In my opinion, laws against blasphemy are utter ridiculous.
Firstly, religions have differing conceptions of what is blasphemous. For Muslims, to say that a man, Jesus, could be God is blasphemous. For Christians, to claim that Jesus was only a prophet is blasphemous. For Jews, to claim that God is not One, that there can be any trinity, is blasphemous.
So any laws against blasphemy are reduced to legislation, not by moral virtue, but by might.
Secondly, what constitutes as blasphemy can vary and is not in any way straightforward. If blasphemy is judged based on what is interpreted as blasphemous, we are at the mercy of the most paranoid member.
Thirdly, I reject the notion that anything should be beyond critique. Insofar as critique may be taken as blasphemous, that is all the more reason to reject laws against blasphemy.
Yet, when we get down to the core of the issue, the existence of gods aside, blasphemy can at times be inflamatory. It cannot be denied that verbal provocations have as much power as physical.
We have laws against such things as grave desecration even though the former person surely is not bothered overly much by it. Rather such laws only serve to pacify the feelings of the living.
So if there are laws at all which aim to protect the 'feelings' of a person, does any extend towards a person's religious beliefs? Or converse to a person's desire to be free of religious interjections?
Firstly, religions have differing conceptions of what is blasphemous. For Muslims, to say that a man, Jesus, could be God is blasphemous. For Christians, to claim that Jesus was only a prophet is blasphemous. For Jews, to claim that God is not One, that there can be any trinity, is blasphemous.
So any laws against blasphemy are reduced to legislation, not by moral virtue, but by might.
Secondly, what constitutes as blasphemy can vary and is not in any way straightforward. If blasphemy is judged based on what is interpreted as blasphemous, we are at the mercy of the most paranoid member.
Thirdly, I reject the notion that anything should be beyond critique. Insofar as critique may be taken as blasphemous, that is all the more reason to reject laws against blasphemy.
Yet, when we get down to the core of the issue, the existence of gods aside, blasphemy can at times be inflamatory. It cannot be denied that verbal provocations have as much power as physical.
We have laws against such things as grave desecration even though the former person surely is not bothered overly much by it. Rather such laws only serve to pacify the feelings of the living.
So if there are laws at all which aim to protect the 'feelings' of a person, does any extend towards a person's religious beliefs? Or converse to a person's desire to be free of religious interjections?
"People need heroes. They don't need to know how he died clawing his eyes out, screaming for mercy. The real story would just hurt sales, and dampen the spirits of our customers." - Mythology for Profit
