Ireland Votes to Overturn Constitutional Ban on Blasphemy… The decision in a referendum on Friday is the latest signal reflecting the country’s weakening adherence to the Roman Catholic Church
Ireland has voted to remove a reference to blasphemy as a punishable offense from the country’s constitution, paving the way for repeal of a law that criminalizes public utterances judged offensive to religious sensibilities. Official results Saturday showed 65% of voters backed the removal of the blasphemy reference, a similar level of support given to a May proposal to remove a ban on abortion from the constitution, and a 2015 amendment that allowed for same-sex marriage. Minister of Justice Charlie Flanagan said the outcome was “another reflection of the strong public support for a modern, liberal constitution.” Many European countries retain provisions that allow for prosecution, and in some cases imprisonment, for blasphemy offenses. In recent years, prosecutions under blasphemy laws have been used in defense of Islam, as well as Christianity, although convictions are rare and they are increasingly seen as outdated and a limit to freedom of expression. Blasphemy isn’t an offense in the U.S. given the nation’s strong constitutional protection for freedom of speech.
The European Union regards many of these laws as oppressive, and an infringement of the right to free speech. The Irish government cited the legitimacy bestowed on oppressive laws elsewhere as a reason to remove the provision from Ireland’s constitution. “Some countries at the United Nations have quoted Ireland’s Blasphemy laws in Defence of their own repressive regimes,” wrote Mr. Flanagan in a tweet. Some European countries are slowly removing the offense from their penal codes. While the USCIRF report was being compiled, Denmark and Malta repealed their laws, following similar moves by Norway in 2015, the Netherlands in 2012 and England and Wales in 2008. More highly religious countries such as Poland and Greece aren’t expected to remove the offense, while some countries—such as Germany—view their laws as a way of offering protection to Islam and other minority religions at a time of increased hostility to immigrants. On Friday, the European Court of Human Rights upheld a 2011 verdict by an Austrian court that sentenced an unnamed woman to pay a fine for insulting the Prophet Muhammad.
Then people will openly declare how much they hate Christianity, after that dies down and the populace loyalty towards the church also dies down, sharia law will become slowly introduced to the public square one by one. We already see this across the world and it's destructive toward the host's culture and church. Brothers and Sisters in Ireland, you ought to form a community together if you wish to continually have a near source of light
Gavin Miller
I'm gonna take a hated opinion on this board. I think this is good I believe in separation of church and state. My reasoning is so Christians can protect their religion if the state decide to adopt scientology or some crazy stuff.
Daniel Diaz
Never happened while the state was linked to the church. Now that it isn't, there have been more and more cases of the state doing weird things no moral person would do(You've probably read a thousand threads about legalizing abortion already) I really, really wish you would abandon this opinion because its unfounded.
Nicholas Morales
From the perspective of logic and reason, what would this really do for Godhaters? Hear me out: if someone doesn’t believe in god, yet feels the need to blaspheme him, from an atheistic prespective what does that really do? It’s like saying Ash Ketchum’s mom is a whore, it’s just yelling at a fictional entity that can’t fight back. of course we all know the real reason why they would be happy about this: they all DO believe in God and want to act like edgy little kids and say “you don’t control my life, DAD!” Obviously the only form of blasphemy people will be using will be against Christ and his Church, since anti Muslim or Hindu blasphemy will be categorized under racist hate speech
Michael Green
You justify church state in law you justify sharia. I hope you abandon this opinion when Ireland randomly decides to adopt sharia and convert their government.
Levi Bennett
Also to add the Vatican is like 10 or 20 years from removing homosexuality and abortion as a sin and if you dont realize that you are blind to your church. Polite sage.
Xavier Cruz
It's not that simple, user. When church and state aren't separated, there are way more problems than just "creeping shariah". What if Ireland decided Catholicism was the state church and stopped recognizing Protestant marriages or property ownership? What if Ireland decided Lutheranism was the state church and started executing Orthodox? Church and state must remain separate.
Christian Murphy
When your Church needs the law to protect itself from criticism, it is a weak, lame Church and it deserves scorn. For those who hate Christ, let them live with that consequence themselves.
Joseph Stewart
You realize you are making points I agree with I was just taking it to the extreme so he would get it.
Blasphemy laws aren't supposed to protect the religion, they're supposed to bring justice for an evil crime
Henry Flores
You know in christianity we follow the new testament and you are suppose to rather than stone people be a good Christian example, leave to Ceaser what is ceasers and love your neighbor as yourself no matter what. Just an fyi. I'm not condoning bad actions just saying.
Samuel Evans
So why are you defending bad actions? Why do you want to protect the world from the Church?
Cooper Hughes
Saying something about wanting to stone some one to death? And Im the one defending bad actions wew. My point is the sword cuts both ways when it comes to state religion, be carful what you ask for.
Nolan Hernandez
Ezekiel 18:25
Luis Robinson
Have you read the new testament?
Jace Murphy
Enjoy your secular Paradise. While you keep borrowing, from the Christian, and Ancient traditional worldview, Morality, ethics. But, i do hope before you leave. Put back the things you're stealing. Want to be a walking contradiction? To the modern European, Materialist, i say.
In all serious though. All some partial truth in my original up top post. Is this, is a fashion. Just like people In the 19th, and very early20th Century were *For* Christianity Were they? I think as C.S Lewis noted in one of his articles. It was a more Generic being, Generic Theism. Once the Fashion ran out. Like it will with this modern Materialism. People then proceeded to leave the Churches. Then what, is left? Ah the True believers. And now we really start getting to the heart of things. And the funny thing. Unlike Christianity, and Traditional Worldviews which ground themselves on solid grounding. Materialism, is the weakest of them all. Once you honestly question. I mean really question like the internet skeptics do to Christianity on a daily basis. You start to see its a, paper tiger.
Tldr: Secularist keep borrowing from different worldviews, This modern materialism is a fashion statement, not an actual worked out worldview, and in the end God has the final say. Nothing happens without him noticing. Even the bad. In, communist Russia they Martyred Many Christians Which became an example to Future Generations, and now see the fruits of that now with modern, Russia coming back in a more powerful state of Faith In comparison to greece. Where the faith is becoming lax. God, Used the Evil, Acted out by the communist, and in the end used it for his Victory in the end. As, Father Rose pointed out. The world is right where it's suppose to be. And, is, as normal as can be in the current state we're.
The Vatican quite literally cannot stop homosexuality and abortion from being a sin. If you don't see that then you are most likely a Protestant, and know nothing about how the Church operates.
Juan Young
CS Lewis believed in a secular government
Jacob Harris
That's what you say meanwhile LGBT ministries and priest are popping up everywhere in your church meanwhile my church isn't doing that
Samuel Price
This is fallacious reasoning. It's like saying if you accept that "a belief" is beneficial to the state you must accept that "any belief" is beneficial to the state.
Obviously not. You're buying into the false dichotomy of atheists that all religion is the same. It isn't.
Christian state = good Islamic state = evil no-religion state = not as good as Christian state but better than Islamic state.
You're welcome to say no religion is better than Christianity for the state, but puts you squarely in the Atheist camp, because that's what they propose.
Now, the founding father's didn't want state religion because they didn't want the state taking over religion - that's a valid concern. Also, there were a lot of very serious sects of Christianity at the time who really didn't want to homogenize - Quakers, Puritans, etc.
And, actually, I think Christianity supports that- when Paul tells us that we're all members of the body of Christ but why would an arm want to be an eye or vice-versa. Of course, the Quakers got all crazy corrupt but, at the time, they had some very important points about connecting with the Holy Spirit in ways that had been lost to a lot of other denominations.
The shame is that the denominations can't just get along- though obviously the modern-bent of mainstream Christianity is despicable and should no longer even be called Christian…
dang, sorry for the tangent.
Robert Bell
C.S. Lewis knew a lot about literature, a chunk of Christianity, a smidge about Philosophy and winnie the pooh all about politics. Love the guy's writing but I can easily disregard his political opinions.
Benjamin Cooper
Atheists and feminist deserve to live under sharia law. Ireland betrayed Christianity. Let them become potato Sweden.
Noah Turner
I know, he saw Monarchy as a sorta figure head but with no real power. And yes this is where the disagreements would come in. But that's with any Philosopher. I used In my pic as you see Nietzsche. Do i believe in Nietzsche's Materialism, His Relativism? No, but he makes good coherent points within his worldview. In-fact. From what I've read he was, probably next to Hume. The most, Coherent Skeptic in comparison to say, Dawkins,…I'm still working out my worldview, still learning, still questioning, still growing. But at the position I've arrived I'm sure that if I'm to arrive at an adult Christian worldview Then our Politics should be that governed, as instructed from the bible/Christian worldview, if it's true. With the Church's help as it was, as in, Ancient Byzantine empire, as an example.I regard all the forms of political governments that came out of the, Enlightenment to what we see now in the West, in a serious error from bad starting points. Hopefully that helps to understand.
