From Ireland’s new ‘blasphemy law’
Section 36
(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. [Amended to €25,000]
(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.
As Les notes at StupidEvilBastard.com, this part of the bill makes it illegal to criticize any religion either verbally or in writing.
SO. Here goes.
There is no evidence of any god, Abrahmic or otherwise.
There is no evidence that anything in Genesis is true.
There is no evidence, indeed no reference outside of the Bible, of Jesus Son of god. There may have well been a wandering rabbi/heretic called Jesus, but the Romans never mention him. Don’t quote Pliny and Josephus, they talk about ChristIANS- it’s like says seeing Tom Cruise in a movie proves Scientology is correct.
You may be interested to know I have seen it argued that ‘Jesus’ was a name of a number of Jews, and had no special connotation- this is why Pilate is so careful with asking the crowd who to release, maybe Barabbas’ name was also Jesus (Bar Abbas=son of Abbas).
Whatever the truth of 2000 years ago, that cracker and wine certainly doesn’t turn into his flesh and blood.
Denying contraception on the basis of religious texts from thousands of years ago is evil, using them isn’t.
Ditto “Teh gays”.
While I’m about it.
There almost certainly is no god (see above re lack of evidence), not even Allah. Ergo Muhammed was not his prophet. (Cos there is no prophet Atheism; boom-boom. I’m here all week).
And Wiccans- No, you are not a Witch of any sort, black, white or spangly (A “Do what?” possibly, but not a witch). There is no Earth spirit.
MOST IMPORTANTLY.
It is wrong to hate someone because of a belief in something that isn’t your belief.
Now as an atheist I don’t care what you do in the privacy of your own home or place of worship. However
- Don’t expect me to fund it through taxation.
- Don’t expect me to agree with you, and if I spot a flaw in your religeous arguement dont expect me to gloss over it if you rely on that flaw.
- Don’t assume that you get extra rights because of your belief. (well ok- in Ireland you do, but don’t expect me to agree with that).
- Don’t expect me to be quiet if you want it taught as ‘Scientific Fact’ in schools.
- or indeed want your private beliefs to be considered more protected than my private beliefs
See, depite what you may think there is no such thing as a Militant Atheist- Not even Richard Dawkins. We don’t go around pushing newspapers through doors asking “Have you heard the Good News about Science?”. We don’t stand in town squares reading bits out of ‘Origin of Species’, or complaining when science shows that something we believe in isn’t true.
I’ll admit I was put out when Pluto was declared ‘not a planet’, but that is emotional attachment to a world view that proved to be wrong. Einstein felt the same way when Nils Bohr showed some of Einstein’s theories to be wrong. But it is just that- emotional attachment to a childhood. I’m never going to go there, and classification is an artificial Human construct. I am certainly not going to support a crusade or jihad demanding it be re-instated as a planet.
Now Ireland; I’ll admit the fact the Irish Sea is between you and me has made me a bit braver in posting this: I’m assuming you won’t go for the whole extradited thing via the EU (though I must say that is actually worrying me a little). But what are you going to do if the University of Dublin comes up with a bit of research that proves something that offends your Catholic mindset? Declare Science blasphemous and demand your fine?
When I first heard of the Irish Blasphemy laws, the first thought that struck me was; why would anyone want to blaspheme in the first place?
‘Barabbas’ is not a name per se’… it is an Aramaic appellation, the meaning of which is: Bar = Son + Abba = Father (or God). Interestingly, the original Greek Gospel according to Matthew (27:17) the man who was called ‘Barabbas’ was named “Jesus”… however, “Jesus” was omitted from the Latin (and most of the sub-sequential translations thereafter).
[editorial- this is what I said, or at least was trying to say! LH]
I am just curious here not to battle you regarding your beliefs. I am a Christian and Catholic and I do not battle people over their beliefs if I disagree with them or not. I do respect your right to belive how you want, even though it differs from mine 100%.
You stated you are an “atheist” and I am curious to know: As an atheist how do they believe in the creation of man and the earth? Also what is the belief when someone dies, what happens to them? Just curious to know what the beliefs are on these things.
Thanks for answering. Sandy
Hi Sandy- Thanks for the politeness. I expected fundementalist Creationist rants, rather than your mild question!
If I may I wish to start by defining how many atheists see atheism. You may wish to start with my post here
https://lasthussar.wordpress.com/2009/05/03/not-an-atheist/
Many of us will say it is not a belief in no god, but rather no belief in a god. The order of the words is important. We don’t actively believe there is no god, rather like I doubt you actively believe in no pixies: it is not something that needs to be conciously affirmed. We are not creating a god shaped hole- the universe runs perfectly fine as it is.
When someone dies, that is it. The eletrical impulses in the brain that make them them stop happening. Imagine we make a truly intelligent computer- one that is self aware. Does it have a soul? (I actually think the ethics of such a machine need to be examined before we make it- would it not be a slave? What if we turn it off?)
The ‘creation of man and Earth’ is discussed at length in many other places. The Vatican has no problems with evolution, and John Paul II was happy with the evolution of the Universe after the Big Bang (though he asseted the Big Bang itself was the work of God) Scientists have got a good (if in places incomplete) history of the universe back to the first 3 minutes – these are the most problematical, as it is in these first seconds that the laws of physics probably didn’t work. The topic is rather complicated, but if you are interested then you are looking to Google “Planck’s Laws”.
Evolution is the explanation of how the eventual descendents first single celled life forms ended up typing stuff on the internet.
The problem of the beginning of life on Earth is more problematical. However not knowing how it happened doesn’t mean that it can’t have happened. True science up to this point has been unable to replicate it, but a scientist may make one attempt per hour. Nature got to make millions of attempts accross the world per minute for hundreds of thousands of years- Its the lottery principle. 1 ticket has a 1:14 million chance of winning- close enough for impossible for most of us BUT every week a ticket wins. There are millions of tickets out there, so millions of attempts.
Your best place to start is TalkOrigins
http://www.talkorigins.org/
The next question is “So why are you lawful with out God’s guidance?” to which I could respond “Why can’t you be good with out fear of God?” The Ten Commandments “The basis of Western Law” we are told, are replicated in virtually all cultures, even those with no Abrahamic religeon. Many will say “Their God(s) said this” but according to Christians these must be false gods, and thus these laws based on no higher power. So where did they come from? Humans are quite capable of being communal without ‘God’- it is a survival instinct to work together. The lack of that communal spirit is regarded as psychiatric illness, not a failure in religion.
Thanks for very well defined answers. I will check these links out as I am truly curious.
Thanks also for the compliment. I am a Christian but as you noticed Catholic also, and we catch enough ranting for the whole world:>) I do not believe in that and never will. I believe any adult can be mature regardless of beliefs.
What good would it do us to rant on about what you believe verses what I believe? We would cease in knowledge if we did this, and that in itself is reason enough. We can never understand another human being or race of people for that matter until we understand their beliefs. Everyone’s life is guided according to these beliefs right or wrong.
Take care and thank you for your kind response also.
Adlai Stevenson, an elitist bastard if ever there was one, said that a civilized society is one in which it is safe to be unpopular. There are civilized religious people and civilized atheists, but it is not the religion or lack of religion that makes them so.
Typically atheists are thought to be ‘militant’ just for finally saying; “There is no god, or close enough to zero probability as makes no difference to me.”
Hi, stumbled across your blog (via TMP), and very interesting it is too!
Just to take you up on a few inaccuracies in this piece (aren’t you thrilled?!?):
To say there is no evidence that anything in Genesis is true is a tad overstated. It’s a long book, with a lot in it, and much of it is as historically undisputed as ancient history gets.
To claim there’s no evidence of Jesus apart from religious writings is also overstated. Pliny the Younger, Josephus, and Tacitus all make reference to him (not just his followers). Again we’re talking ancient history, so if you’re insisting on undisputed verification, you can ditch everything pre-“Dark Age”. Of course Jesus (Joshua)was a common name – but this is hardly of shattering importance. So was Julius in the Roman world, it doesn’t call into doubt the existence of the other JC 😉
ta!
Fair enough- I’m prepared to listen (can you listen on a blog?) WHich bits of Genesis have evidence?
My point about Pliny et al is that the people that Christians tell me provide proof of the Gospels never actually met him, and are often born after (or very shortly before) the Ascension. Having read about what they say (and I would point out one of the people who said ‘read Jospehus’ was my Best Man at my wedding, so it’s not as if I’m a stranger to even evangelical Christians), the reports seem very much to be ‘The followers of this Christ keep doing this that and the other because of him’
I’m prepared to believe there was a person in the Middle East, around which the Gospels grew around, but the evidence for the actual events described appears to be near non-existent.
As to the blog- I know, it’s a bit eclectic isn’t it!