Blasphemy Rights Day.

abuayisha wrote: Well, you'll find that over half of European countries have laws against blasphemy, however I'm not specifically advocating laws against blasphemy since some people, such as yourself, may unknowingly blaspheme. I simply think it's neighborly to not go out of your way to bash and provoke harm. I mean, good grief, don't people have better things to do with their time?

If you oppose blasphemy laws, then you are in agreement with me and with the opening post.  And I agree as well that people shouldn't deliberately provoke others.  On the other hand, as Noam Chomsky likes to point out, if freedom of speech is to mean anything at all, it must include freedom for speech that you hate.

Besides, one person's blasphemy can be another's high comedy.  The Book of Mormon, (the musical, not the scripture ), for example, is very deliberately blasphemous and offensive, especially to Mormons but I think to religion in general.  It is also reported to be one of the funniest musical comedies in years.  (I haven't seen it myself but I have heard a few of the songs and read many reviews.)

I think blasphemy often has a serious point to make as well.  As deeply, profoundly silly as Mormonism is, it is really not much different from most other religions.  Perhaps as you laughed along with The Book of Mormon, you might see the parallels with all the other religions of the world -- including your own.

Edited by Ron Webb - 17 October 2015 at 9:02pm

abuayisha wrote: Ron Webb wrote: -- including your own. [IMG]smileys/smiley2.gif" align="absmiddle" alt="Wink" /> Once again, you're not missing an opportunity to snipe and be flippant about theology. Is there not a time and place for everything? "sigh" I think having a "right" to do something doesn't make it right to do. I watched in pain for the families of dead soldiers returned to the United States for burial, while a group of "freedom of speech" protestors stood outside the cemetery shouting awful things as the funeral procession passed by. Okay, freedom to hate, and likewise, freedom to hate such despicable behavior.

Certainly that is out of order. I have used the same example. Just asking for a broken nose.

It is however not the same as a blanket bann on another's speach.

To begin with, there are absolutely exceptions to free speech � legal exceptions, in fact which include: child pornography, incitement, sexual obscenity without literary, artistic, political or scientific value and �fighting words and offensive speech.� And no, this is not a �slippery slope;� these are rules that have always been here and should always stay here, for good reason.

Part of Cates� confusion, I imagine, boils down to her understanding of why free speech exists. No, it�s not for people �to express themselves.� In the Supreme Court case Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire the Court ruled against Chaplinsky�s freedom to profanity and offensive speech.

�It has been well observed,� wrote Justice Frank Murphy, �that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality.�

http://emorywheel.com/free-speech-some-exceptions/

Well certainly we as a society can and should have honest and rational discourse, but I would argue that blasphemy and other such vile speech shouldn't be ignored. Indeed it does hurt people. And indeed rhetoric has consequences.