Given that the name of the Lord Jesus Christ is blasphemed daily by pollies, the ABC,sportsman, the general public and most TV shows and movies I doubt whether anyone in the West could even consider the proposed blasphemy laws being considered by the UN. Surely not such blatant hypocrisy and cowardice. Then again the secular world never cease to amaze me with their double standards.

How can it be posible to insult the non existant.

An interesting Indonesian take on Tuesday regarding Yudhoyono's proposal, runner:

“How can we expect the international community to accept such a proposal while a similar blasphemy law has been used to condone violence against minority Muslim groups such as the Ahmadiyah and Shia? We must first show the world that we can protect these minority groups at home before demanding the global community do the same,” National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) chairman Ifdhal Kasim told The Jakarta Post.

Ifdhal said that instead of an anti-blasphemy protocol, countries needed to sit down and talk about making a resolution that could address religion-inspired violence, which was on the rise."

I don't share such reservations about blasphemy laws as long as they as framed correctlly.

Properly implemented, they may just benefit all of us. A legal system where an aggrieved party can seek impartially-judged redress is an important part of most modern societies.

To simplify the application of the blasphemy law and prevent its misuse there would be one pre-requisite… The blasphemed deity has to both initiate the action and must appear in court providing a victim impact statement.

LMAO Trev. That's Gold!

Ponde

'How can it be posible to insult the non existant. '

Probably the same way a person sues for character defamation when they have no moral basis to define what good character is.

WmTrevor

' The blasphemed deity has to both initiate the action and must appear in court providing a victim impact statement. '

Finally I think we agree on something. I suppose that is why you don't see Christians rioting against film producers and smug ABC reporters. They know that a day of court hearings will take place. God is certainly capable of defending HImself.

runner,

"God is certainly capable of defending Himself."

I hope the court proceedings will be telecast in that case.

I wonder how he'd(?) go up against Judge Judy?

Richard Dawkins says this quite well
The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant
character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust,
unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.

I could quite easily defend myself against him in a defamation action.

As soon as he presented himself I would have him instantly arrested and tried in The Hague for crimes against humanity.

If he sent his son down I would also insist that he did something useful for humanity and not run around performing parlour tricks

'I hope the court proceedings will be telecast in that case. '

Well Poiret the flood that wiped out all but a few shows their will be no contest as the mockers have a few short years to display their arrogrance and denying capabilities which really are pathetic.

ponde

a man who can't keep a marriage vowel and then waves a puny fist and tongue at His Creator is hardly in a position to make such a judgment. A few years and he will join his high priest brother who recently passed. I doubt then whether he will be in a position to open his mouth.

I don't care what your name is, nobody walks on the water when I'm fishing!

PS: I think parlour tricks is doing something for humanity. The single thing humanity worships most is entertainment.

runner,

Which Marriage vowel did ponde not keep? Was it the the i, the e or the first or second a? My bet's on the second a.

WmTrevor go you good thing!

'runner,

Which Marriage vowel did ponde not keep?

Houllie

I was referring to the high priest he quoted. I have no interest in whtehr ponde is married, single, etc etc.

Poor Mr. Dawkins (MPBUH) has been divorced twice.
ROFL

"Finally I think we agree on something."

I have with you, runner, but it was a while back and you may have forgotten the details… I know I have, but I still remember being surprised. However, it doesn't matter how the terms are defined, I agree with you that "God is certainly capable of defending Himself."

That point though, was certainly lost on Christendom for most of the last 2000 years, and still is in the United States given numbers of recent court actions. It's certainly not believed by a small group of Western Sydney criminal thugs, judging by their recent behaviour.

So, to enable you to continue railing against the religions as you see them of secularism, AGW'ism and atheism – and all the other isms that isn't – we need to continue to reject any concepts of law involving blasphemy. Instead, we'll just need to rely on the secular laws proscribing incitement to, or actual, violence.

Alternatively – and I know I suggested this elsewhere – could all the peoples of religion in the world get together and agree amongst yourselves as to which one is right. Then inform the rest of us.

PS: Houellebecq may have been referencing your loose vowels – not your comments re Dawkins.

WmTrevor

'could all the peoples of religion in the world get together and agree amongst yourselves as to which one is right. Then inform the rest of us. '

About as much chance as all the secularist, athieist, agnostics agreeing what is right and what is wrong.

That's easy runner. There's no such thing as right and wrong. There's just actions and consequences. I'm comfortable with that.

I was unaware Dawkins must be addressed as 'His...'.

Speaking of God defending himself, it reminds me of the movie 'The Devil's Advocate'.

It had a wonderful suggestion that the explosion in the numbers of lawyers in the US was a plan by the devil. This speech also makes me laugh...

'Let me give you a little inside information about God. God likes to watch. He's a prankster. Think about it. He gives man instincts. He gives you this extraordinary gift, and then what does He do, I swear for His own amusement, his own private, cosmic gag reel, He sets the rules in opposition. It's the goof of all time. Look but don't touch. Touch, but don't taste. Taste, don't swallow. Ahaha. And while you're jumpin' from one foot to the next, what is he doing? He's laughin' His sick, f_ckin' ass off! He's a tight-ass! He's a SADIST! He's an absentee landlord! Worship that? NEVER! '

'You sharpen the human appetite to the point where it can split atoms with its desire; you build egos the size of cathedrals; fiber-optically connect the world to every eager impulse; grease even the dullest dreams with these dollar-green, gold-plated fantasies, until every human becomes an aspiring emperor, becomes his own God... and where can you go from there? '

And this wonderful advertisement for the devil.

You'll really love this runner!..

' I'm here on the ground with my nose in it since the whole thing began. I've nurtured every sensation man's been inspired to have. I cared about what he wanted and I never judged him. Why? Because I never rejected him. In spite of all his imperfections, I'm a fan of man! I'm a humanist. Maybe the last humanist. '

'You sharpen the human appetite to the point where it can split atoms with its desire; you build egos the size of cathedrals; fiber-optically connect the world to every eager impulse; grease even the dullest dreams with these dollar-green, gold-plated fantasies, until every human becomes an aspiring emperor, becomes his own God... and where can you go from there? '

You describe it beautifully Houllie only you like the devil fail to blame your own fallen nature.

Wow, way to open up the place for more ridicule from hypocrites. Great job.

Dear runner,

The are penalties proscribed in the Bible for blasphemy. While I'm not saying you would want them literally as law go you think there should be any legal sanctions for blasphemy in our society?

There used to be laws against blasphemy in Australia, or at any rate people were charged as such for offences against the church, I read a book about an eccentric hermit who lived out near Fryerstown in the1920's who was accused of burgling several churches in the Elphinstone and Taradale area and he was charged with "Blasphemy". You could also be charged with "lunacy", once tried by a court and convicted a person could be sent to a mental institution. According to this biography such a charge was much feared by vagrants and eccentric outsiders since the Police would use a charge of "Lunacy" to remove serial pests, transients (swagmen) and petty criminals from the community.

<<Then again the secular world never cease to amaze me with their double standards>>

Runner has a point here. I mean we seem to see it as quite Ok when someone uses the name of someone’s God as part of a curse, or ridicules someone’s holy people/practises.

But many of us would get all hot and bothered if that same someone used “sexist” or the “racist” language.The use of such words/terms could ruin a career and might even see one prosecuted.

It does seem that all we have done is move the goal posts.

“Please explain” all ye brave defenders of free speech.

I think it's time God got a bit of a break.

He's obviously lonely, otherwise He wouldn't have created us to keep Him company.

He's also got some issues and needs constant personal reassurance and worship and has already admitted to making several mistakes in the Bible.

However, He must be very disappointed in those that invent myths and stories about Him and then use those as an excuse to justify their own shortcomings, hatreds and bigotry.

When the churches get serious about laws concerning child abuse, then perhaps we could look at blasphemy laws...

Susieonline - When the churches get serious about laws concerning child abuse, then perhaps we could look at blasphemy laws...

Well said by Susieonline. When they start to see stoning someone to death as a lot more horrific than having sex outside the dictates of draconion laws also.

Why is it up to low beings(compared to God,)to punish people for slights against God? Couldn't God just strike them dead immediately. on the spot, where they stand so to speak, if he is so grievously offended.

Either he is not that offended or he doesn't exist.

The blasphemy runner mentioned is the "Lord Jesus Christ", a man to be admired and made one's model [Lord]; upon whose birth we date our calander. He lived years 0 AD to 33 AD and his life and action revealed the righteous nature and character of God who is spirit.

Using his name as a term of derision indicates the persons rejrction of his character and life and its meaning - they have partaken in putting him to death.