Saturday, September 22, 2012

Viewpoint: Blasphemy Laws and Modern Uber-Politics


The recent suggestion by both the Maronite Catholic Patriarch and four Anglican bishops from northern Africa that the United Nations should outlaw blasphemy is highly dubious. As the Anglican bishops put it, there should be an international policy "that outlaws the intentional and deliberate insulting or defamation of persons (such as prophets), symbols, texts, and constructs of belief deemed holy by people of faith."

We have plenty of evidence, from every corner of the world, that laws against blasphemy, however defined, can be used in a highly selective manner, depending on who is in power. Christians are all too familiar with the use of blasphemy laws against them by Islamic governments, but it may also be worth noting that many governments (including Western governments such as the US government) are unconcerned about blasphemy proper, but come down very hard on certain kinds of political mockery or intemperate political speech. It seems that lèse majesté is alive and well in our world. It is not quite the same thing, but it is worth reflection.

In any case, legitimate enforcement is problematic. What is the line between "insult" or "mockery" and insistence on uncomfortable facts? For example, Muhammad may not have been a pedophile but the historical evidence is quite clear that he consummated a "marriage" with a nine year old girl. Luther may not have been driven to rebellion against the Church by vice, but he did have a relationship with a nun. And what about opinion? Some commentator may really believe that Jesus was mad rather than inspired. These assertions may or may not be intended as insult or mockery. But they may be taken that way no matter how intended. Read more

Read also:
Pakistani bounty placed on anti-Islam filmmaker
Africa: Anglican Leaders Condemn Anti-Islam Film and Violence

No comments: