A Catholic bishop has called for a blasphemy law in Germany, saying all religions deserved legal protection from attack in order to preserve human dignity…
“Those who injure the souls of believers with scorn and derision must be put in their place and in some cases also punished,” said Bamberg Archbishop Ludwig Schick…
He said there should be a “Law against the derision of religious values and feelings,” the Süddeutsche Zeitung reported.
Satire magazine Titanic raised the topic of blasphemy and respect for religion last month after publishing an image of Pope Benedict with a yellow stain on his cassock in reference to the Vatican leaks scandal.
The Pope took legal action which succeeded in banning further printing of the image, although copies of the magazine already published were not removed from sale. Yet his legal argument was based on his personal rights rather than any protection of religion…
…The idea of a blasphemy law was slammed by the Green Party, whose parliamentary leader Volker Beck said satire and irony could not be banned…He said that ironic or satirical statements might not be popular among those targeted, but they could not be forbidden.
“Believers do not need any greater criminal legal protection against defamation, slander and attack than other social groups,” he said.
I don’t care whether the theocrats are Catholic or Southern Baptist, Orthodox Jews or Muslims – justice provided by religious ideology should remain catalogued in history books as an aberration leftover from the Dark Ages.
No one is more deserving of scorn, derision & psychoanalysis than Our Dear Deity.
You can’t psychoanalyze something that does not exist.
You can’t hate something that does not exist.
You can, however, analyze the holy scriptures and get inside the heads of the people that were inspired to scam people for their own personal gain.
Pat Robertson is a perfect example of a scam artist that talks to God and informs his believers of the thoughts in God’s mind.
I could do the same thing, and rake in millions of dollars from gullible and easy marks, but I have a conscience.
My imagination conjures up a Hell reserved for preachers, priests, and politicians, but I am resolved to tolerate them until they finally croak and leave the rest of us in peace.
Whose definition of blasphemy should be used?
For example, the Christian Bible would define anything written after it that claims to be scripture to be blasphemy.
(Not religious books in general, just things that claim to be of equal validity to the Bible). This would put Moslems in the hot seat for starters as well as JWs Mormons and all sorts of others.
I understand that (Some?) Moslems say that what the Christian Bible says about the crucifixion, for example, are blasphemous.
The list goes on. Any set of beliefs that says it is correct must, by definition, say other beliefs are wrong.
As an exception, I don’t think Sikhs call anyone else blasphemous but they are very nice and tolerant people.
Buddhists are tolerable.
Once you work through the logic chain, it becomes obvious that the reason the universe exists is for Americans to have big houses with 3 car garages and drive 4x4s, to propose anything else is blasphemy and a crime against humanity.
Well ain’t that some shit (and piss).