Well, it’s International Blasphemy Day. The Center for Inquiry has led the charge to make September 30th “a day to promote free speech and to stand up in a show of solidarity for the freedom to challenge, criticize, and satirize religion without fear of murder, litigation, or reprisal.” Sounds good to me. In America we are generally protected in our free speech. But in much of the world, blasphemy is punishable by prison, corporal punishment–even death. And in Europe, free speech is under attack, with a number of ridiculous laws making it illegal to speak ill of another’s religious beliefs.
Knowing they cannot overturn the First Amendment, American bullies like the Eye of Sauron now try to label any insult to their religion as “hate speech.” Such tactics don’t usually lead to legal charges, but the intimidation often works, and it has a chilling effect on the willingness of people to criticize organized religions.
Here’s an idea: if you don’t like blasphemy, don’t blaspheme. If you’re Catholic, don’t make a chocolate Jesus or flush a cracker that’s been prayed over down the toilet. If you’re a Muslim, don’t scribble pictures of Allah. But don’t hold people of other faiths (or of no faith) to your standards. I think it’s the mark of an adult to shrug off insults, especially if they aren’t to you personally. What kind of baby gets upset and starts hitting people, burning things, or bringing lawsuits just because someone says something nasty about his god? You don’t think god won’t get the last laugh? (Well, I don’t, but you get my point.)
A request to our governments: don’t roll over to these thugs. The reaction by certain governments in the wake of the Muhammad cartoons scandal was absolutely shameful. And how ridiculous is it that a book is about to be published about the Muhammad cartoon scandal–but it won’t include the cartoons themselves!
Governments should send one clear, unified message: that violence and intimidation against free speech will not be tolerated and that those who engage in such violence and intimidation will be punished.
Now, having said all this, I don’t personally see much point in drawing pictures of Muhammad just to get a rise out of someone, or pickling a crucifix in urine just to make the Catholics mad. But I think people ought to be free to do these things, to say “Suck it, Jesus!” or “God is a perv,” or to write a fictional biography about Muhammad’s child bride and not be afraid that some nut job will send a letter bomb to the publisher.
So enjoy your blasphemy, cherish your freedom of expression. But use it wisely.
Tags: blasphemy day
Interesting stuff.
Here in NZ we have inherited all of the old, British terms such as: bloody, blimey, crikey, and streuth.
I’m told that the etymologies are as follows:
Bloody = by Our Lady
Blimey = God blight me
Crikey = Christ
Streuth = God’s truth
Hopefully if I ever travelled to a theocratic country… or Ireland… they wouldn’t be quite so savvy about the common blasphemies that sneak their way into my every day speech.
Uh, John.
You have the right to say, or depict, anything you want.
However, I really question whether you WANT to post that picture.
It really is a stomach-turner. I came within a hair’s breadth of unsubscribing to the blog, the groups, and the podcast. For just as you have the right to say or show anything, I and everyone else have a right to walk away.
The picture makes zero sense in the context of a blog recommending self-restraint. If blasphemy for blasphemy’s sake is the point, then blasphemy day will remain an epic fail, for its final result is simple alienation. In contrast, blasphemy designed to push society in the direction you want it to go is vital to a free society. Yes, we have to endure the former in order to benefit from the latter. But that’s the way freedom works.
You could have made your point without making me question my trust in you. As much as your last paragraph repudiates the gratuitous use of blasphemy, you EMPLOYED gratuitous blasphemy by posting that picture. And now I will walk around the rest of the day with that image stuck in my head.
And I’m not grateful.
NH,
I totally understand your concern. My purpose in including those graphics was simply to show the kinds of things to which people object. I thought it would speak for itself in context with the article, but apparently (in your case) it didn’t. Yes, those images are rude, or provocative, or disturbing, and on any other day I wouldn’t see the point in showing them. But people should have the right to create them and to display them without fearing legal or physical reprisal. If people object, that’s fine, and they should say so (as you did). It does say something that you didn’t threaten to sue me, or kick my ass, or send my supposed soul to hell. Instead, we can have a conversation about what my intentions were and why you object.
For what it’s worth, you are the only person who has objected. Of course, it’s possible there are lots and lots of people who objected, but decided simply to walk away with nary a comment. My intention was not to offend anyone simply to offend, but rather to illustrate where blasphemy can go, within the context of Blasphemy Day.
Thanks again for sharing your thoughts.
wow, what a great way to start a war!
whats next? October 5th lets call every black person a nigger day?
……dumbass
Dear dumbass,
I would like to assume you are just joking, and that you understand the difference between criminalizing criticism of religion and the fact that certain racial epithets are now considered out of bounds. I would be equally opposed to any attempt to criminalize use of the word “nigger”…but a simple insult isn’t what we’re talking about here. We’re talking about freedom of speech and freedom of conscience. We’re talking about the right of every citizen to critique (or even mock) any given religious belief without fear of imprisonment or worse. Surely you can understand that.
Or maybe not.