy law and to promote a rational, ethical, secular Ireland.

List of 25 Blasphemous Quotes Published by Atheist Ireland

1. Jesus Christ, when asked if he was the son of God, in Matthew 26:64: “Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.” According to the Christian Bible, the Jewish chief priests and elders and council deemed this statement by Jesus to be blasphemous, and they sentenced Jesus to death for saying it.

2. Jesus Christ, talking to Jews about their God, in John 8:44: “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him.” This is one of several chapters in the Christian Bible that can give a scriptural foundation to Christian anti-Semitism. The first part of John 8, the story of “whoever is without sin cast the first stone”, was not in the original version, but was added centuries later. The original John 8 is a debate between Jesus and some Jews. In brief, Jesus calls the Jews who disbelieve him sons of the Devil, the Jews try to stone him, and Jesus runs away and hides.

3. Muhammad, quoted in Hadith of Bukhari, Vol 1 Book 8 Hadith 427: “May Allah curse the Jews and Christians for they built the places of worship at the graves of their prophets.” This quote is attributed to Muhammad on his death-bed as a warning to Muslims not to copy this practice of the Jews and Christians. It is one of several passages in the Koran and in Hadith that can give a scriptural foundation to Islamic anti-Semitism, including the assertion in Sura 5:60 that Allah cursed Jews and turned some of them into apes and swine.

4. Mark Twain, describing the Christian Bible in Letters from the Earth, 1909: “Also it has another name – The Word of God. For the Christian thinks every word of it was dictated by God. It is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and some good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies… But you notice that when the Lord God of Heaven and Earth, adored Father of Man, goes to war, there is no limit. He is totally without mercy – he, who is called the Fountain of Mercy. He slays, slays, slays! All the men, all the beasts, all the boys, all the babies; also all the women and all the girls, except those that have not been deflowered. He makes no distinction between innocent and guilty… What the insane Father required was blood and misery; he was indifferent as to who furnished it.” Twain’s book was published posthumously in 1939. His daughter, Clara Clemens, at first objected to it being published, but later changed her mind in 1960 when she believed that public opinion had grown more tolerant of the expression of such ideas. That was half a century before Fianna Fail and the Green Party imposed a new blasphemy law on the people of Ireland.

5. Tom Lehrer, The Vatican Rag, 1963: “Get in line in that processional, step into that small confessional. There, the guy who’s got religion’ll tell you if your sin’s original. If it is, try playing it safer, drink the wine and chew the wafer. Two, four, six, eight, time to transubstantiate!”

6. Randy Newman, God’s Song, 1972: “And the Lord said: I burn down your cities – how blind you must be. I take from you your children, and you say how blessed are we. You all must be crazy to put your faith in me. That’s why I love mankind.”

7. James Kirkup, The Love That Dares to Speak its Name, 1976: “While they prepared the tomb I kept guard over him. His mother and the Magdalen had gone to fetch clean linen to shroud his nakedness. I was alone with him… I laid my lips around the tip of that great cock, the instrument of our salvation, our eternal joy. The shaft, still throbbed, anointed with death’s final ejaculation.” This extract is from a poem that led to the last successful blasphemy prosecution in Britain, when Denis Lemon was given a suspended prison sentence after he published it in the now-defunct magazine Gay News. In 2002, a public reading of the poem, on the steps of St. Martin-in-the-Fields church in Trafalgar Square, failed to lead to any prosecution. In 2008, the British Parliament abolished the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel.

8. Matthias, son of Deuteronomy of Gath, in Monty Python’s Life of Brian, 1979: “Look, I had a lovely supper, and all I said to my wife was that piece of halibut was good enough for Jehovah.”

9. Rev Ian Paisley MEP to the Pope in the European Parliament, 1988: “I denounce you as the Antichrist.” Paisley’s website describes the Antichrist as being “a liar, the true son of the father of lies, the original liar from the beginning… he will imitate Christ, a diabolical imitation, Satan transformed into an angel of light, which will deceive the world.”

10. Conor Cruise O’Brien, 1989: “In the last century the Arab thinker Jamal al-Afghani wrote: ‘Every Muslim is sick and his only remedy is in the Koran.’ Unfortunately the sickness gets worse the more the remedy is taken.”

11. Frank Zappa, 1989: “If you want to get together in any exclusive situation and have people love you, fine – but to hang all this desperate sociology on the idea of The Cloud-Guy who has The Big Book, who knows if you’ve been bad or good – and cares about any of it – to hang it all on that, folks, is the chimpanzee part of the brain working.”

12. Salman Rushdie, 1990: “The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas – uncertainty, progress, change – into crimes.” In 1989, Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran issued a fatwa ordering Muslims to kill Rushdie because of blasphemous passages in Rushdie’s novel The Satanic Verses.

13. Bjork, 1995: “I do not believe in religion, but if I had to choose one it would be Buddhism. It seems more livable, closer to men… I’ve been reading about reincarnation, and the Buddhists say we come back as animals and they refer to them as lesser beings. Well, animals aren’t lesser beings, they’re just like us. So I say fuck the Buddhists.”

14. Amanda Donohoe on her role in the Ken Russell movie Lair of the White Worm, 1995: “Spitting on Christ was a great deal of fun. I can’t embrace a male god who has persecuted female sexuality throughout the ages, and that persecution still goes on today all over the world.”

15. George Carlin, 1999: “Religion easily has the greatest bullshit story ever told. Think about it. Religion has actually convinced people that there’s an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever ’til the end of time! But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He’s all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can’t handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, talk about a good bullshit story. Holy Shit!”

16. Paul Woodfull as Ding Dong Denny O’Reilly, The Ballad of Jaysus Christ, 2000: “He said me ma’s a virgin and sure no one disagreed, Cause they knew a lad who walks on water’s handy with his feet… Jaysus oh Jaysus, as cool as bleedin’ ice, With all the scrubbers in Israel he could not be enticed, Jaysus oh Jaysus, it’s funny you never rode, Cause it’s you I do be shoutin’ for each time I shoot me load.”

17. Jesus Christ, in Jerry Springer The Opera, 2003: “Actually, I’m a bit gay.” In 2005, the Christian Institute tried to bring a prosecution against the BBC for screening Jerry Springer the Opera, but the UK courts refused to issue a summons.

18. Tim Minchin, Ten-foot Cock and a Few Hundred Virgins, 2005: “So you’re gonna live in paradise, With a ten-foot cock and a few hundred virgins, So you’re gonna sacrifice your life, For a shot at the greener grass, And when the Lord comes down with his shiny rod of judgment, He’s gonna kick my heathen ass.”

19. Richard Dawkins in The God Delusion, 2006: “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.” In 2007 Turkish publisher Erol Karaaslan was charged with the crime of insulting believers for publishing a Turkish translation of The God Delusion. He was acquitted in 2008, but another charge was brought in 2009. Karaaslan told the court that “it is a right to criticise religions and beliefs as part of the freedom of thought and expression.”

20. Pope Benedict XVI quoting a 14th century Byzantine emperor, 2006: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.” This statement has already led to both outrage and condemnation of the outrage. The Organisation of the Islamic Conference, the world’s largest Muslim body, said it was a “character assassination of the prophet Muhammad”. The Malaysian Prime Minister said that “the Pope must not take lightly the spread of outrage that has been created.” Pakistan’s foreign Ministry spokesperson said that “anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence”. The European Commission said that “reactions which are disproportionate and which are tantamount to rejecting freedom of speech are unacceptable.”

21. Christopher Hitchens in God is not Great, 2007: “There is some question as to whether Islam is a separate religion at all… Islam when examined is not much more than a rather obvious and ill-arranged set of plagiarisms, helping itself from earlier books and traditions as occasion appeared to require… It makes immense claims for itself, invokes prostrate submission or ‘surrender’ as a maxim to its adherents, and demands deference and respect from nonbelievers into the bargain. There is nothing-absolutely nothing-in its teachings that can even begin to justify such arrogance and presumption.”

22. PZ Myers, on the Roman Catholic communion host, 2008: “You would not believe how many people are writing to me, insisting that these horrible little crackers (they look like flattened bits of styrofoam) are literally pieces of their god, and that this omnipotent being who created the universe can actually be seriously harmed by some third-rate liberal intellectual at a third-rate university… However, inspired by an old woodcut of Jews stabbing the host, I thought of a simple, quick thing to do: I pierced it with a rusty nail (I hope Jesus’s tetanus shots are up to date). And then I simply threw it in the trash, followed by the classic, decorative items of trash cans everywhere, old coffeegrounds and a banana peel.”

23. Ian O’Doherty, 2009: “(If defamation of religion was illegal) it would be a crime for me to say that the notion of transubstantiation is so ridiculous that even a small child should be able to see the insanity and utter physical impossibility of a piece of bread and some wine somehow taking on corporeal form. It would be a crime for me to say that Islam is a backward desert superstition that has no place in modern, enlightened Europe and it would be a crime to point out that Jewish settlers in Israel who believe they have a God given right to take the land are, frankly, mad. All the above assertions will, no doubt, offend someone or other.”

24. Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, 2009: “Whether a person is atheist or any other, there is in fact in my view something not totally human if they leave out the transcendent… we call it God… I think that if you leave that out you are not fully human.” Because atheism is not a religion, the Irish blasphemy law does not protect atheists from abusive and insulting statements about their fundamental beliefs. While atheists are not seeking such protection, we include the statement here to point out that it is discriminatory that this law does not hold all citizens equal.

25. Dermot Ahern, Irish Minister for Justice, introducing his blasphemy law at an Oireachtas Justice Committee meeting, 2009, and referring to comments made about him personally: “They are blasphemous.” Deputy Pat Rabbitte replied: “Given the Minister’s self-image, it could very well be that we are blaspheming,” and Minister Ahern replied: “Deputy Rabbitte says that I am close to the baby Jesus, I am so pure.” So here we have an Irish Justice Minister joking about himself being blasphemed, at a parliamentary Justice Committee discussing his own blasphemy law, that could make his own jokes illegal.

Finally, as a bonus, Micheal Martin, Irish Minister for Foreign Affairs, opposing attempts by Islamic States to make defamation of religion a crime at UN level, 2009: “We believe that the concept of defamation of religion is not consistent with the promotion and protection of human rights. It can be used to justify arbitrary limitations on, or the denial of, freedom of expression. Indeed, Ireland considers that freedom of expression is a key and inherent element in the manifestation of freedom of thought and conscience and as such is complementary to freedom of religion or belief.” Just months after Minister Martin made this comment, his colleague Dermot Ahern introduced Ireland’s new blasphemy law.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Talk Tonight at TCD Theological Society

I will be speaking this evening, Monday 12 October, to the Trinity College Dublin Theological Society on the topic of Reading the Bible as an Argument for Atheism.

The talk starts at 7 pm in the Chamber, GMB. Hope to see you there.

I will do my best to live up to the image that the Theological Society are using to advertise the talk.

€2 gets you admission to the talk, a reception afterwards, plus all future Theological Society events this year, including talks by Senator Ivana Bacik on atheism in Ireland and Trevor Sargent TD on environmental ethics.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Campaign for a Secular Irish Constitution

Today is the first International Blasphemy Day, run by the Center For Inquiry as part of its Campaign for Free Expression. Atheist Ireland is an advocacy group for an ethical and secular Ireland: see details in these Irish Times articles on the Irish blasphemy law and our first AGM.

Atheist Ireland is seeking your help today to launch and shape a new long-term campaign with two important aims: to repeal the new Irish blasphemy law and to attain a secular Irish Constitution. Specifically, we are asking you to do three things: send us a message of support, get actively involved in shaping this project, and lobby to persuade Irish politicians to pursue these policies.

We will soon be holding public meetings around Ireland to launch this campaign. We want it to include religious and nonreligious people working together, within Ireland and with international support. The campaign has one common aim that transcends any other differences we may have: that all Irish citizens, of all beliefs and none, can live together in equality, with the State being neutral on matters of religion.

In recent decades, several independent and all-party committees (most whose members were Christians) have repeatedly called for an end to discrimination against nonreligious citizens in our Constitution. Not only has this not been done, but a new religious crime has now been created. The blasphemy law is the final straw. We need a secular Irish Constitution, and we need it now. Please help to make this happen.

Our Immediate Aim: Repeal the Blasphemy Law

The Defamation Act 2009 makes blasphemy a crime punishable by a €25,000 fine, after the Minister for Justice signs the commencement order in mid-October. Blasphemy is defined as “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” with safeguards to make it harder to prosecute.

Regardless of the detail, it is wrong in principle for a modern democratic republic to have any type of blasphemy law. Theological thought-crimes belong in the past. Religious and nonreligious people alike should be protected from harm and incitement to harm, but religious and nonreligious ideas alike should be open to any criticism. That is how human knowledge progresses. Blasphemy laws discriminate against nonreligious citizens, by protecting the fundamental beliefs of religious citizens only.

This law also has serious international impacts. Irish citizens could face blasphemy charges elsewhere under the European Arrest Warrant. Also, Islamic States are lobbying at the UN to make defamation of religion a crime internationally. Ireland has voted along with the other EU States against this, because Islamic States can use blasphemy laws to justify religious persecution. These Islamic States can now point to a modern pluralist Western State passing a new blasphemy law in the 21st century.

Our Overall Aim: A Secular Irish Constitution

We have a blasphemy law because the Irish Constitution of 1937 says we should have one. And our Constitution also discriminates against nonreligious citizens in many other ways. For example, you cannot become President or a Judge unless you take a religious oath asking God to direct and sustain your work. So up to a quarter of a million Irish people cannot hold these offices without swearing a lie. This is contrary to Ireland’s obligations under the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The Preamble states that all authority of the State comes from, and all actions of the State must be referred to, the Most Holy Trinity. Article 44 states that the homage of public worship is due to Almighty God and that the State shall hold His Name in reverence. This is not merely an assertion of the right of citizens to worship this god. It is an assertion of the right of this god to be worshipped by citizens.

The Constitution also contains many other references to this god and to religion generally. Our national parliament reflects this by starting each day’s business with a prayer explicitly asking the Christian God to direct all of their actions. Under this guidance, they have legislated for many public policies that are heavily influenced by religion.

We should be removing these 1930s religious references from our Constitution, not creating new crimes to enforce them seventy years later. A modern secular Constitution would allow all citizens, whether religious or nonreligious, to live together as equals with the State being neutral on matters of religion.

Our Request to You: Please Help This Campaign

The blasphemy law is the final straw. We now need a secular Irish Constitution. We will soon be holding public meetings around the country to shape this campaign for equality for and by all Irish citizens, of any or no religious beliefs. But we will be much more likely to succeed if we have national and international support.

Here are three ways that you can help:

• One, please send us a message of support. Just a few lines will do. We want to be able to show that there is a wide support for these ideals.
• Two, please let us know if you would like to get actively involved in any way. You are more than welcome to help shape how this project evolves.
• Three, in whatever way you can, please help to lobby Irish politicians at national and international level to implement these policies.

This will be a lengthy campaign, but a very worthwhile one that you can be proud to have played your part in. We look forward to working alongside you to build an ethical and secular Ireland.

Michael Nugent
Chairperson
Atheist Ireland

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Would You Be Buried Beside an Atheist?

Ireland has always casually discriminated against atheists, in ways that are often very funny as well as serious. And it does not end with death, but continues on into the grave.

Here are four funny random news stories, each about fifty years apart, that illustrate how official Ireland has viewed atheists from the mid 1880s to the early 2000s.

Two involve court cases, and two involve burials. For the full impact of the casual discrimination involved, as you read them, imagine substituting the word atheist with that of any other group of people.

Atheism worse than violence?

In April 1859, a Belfast Presbyterian was horrified when he was accused of being an atheist. James McAldin had been removed from a jury panel in a court case, and he believed that it was because his name “had a Roman Catholic sound to official ears”. However, the Attorney General told the House of Commons that McAldin had been set aside because he was “an atheist and a violent party man”.

McAldin wrote a letter to the Times saying that “the charge of atheism is such an odious accusation that I trust to your sense of justice to permit me to repel it.” He was also upset by being called “a violent party man” but he described this accusation as being “not so damaging” as being labelled an atheist.

Buried beside an atheist?

In October 1908, Councillors in Gorey rejected a plan to open a Council graveyard after a debate in which one of them argued that he did not want to be buried beside an atheist. An enquiry was being held into an application to close the Cranford burial ground in County Wexford.

The graveyard was almost full, with some coffins covered by only inches of earth. Some councillors wanted the Council to establish its own graveyard, while others wanted the church to continue to run parish graveyards.

Councillor Patrick Walsh argued that, if the Council ran the graveyard, an atheist could be buried in it, and he would not care to have an atheist buried beside him. A solicitor representing the church agreed that “it would be horrible for those that believed he had no soul in him.” A resolution in favour of acquiring the increased accommodation was defeated.

One of them said: “We are atheists.”

In December 1960, a century after the James McAldin court case, the Children’s Court in Dublin fined two youths 40 shillings each and put them under a rule of bail for a year after an altercation with a local priest. The youths had tried to push their way into a parish social event in Sallynoggin.

Father Michael Quilter told the court that, after he refused to let them in, they threatened to come back again and “get” him and one of them said: “We are atheists.” In court, this youth said that he was not an atheist, that he believed in God, and that he wished to apologise to Father Quilter.

However, he asked the priest in court: “Did you hit me on the jaw?” and the priest replied: “I had to use physical force to get you out.” The Justice said that he was sorry that he could only impose a maximum penalty of 40 shillings on the youths. There is no record of the Justice saying anything about Father Quilter hitting the boy on the jaw.

“Putting her in with the Protestants.”

In August 2008, a century after the Gory burial inquiry, a man was told that he could not bury his dead mother in Donegal, because no graveyard in the County would bury an atheist. Joan Greenslade had a humanist funeral service but church authorities told her son Roy that the churches (Catholic, Church of Ireland and Presbyterian) owned all of the graveyards in Donegal. Therefore, unless he was willing to compromise his late mother’s beliefs by agreeing to a religious service, it was impossible for her to be buried.

She was eventually buried in nearby Derry, in Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom. The city council’s cemeteries department said they had different areas in the municipal graveyard for Catholics, Protestants and even Muslims. Asked whether they were starting an atheist section for Mrs Greenslade the reply was: “No, we’re putting her in with the Protestants.”

Source: The Irish Times reported on each of these stories.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Trailer for Video on New Irish Blasphemy Law

This is a two-minute trailer for a ten-minute video about the new Irish blasphemy law, produced by Baz Grant of Atheist Ireland. The full video will be released next month, when Justice Minister Dermot Ahern plans to sign the commencement order for the law.

All of the lines spoken by the actors (Yvonne Usher and Angelica Grant) are direct quotes from the politicians involved in the blasphemy debate, going back to Eamon DeValera in 1937.

The trailer has been entered in the Darklight ‘Democracy and Dialogue’ viral video competition 2009. 25% of the marks go for the amount of views the trailer gets on youtube, so please feel free to ‘pass it on’.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Mass Card Law Protects Sale of Magic

The Irish Times today published this letter from Atheist Ireland.

Madam, – From September 1st, the Charities Act 2009 has been offering State protection to the Roman Catholic Church, and only this one church, to sell Mass cards (Home News, September 1st). The legality of this Act is being challenged in the High Court, but for a reason that turns ethics upside down.

It is not being challenged to prevent people from selling claims of intercession with the creator of the universe to bereaved and vulnerable people. Instead, it is being challenged to allow a wider number of people to sell such unverifiable claims.

Such thinking exists in the realm of magic and superstition. It is like last year’s special offer by the Pope that, if you visited Lourdes during 2008, you would get a free “plenary indulgence” which would get you early release from a place called Purgatory after you die, and get you sooner to another place called Heaven.

In any other field of regulation, it would be seen as fraudulent to persuade sick or bereaved people to part with money in return for prayers or plenary indulgences. And the underlying purpose of a Charities Act is surely to protect vulnerable people, not to exploit them.

Atheist Ireland is a new advocacy group for an ethical and secular Ireland, free from superstition and supernaturalism, where the State does not support or give special treatment to any religion. 

– Yours, etc,
Michael Nugent,
Chairperson,
Atheist Ireland

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

New Irish Law Protects Sale of Mass Cards

From today, the Charities Act 2009 offers State protection to the Roman Catholic Church, and only this one Church, to sell Mass cards in Ireland. The legality of this Act is being challenged in the High Court, but for a reason that turns ethics upside down.

It is not being challenged to prevent people from selling offers of intercession with the creator of the universe to bereaved and vulnerable people. Instead, it is being challenged to allow a wider number of people to sell such unverifiable claims.

Church Monopoly

The new law defines a mass card as a card that indicates “that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (howsoever described) will be offered for the intentions specified therein”. It is now a crime to sell such a card in Ireland other than by agreement with a Bishop or Provincial of the Church, and “the Church” is defined as “the Holy Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church.” Furthermore, it is presumed that a seller does not have such an arrangement unless they prove otherwise. Anyone convicted of breaking this law can be jailed for up to ten years or fined up to €300,000.

Thomas McNally, who sells Mass cards in Longford, Ireland, is challenging the legality of the Act as he says it confers a Church monopoly on Mass card sales. He claims to have an arrangement with the Most Rev William Pascal Kikoti, Bishop of Mpanda, Tanzania, for signing Mass cards. The State has agreed not to take any prosecutions under the new Act until the case is heard, probably in October. Here is the Irish Times report on the legal challenge.

Magic and Superstition

Such thinking exists in the realm of magic and superstition. It is like last year’s special offer by the Pope that, if you visited Lourdes during 2008, you would get a free ‘plenary indulgence’ which would get you early release from a place called Purgatory after you die, and get you sooner to another place called Heaven.

In any other field of civic regulation, it would be seen as fraudulent to persuade sick or bereaved people to part with money in return for masses or plenary indulgences. And the underlying purpose of a Charities Act is surely to protect vulnerable people, not to exploit them.

As an aside, many religious people consider the selling of sacraments to be grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters they hold sacred. They may be tempted to complain under the new blasphemy law that Justice Minister Dermot Ahern plans to make operational in mid-October, around the same time as the Mass Card High Court case.

So, all in all, October should be a great month for legalising nonsense in Ireland!

Join Atheist Ireland

Atheist Ireland is an advocacy group for an ethical and secular Ireland, free from superstition and supernaturalism, where the State does not support or give special treatment to any religion. We welcome new members to help make this happen. You can join us at http://atheist.ie

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Campaign to Repeal New Blasphemy Law

Today the Irish President, Mary McAleese, signed into law the Defamation Act that includes the newly-defined crime of blasphemy. This law will become operable when the Minister for Justice signs an order making it so.

Atheist Ireland will now campaign for the repeal of this anachronistic and dangerous blasphemy law, and for a referendum to remove the blasphemy reference from the Irish Constitution, as part of our wider campaign for an ethical and secular Ireland.

We call on the Minister for Justice to delay signing the order that would make the blasphemy sections of the Defamation Act operable, until such time as a referendum can be held to remove the reference to blasphemy from the Constitution.

Ministerial Order

The Minister has the power to sign different provisions of the Act into law at different times.

He has already said that he does not want blasphemy to be illegal. He repeatedly told the Oireachtas that he only included the blasphemy sections into the Defamation Act because he was advised that he was constitutionally obliged to do so, and that to not do so would result in him having to withdraw the entire Defamation Bill.

The Minister has now satisfied the obligation that he stated himself to be under, and he has also succeeded in his more important stated aim of passing the Defamation Act. He should now delay making operable the sections of the Act that he says he does not want to be illegal, and give the Irish people the opportunity to address the issue by referendum.

Constitutional Issues

A citizen charged with blasphemy can still challenge the constitutionality of this law.

• It is inconsistent with the guarantees in our Constitution of freedom of equality, freedom of conscience and religion and freedom from religious discrimination.
• It reverses the burden of proof to the defendant in a criminal trial, and it does not meet the standard of prevention of public disorder that made the old English blasphemy law compatible with the European Convention of Human Rights.
• The definitions in the law are too vague to allow citizens to regulate their conduct, and it could make it unlawful for a religious citizen to inform his co-religionists about a statement he believes to be blasphemous.

Original Concerns

As well as the constitutional issues, our original concerns with this law still remain.

• It does not protect religious belief; it incentivizes outrage and it criminalises free speech. Instead of incentivizing outrage, we should be educating people to respond in a more healthy manner than outrage when somebody expresses a belief that they find insulting.
• It treats religious beliefs as more valuable than secular beliefs and scientific thinking. There is no equivalent of a blasphemy law for scientific ideas. We should respect people as individuals, but beliefs as abstract ideas should always be open to scrutiny and challenge.
• We should be removing 1930s religious references from the Irish Constitution, not legislating to enforce them. For example, conscientious Irish atheists are precluded from becoming President or judges because of the religious oath in the constitution.

Today we begin our campaign for the repeal of this law, as part of our wider campaign for an ethical and secular Ireland.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Is the Blasphemy Law Constitutional?

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

The Blasphemy Law and Dermotology

Here’s my opening contribution to the recent public meeting in Dublin against the proposed Irish blasphemy law. It includes an overview of the problems with the new law, and the official founding of the Church of Dermotology. We worship Irish Justice Minister Dermot Ahern and we will seek to have the blasphemy law implemented whenever our sacred beliefs are offended. All praise be upon the blessed Dermot.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Minister to Amend New Blasphemy Law

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:

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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!

New Campaign Website at Blasphemy.ie

Do you want to stop the Irish government from reviving the medieval crime of blasphemy? Do you want to promote a rational, ethical and secular society in Ireland?

Atheist Ireland has put a campaign website online at http://blasphemy.ie as part of our campaign against this proposed new law. 

It includes analysis and news items about blasphemy and free speech, and examples of material that could be illegal in Ireland if the new blasphemy law is passed. 

Please let people know about http://blasphemy.ie, and we can intensify this important campaign over the coming weeks.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

New Blasphemy Crime for Ireland?

The Irish Government’s new proposed blasphemy crime combines the oppressive religious thinking of 1950s Catholic Ireland and modern Islamic fundamentalism.

This proposal should be opposed for three reasons. One, it does not protect religious belief; it encourages outrage and it criminalises free speech. Two, it treats religious beliefs as more valuable than secular beliefs and scientific thinking. Three, we should be removing 1930s religious references from the Irish Constitution, not legislating to enforce them.

Atheist Ireland, as an advocacy group for a rational, ethical, secular Ireland, encourages Irish citizens to lobby their TDs about this proposal. Here are detailed arguments for the three reasons to oppose it, plus a summary of the proposed new crime and its background.

The proposed new blasphemy crime and its background

Under the proposal, which is part of a wider defamation bill, “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.”

“Blasphemous matter” is defined as 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 he or she intends, by the publication of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage.”

The background is this: Under Article 40 of the Irish Constitution, blasphemy is an offence which shall be punishable in accordance with law. In 1999, the Supreme Court found that the existing law against blasphemy was unenforceable, as there was no definition of blasphemy.

Last year the Oireachtas committee on the Constitution recommended removing the reference to blasphemy from the Constitution. Instead, this proposed new law creates a legal definition of blasphemy, in order to make the offence punishable in law.

We should be working towards an ethical and secular society, where we address our differences of belief in rational terms.

Reason One: This proposed law does not protect religious belief; it encourages outrage and it criminalises free speech.

Under this proposed law, if one group of people expresses one belief about gods, and a second group of people thinks that this insults a different beliefs about gods, then the second group can become outraged, and this outrage makes it illegal for the first group to express their beliefs.

The problematic behaviour here is the outrage, not the expression of different beliefs. Instead of encouraging outrage, we should be educating people to respond in a more healthy manner than outrage when somebody expresses a belief that they find insulting.

Also, it is not restricted to expressions about beliefs. This outrage could be triggered by people expressing scientifically validated facts about the origin of the universe, which could be offensive to young earth creationists.

More worryingly, this law would encourage, reinforce and protect the type of orchestrated outrage that Islamic fundamentalists directed against Danish cartoonists and novelists. It could also help Islamic communities in Ireland to enforce Sharia law on Islamic women living here.

Reason Two: This proposed law treats religious beliefs as more valuable than secular beliefs and scientific thinking

From an ethical perspective, I find it abusive and insulting that the Christian Bible suggests that a woman should be stoned to death for not being a virgin on her wedding night, or that it is okay to kill your slave if he dies slowly, or that effeminate people are unrighteous, or that women must not teach and must learn in silence, or that people should worship a God who threatens to make you eat your own children, who sends bears to kill children for mocking a bald man, and who says that he will bring so much evil it will make your ears tingle.

From a scientific perspective, I find it abusive and insulting that Christians teach impressionable children that the creator of the universe impregnated a virgin to give birth to himself, or that many dead bodies rose from their graves and walked through Jerusalem when Jesus died, or that the creator of the universe turns pieces of bread and volumes of wine into his own body and blood every time a priest on the planet earth chooses to utter a particular set of words. I believe that these false beliefs harm the ongoing human quest for knowledge.

If enough atheists are outraged about these passages, should the Christian Bible be banned? I do not believe that the Bible should be banned, and neither should discussion of the Bible in terms that cause Christians to be outraged.

Reason Three: We should be removing 1930s religious references from the Irish Constitution, not legislating to enforce them

Today, under the Irish Constitution, you cannot become President or be appointed as a Judge unless you take a religious oath under God asking god to direct and sustain you in your work. Also, an atheist Taoiseach or Tanaiste could not take their place on the Council of State without swearing a religious oath.

This means that up to a quarter of a million Irish people cannot take up these offices without swearing a lie. These religious declarations are contrary to Ireland’s obligations under the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The preamble to our Constitution states that all authority of the State comes from, and all actions of the State must be referred to, a specific god called the Most Holy Trinity. It also humbly acknowledges all of the obligations of the people of the State to a specific god called Our Lord Jesus Christ.

In Article 44, the State acknowledges that the homage of public worship is due to Almighty God and that the State shall hold His Name in reverence. This is not an assertion of the right of citizens to worship this god. It is an assertion of the right of this god to be worshipped by citizens.

The Constitution also contains other references to this god. Article 6 states that all powers of government derive, under God, from the people. Article 40 makes blasphemy an offence. The last line of the Constitution dedicates the Constitution to the glory of God and the honour of Ireland.

Our national parliament recognises the rights of this god by starting each day’s business with a prayer to it. This prayer explicitly asks this god to direct the actions of our parliamentarians, so that their every word and work may always begin from and be happily ended by Christ Our Lord.

There are also other references in the Constitution to religion, as opposed to gods.

We should be amending our Constitution to remove these theistic references, not creating new crimes to enforce provisions that were written in the 1930s

Some International Context

The UN’s Universal Declaration on Human Rights contains articles which militate against the idea that blasphemy is a crime. Article 7 says everyone is equal before the law. Article 21 supports democracy not theocracy. Article 18 declares that everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Article 19 says everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression.

In 2007 the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe made recommendations on how States should treat blasphemy, religious insults and hate speech. It noted that States must act within the limits imposed by the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, and said that:

“In this connection, the Assembly considers that blasphemy, as an insult to a religion, should not be deemed a criminal offence. A distinction should be made between matters relating to moral conscience and those relating to what is lawful, matters which belong to the public domain, and those which belong to the private sphere. Even though today prosecutions in this respect are rare in member states, they are legion in other countries of the world.”

However, in recent years, Muslim countries have led a campaign to persuade the United Nations to oppose defamation of religion. In March 2009 the UN Human Rights Council passed a resolution condemning “defamation of religion” as a human rights violation. The motion was proposed by Pakistan to combat defamation of Islam, as in the case of the cartoons of the prophet Muhammad, and opposed by Western countries who said it would restrict freedom of speech. The World Jewish Congress condemned the vote as an attempt to further the blasphemy laws of some Muslim countries.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Welcome to Atheist Ireland

I had the honour last Sunday of being elected the first chairperson of Atheist Ireland, which is Ireland’s first atheist advocacy group. Our mission to provide a platform for people who wish to work together to build a rational, ethical and secular society free from superstition and supernaturalism.

We have two aims. One, to promote atheism and reason over superstition and supernaturalism. And two, to promote an ethical and secular Ireland where the State does not support or fund or give special treatment to any religion.

Our priority goals include promoting our aims, initially to Irish people of no religion, and campaigning for a secular Irish Constitution and a secular Irish education system.

We will be launching the group formally in the coming weeks. In the meantime, we would welcome any help or interest from people with relevant experience. If you want to find out more or get involved, please visit the discussion forum at www.atheist.ie, which is the website that brought together the friendly and committed group of people who have founded Atheist Ireland.

Meanwhile, here is some background on three of our immediate goals:

Promoting Atheism and Reason

Many people define atheism in different ways, and most atheists also share common values that arise from our belief that we are natural beings living a natural world. We will promote a greater understanding of atheism in Ireland, and of the benefits of reason and science and evidence over superstition and supernaturalism. We will do this through debate, publications and networking with relevant groups.

At first, we will focus our attention on Irish people of no religion. In the 2006 Irish census, there were almost 190,000 of these. And another 70,000 did not answer the question about religion. That is over a quarter of a million people, more than 6% of the population, and considerably more than 6% of the adult population as most children are likely to have been included under the religion of their parents.

Promoting a Secular Irish Constitution

The preamble to the Irish Constitution states that all authority of both men and States comes from “the Most Holy Trinity”, and that the people of Ireland humbly acknowledge our obligations to “our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ”. Actually, all authority (in the sense of legitimate power) comes from agreed relationships between people, and not from any gods that some of those people imagine to exist.

Article 44 begins with an extraordinary claim: “The State acknowledges that the homage of public worship is due to Almighty God.” This is not a guarantee of the right of Irish citizens to worship a god, but of the right of this god to be worshipped by Irish citizens. The next line—the State “shall hold His Name in reverence, and shall respect and honour religion”—also protects the rights of this god, not the rights of Irish citizens. And the State’s respect for religion flows from the rights of this god to be revered, not from the rights of its citizens to revere it.

Articles 12, 31 and 34 prescribe religious oaths in which the President, Councillors of State and Judges must ask God to direct and sustain them. Article 40 makes blasphemy an offence. Partly because of these references in our Constitution, the courts have found that certain personal rights of Irish citizens “flow from the Christian and democratic nature of the State”.

Promoting a Secular Education System

We believe that children should to be educated on an equal basis, regardless of the religious beliefs of their parents. As an overall aim, the State should own at least a majority of Irish schools, and should manage them with a rational, secular ethos. As an immediate short-term goal, we are going to focus on the issue of schoolchildren being able to opt out of religious education classes.

Members Welcome

We have other short-term goals, some of which are about the practicalities of setting up a new national organisation. As I mentioned earlier, we will be launching the group formally in the coming weeks. In the meantime, we would welcome any help or interest from people with relevant experience. If you want to find out more or get involved, please visit the discussion forum at www.atheist.ie.

Photo: Ireland Landscape by Obbino (cc)

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!