That blasphemous statement was just resting on my blog!
The Irish government, in a fit of what can only be described as some form of political mental illness, has reintroduced a law criminalising blasphemy.
Aside from a €25,000 fine (reduced from the €100,000 originally sought by the government), the new Defamation Act gives the authorities the power to stage raids on publishers: the courts may now issue a warrant authorising the police to enter, using 'reasonable force', premises where they have grounds for believing there are copies of 'blasphemous statements'.
Many are asking why on earth blasphemy should be criminalised, particularly at a time when the Catholic Church in Ireland is being investigated for widespread child abuse and its public image has hit rock bottom.
The government has responded to its critics by saying there is a constitutional requirement for a specific blasphemy law in Ireland. Indeed so: freedom of speech is guaranteed by Article 40.6.1 of the Irish constitution. However, it goes on to prohibit the publication of 'blasphemous, seditious, or indecent matter'. One might call the Irish constitution a clear case of the left hand giving and the right hand taking away.
Ireland’s bizarre war on blasphemy (via /.)
This particular article proves rather more pragmatic in places than many of the commentators to date:
The fact that this has been the case since the constitution came into effect in 1937 seems to have blinded the government to its usual option: the traditional Irish response to divisive issues is to pretend that they don't exist. It is not for nothing that Ireland's acceptance of abortion for those with enough money to travel to Britain is called 'an Irish solution to an Irish problem'.
It goes on to froth a bit and then point out that the current government is on the ropes and trying to consolidate its support amongst the rural conservatives while playing primarily on political correctness rather than trying to bring the church and state back together (not that they were ever separated by much here).
Regardless of the excuses, thought crime is a sorry situation for any supposedly modern western nation.
Don't worry, I doubt that this is a goodbye to Father Ted repeats.
My personal feeling is that anyone believing in a giant invisible sky-daddy who grants wishes is perfectly entitled to do so... on one, single, solitary condition: that their fantasies must never ever impinge upon the freedom of those who do not share them.
Aside from a €25,000 fine (reduced from the €100,000 originally sought by the government), the new Defamation Act gives the authorities the power to stage raids on publishers: the courts may now issue a warrant authorising the police to enter, using 'reasonable force', premises where they have grounds for believing there are copies of 'blasphemous statements'.
Many are asking why on earth blasphemy should be criminalised, particularly at a time when the Catholic Church in Ireland is being investigated for widespread child abuse and its public image has hit rock bottom.
The government has responded to its critics by saying there is a constitutional requirement for a specific blasphemy law in Ireland. Indeed so: freedom of speech is guaranteed by Article 40.6.1 of the Irish constitution. However, it goes on to prohibit the publication of 'blasphemous, seditious, or indecent matter'. One might call the Irish constitution a clear case of the left hand giving and the right hand taking away.
Ireland’s bizarre war on blasphemy (via /.)
This particular article proves rather more pragmatic in places than many of the commentators to date:
The fact that this has been the case since the constitution came into effect in 1937 seems to have blinded the government to its usual option: the traditional Irish response to divisive issues is to pretend that they don't exist. It is not for nothing that Ireland's acceptance of abortion for those with enough money to travel to Britain is called 'an Irish solution to an Irish problem'.
It goes on to froth a bit and then point out that the current government is on the ropes and trying to consolidate its support amongst the rural conservatives while playing primarily on political correctness rather than trying to bring the church and state back together (not that they were ever separated by much here).
Regardless of the excuses, thought crime is a sorry situation for any supposedly modern western nation.
Don't worry, I doubt that this is a goodbye to Father Ted repeats.
My personal feeling is that anyone believing in a giant invisible sky-daddy who grants wishes is perfectly entitled to do so... on one, single, solitary condition: that their fantasies must never ever impinge upon the freedom of those who do not share them.