Actually there was a law made in the UK that puts religion under the same protections as skin colours, meaning blasphemy is illegal if it offends anyone - there was a uproar about it a while ago with writers and comedians protesting but it passed nonethless.
My problem is largely with the concept of blasphemy, itself a vague notion, being the basis of a vague law. If someone passed a law saying that it was illegal to go to an Anglican church, during the hours of 11:00 to 12:20 on Sunday, and state, within the hearing of a majority of adults attending, in English, that God was a [insert epithet here], then I would be more or less OK with that, if a majority vote passed it. It is easy to not do, and comprehensible.
The problem for me is when someone says, in effect "If a large enough group of people who believe in magic invisible creatures dislike something you say or write, then you are a criminal", when the logical end to that sentence would be "then you are a sane person in a minority".
(Thanks Evilmunky)
Eagles may soar, but weasels never get sucked into jet intakes.
Off topic but that link made me laugh - "morally unhelpful advertisements"? Moral, advert, same sentence?Originally Posted by Phage
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote