Revision as of 19:33, 17 December 2015 edit005atul (talk | contribs)8 editsm →Blasphemy in different Islamic schools of jurisprudence← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 00:20, 26 December 2024 edit undoPEPSI697 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers12,707 edits Reverted 1 edit by 186.14.100.197 (talk): Non constructive editTags: Twinkle Undo Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit | ||
(626 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Act of insulting of religion}} | |||
{{Other uses}} | |||
{{distinguish|Heresy}} | |||
{{Use dmy dates|date=November 2011}} | |||
{{Redirect|Blasphemous|the video game|Blasphemous (video game){{!}}''Blasphemous'' (video game)|5=Blasphemy (disambiguation)}} | |||
] was executed in Baghdad for blasphemy in 10th century CE.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Avery|first1=Kenneth|title=Psychology of Early Sufi Sama: Listening and Altered States|date=2004|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-0415311069|page=3}}</ref>]] | |||
{{Use dmy dates|date=March 2020}} | |||
'''Blasphemy''' is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of ] for (a) ](s), to religious or holy persons or ] things, or toward something considered ] or ].<ref>{{Cite book|title = On blasphemy|last = Miriam Díez Bosch and Jordi Sànchez Torrents|publisher = Blanquerna Observatory on Media, Religion and Culture|year = 2015|isbn = 978-84-941193-3-0|location = Barcelona}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/blasphemy |title=Blasphemy |publisher=Random House Dictionary |accessdate=12 January 2015|quote=Quote: impious utterance or action concerning God or sacred things.; the crime of assuming to oneself the rights or qualities of God.}}</ref><ref> Merriam Webster (July 2013); 1. great disrespect shown to God or to something holy<br>2. irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolable</ref><ref>''Blasphemies'', in Webster's New World College Dictionary, 4th Ed,<br>1. profane or contemptuous speech, writing, or action concerning God or anything held as divine.<br>2. any remark or action held to be irreverent or disrespectful</ref> | |||
'''Blasphemy''' refers to an insult that shows contempt, disrespect or lack of ] concerning a ], an object considered ], or something considered ].<ref>{{Cite book|title = On blasphemy|last = Miriam Díez Bosch and Jordi Sànchez Torrents|publisher = Blanquerna Observatory on Media, Religion and Culture|year = 2015|isbn = 978-84-941193-3-0|location = Barcelona}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url= http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/blasphemy|title= Blasphemy|publisher= Random House Dictionary|access-date= 12 January 2015|quote= Quote: impious utterance or action concerning God or sacred things.; the crime of assuming to oneself the rights or qualities of God.}}</ref><ref> Merriam Webster (July 2013); 1. great disrespect shown to God or to something holy<br />2. irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolable</ref><ref>''Blasphemies'', in Webster's New World College Dictionary, 4th Ed,<br />1. profane or contemptuous speech, writing, or action concerning God or anything held as divine.<br />2. any remark or action held to be irreverent or disrespectful</ref> Some religions, especially Abrahamic ones, regard blasphemy as a crime, including insulting the ]ic prophet ] in Islam, speaking the ] in Judaism,<ref>{{cite book |last1=Karesh |first1=Sara |last2=Hurvitz |first2=Mitchell |title=Encyclopedia of Judaism |date=2006 |publisher=Facts on File |location=United States |quote=It is considered blasphemy to utter God's personal names...Interestingly, this prohibition has crept into the practice of writing God's name in English. Many Jews will choose to write "G-d" instead of "God" to avoid blasphemy. |page=180}}</ref> and blasphemy of God's ] is an ] in Christianity.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Concannon |first1=Cavan W. |title=Assembling Early Christianity: Trade, Networks, and the Letters of Dionysios of Corinth |date=2017 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |page=114 |quote=The ''Didache'' cites Mark 3:28-29 and implicitly defines blaspheming the holy spirit as testing or examining a prophet who is speaking in the spirit (11:7). This is the sin that cannot be forgiven, though other sins can be resolved through repentance. Epiphanius, in his discussion of the heretics he calls the Alogi, says they have committed the unforgivable sin. Because they reject the Gospel of John, which was inspired by the holy spirit, their teaching is therefore contrary to what the spirit has said and liable to the penalty imposed by Jesus' saying.}}</ref> It was also a crime under ] ], and it is still a crime under Italian law (Art. 724 del Codice Penale).<ref name="Harvard Law">{{cite web |title=Blasphemy and the Original Meaning of the First Amendment |date=December 10, 2021 |website=Harvard Law Review |url=https://harvardlawreview.org/2021/12/blasphemy-and-the-original-meaning-of-the-first-amendment/ |quote=Until well into the twentieth century, American law recognized blasphemy as proscribable speech. The blackletter rule was clear. Constitutional liberty entailed a right to articulate views on religion, but not a right to commit blasphemy — the offense of “maliciously reviling God”, which encompassed “profane ridicule of Christ”. The English common law had punished blasphemy as a crime, while excluding “disputes between learned men upon particular controverted points” from the scope of criminal blasphemy. Looking to this precedent, nineteenth-century American appellate courts consistently upheld proscriptions on blasphemy, drawing a line between punishable blasphemy and protected religious speech.}}</ref> | |||
In the early history of the Church, blasphemy "was considered to show active disrespect to ] and to involve the use of profane cursing or mockery of his powers". In the medieval world, those who committed blasphemy were seen as needing discipline.<ref name="Nash2007"/> By the 17th century, several historically ] countries had ].<ref name="Nash2007">{{cite book |last1=Nash |first1=David |title=Blasphemy in the Christian World |date=2007 |publisher=Oxford University Press |pages=3–5}}</ref> Blasphemy was proscribed speech in the U.S. until well into the 20th century.<ref name="Harvard Law"/> Blasphemy laws were abolished in ] in 2008, and in ]. ] repealed its blasphemy laws in 2021. Many other countries have abolished blasphemy laws including ], the ], ], ] and ].<ref>{{cite web |title=Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill Information Note: Blasphemy |website=gov.scot |url=https://www.gov.scot/binaries/content/documents/govscot/publications/factsheet/2020/04/hate-crime-bill-what-it-will-do/documents/hate-crime-bill-information-note-blasphemy/hate-crime-bill-information-note-blasphemy/govscot%253Adocument/Hate%252BCrime%252Band%252BPublic%252BOrder%252B%252528Scotland%252529%252BBill%252B-%252BInformation%252BNote%252B%252B-%252BBlasphemy%252B-%252BApril%252B2020.pdf}}</ref> {{As of |2019}}, 40 percent of the world's countries still had blasphemy laws on the books, including 18 countries in the ] and ], or 90% of countries in that region.<ref>, Pew Research (25 January 2022)</ref><ref name=pewres> Pew Research (21 November 2012)</ref><ref name=wsj> ''The Wall Street Journal'' (8 January 2015)</ref> ], such as ] and ] have no concept of blasphemy and hence prescribe no punishment.<ref name=NoBigotry1>, Rediff.com, 4 February 2015.</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://divinity.uchicago.edu/sightings/articles/prelude-censorship-toleration-blasphemy-ancient-india#:~:text=The%20Oxford%20English%20Dictionary%20defines,and%20certainly%20not%20to%20benevolence. |title=Prelude to Censorship: The Toleration of Blasphemy in Ancient India |last=Doniger |first=Wendy |date= 2015|publisher= University of Chicago |access-date= 7 July 2024}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://groundviews.org/2019/06/22/blasphemy-and-the-prisoner-of-buddhism/ |title=Blasphemy and the Prisoner of Buddhism |last=Wickrematunge |first=Raisa |date= 2019|publisher= Groundviews |access-date= 7 July 2024}}</ref> | |||
Some religions consider blasphemy as a religious crime.<ref name=wsj> The Wall Street Journal (January 8, 2015)</ref> As of ], anti-blasphemy laws existed in 32 countries, while 87 nations had hate speech laws that covered defamation of religion and public expression of hate against a religious group.<ref name=pewres> Pew Research (November 21, 2012)</ref> Anti-blasphemy laws are particularly common in Muslim-majority nations, such as those in the Middle East and North Africa,<ref name=pewres/> although they are also present in some Asian and European countries. | |||
== |
==Etymology== | ||
{{Anchor|History}} | |||
The word "blasphemy" came via ] ''blasfemen'' and ] ''blasfemer'' and ] ''blasphemare'' from ] βλασφημέω, from βλάπτω "injure" and φήμη "utterance, talk, speech". From ''blasphemare'' also came Old French ''blasmer'', from which English "]" came. Blasphemy: 'from Gk. blasphemia "a speaking ill, impious speech, slander," from blasphemein "to speak evil of."'<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=blasphemy |title=Online Etymology Dictionary – Blasphemy |publisher=Etymonline.com |accessdate=10 November 2011}}</ref> "In the sense of speaking evil of God this word is found in Ps. 74:18; Isa. 52:5; Rom. 2:24; Rev. 13:1, 6; 16:9, 11, 21. It denotes also any kind of calumny, or evil-speaking, or abuse (1 Kings 21:10 ]; Acts 13:45; 18:6, etc.)."<ref>(from Easton's Bible Dictionary) {{bibleref2|Romans.2:24||9}} – {{bibleref2|Revelation.13:1;Rev.13:6;Rev.16:9;Rev.16:11;Rev.16:21||9}} – {{bibleref2|1Kings.21:10;Acts.13:45;Acts.18:6||9}}</ref> | |||
The word ''{{linktext|blasphemy}}'' came via ] {{lang|enm|blasfemen}} and ] {{lang|fro|blasfemer}} and ] {{lang|la|{{linktext|blasphemare}}}} from ] {{linktext|βλασφημέω}}, from βλασ, "injure" and φήμη, "utterance, talk, speech". From ''blasphemare'' also came Old French {{lang|fro|blasmer}}, from which the English word '']'' came. Blasphemy: 'from Gk. blasphemia "a speaking ill, impious speech, slander," from blasphemein "to speak evil of."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=blasphemy|title=Online Etymology Dictionary – Blasphemy|publisher=Etymonline.com|access-date=10 November 2011}}</ref> "In the sense of speaking evil of God this word is found in Ps. 74:18; Isa. 52:5; Rom. 2:24; Rev. 13:1, 6; 16:9, 11, 21. It denotes also any kind of calumny, or evil-speaking, or abuse (1 Kings 21:10 ]; Acts 13:45; 18:6, etc.)."<ref>(from Easton's Bible Dictionary) {{bibleverse|Romans|2:24|9}} – {{bibleverse|Revelation.13:1, 6; Rev.16:9, 11, 21|multi=yes}} – {{bibleverse|1Kings.21:10; Acts.13:45; Acts.18:6|multi=yes}}</ref> | |||
==Blasphemy laws== | |||
] | |||
{{Main|Blasphemy law}} | |||
In ] with a ] blasphemy is outlawed under the criminal code. Such laws have led to the persecution, lynchings, murder or arrest of minorities and dissident members, after flimsy accusations.<ref> The Economist (November 29, 2014)</ref><ref>Sources of claims: | |||
* ''Religious Watch''. Retrieved 5 October 2011 | |||
<!-- Multiple MALWARE threats 5Oct2011, this URL disabled: h*t*t*p://www.christianpost.com/article/20091113/100-groups-oppose-u-n-defamation-of-religions-proposals/index.html --> | |||
* ''International Humanist and Ethical Union''. Retrieved 5 October 2011 | |||
* {{cite web|title = Muslim scholar says Scrap blasphemy laws|work = Herald Malaysia Online|date = 11 August 2009|url = http://www.heraldmalaysia.com/news/Muslim-scholar-says-Scrap-blasphemy-laws-which-bring-shame-on-Islam-and-Pakistan-2058-1-1.html|accessdate = 5 October 2011}} | |||
* May 2009 (Pakistan, etc.). Retrieved 5 October 2011 | |||
* U.N. January 1999. Retrieved 5 October 2011 | |||
* ''Amnesty International''. Retrieved 5 October 2011 | |||
</ref> | |||
==History== | |||
As of 2012, 33 countries had some form of anti-blasphemy laws in their legal code.<ref name=pewres/> Of these, 21 were Muslim-majority nations – Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, the Maldives, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Turkey, the UAE and the Western Sahara. The other twelve nations with anti-blasphemy laws in 2012 were Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, India, Ireland, Italy, Malta, the Netherlands (abolished in 2014), Nigeria, Poland and Singapore.<ref name=pewres/> Blasphemy was treated as a ] (death penalty) in many Muslim nations.<ref name=wsj/> | |||
===Middle Ages=== | |||
Other countries have removed the ban of blasphemy. France did so in 1881 to allow freedom of religion and freedom of the press and blasphemy was abolished or repealed in Sweden in 1970, Norway with Acts in 2009 and 2015, the Netherlands in 2014, and Iceland in 2015. | |||
] received more attention than blasphemy throughout the ] because it was considered a more serious threat to ],<ref>cf. Thomas Aquinas' ''Summa Theologiae''. ST II-II q10a3, q11a3, q12. Q11A3: "With regard to heretics two points must be observed: one, on their own side; the other, on the side of the Church. On their own side there is the sin, whereby they deserve not only to be separated from the Church by excommunication, but also to be severed from the world by death. For it is a much graver matter to corrupt the faith which quickens the soul, than to forge money, which supports temporal life. Wherefore if forgers of money and other evil-doers are forthwith condemned to death by the secular authority, much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."</ref> while blasphemy was mostly seen as irreverent remarks made by persons who may have been drunk or diverged from good standards of conduct in isolated incidents of misbehavior. When the fundamental understanding of the ] became more contentious during the ], blasphemy started to be regarded as similar to heresy.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Nash |first1=David |title=Blasphemy in the Christian World |date=2007 |publisher=Oxford University Press |page=4}}</ref> | |||
The intellectual culture of the early English Enlightenment embraced ironic or scoffing tones in contradistinction to the idea of sacredness in revealed religion. The characterization of "scoffing" as blasphemy was defined as ] the Scripture by irreverent "Buffoonery and Banter". From at least the 18th century on, the clergy of the ] justified blasphemy prosecutions by distinguishing "sober reasoning" from mockery and scoffing. Religious doctrine could be discussed "in a calm, decent and serious way" (in the words of ]) but mockery and scoffing, they said, were appeals to sentiment, not to reason.<ref name=Frances/> | |||
Where blasphemy is banned, it can be either some laws which directly punish religious blasphemy,<ref>See ]</ref> or some laws that allow those who are offended by blasphemy to punish blasphemers. Those laws may condone penalties or retaliation for blasphemy under the labels of ],<ref>{{cite web | last = Kerr | first = ine | title = Libel and blasphemy bill passed by the Dail |work=The Irish Independent | date = 9 July 2009 | url = http://www.independent.ie/national-news/libel-and-blasphemy-bill-passed-by-the-dail-1813479.html | accessdate = 17 November 2009}}</ref> expression of opposition, or "vilification," of religion or of some religious practices,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_act/aa1991204/s124a.html |title=ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1991 – SECT 124A 124A Vilification on grounds of race, religion, sexuality or gender identity unlawful |publisher=Austlii.edu.au |accessdate=10 November 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content.asp?document_id=23370 |title=Victoria Police – Racial and religious vilification |publisher=Police.vic.gov.au |accessdate=10 November 2011}}</ref> religious insult,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://merlin.obs.coe.int/redirect.php?id=11512 |title=European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), ''Report on the relationship between freedom of expression and freedom of religion: the issue of regulation and prosecution of blasphemy, religious insult and incitement to religious hatred'', 17–18 October 2008, Doc. No. CDL-AD(2008)026 |publisher=Merlin.obs.coe.int |accessdate=10 November 2011}}</ref> or ].<ref>See ] and ].</ref> | |||
== |
===Common law=== | ||
It was a ] crime according to ]'s ''Commentaries on the Laws of England'': | |||
<blockquote>Blasphemy against the Almighty is denying his being or providence, or uttering conteumelious reproaches on our Savior Christ. It is punished, at common law by fine and imprisonment, for Christianity is part of the laws of the land".</blockquote> | |||
In 1636, the ] controlled ] made blasphemy – defined as "a cursing of God by atheism, or the like" – punishable by death.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Williams Levy |first1=Leonard |title=Blasphemy: Verbal Offense Against the Sacred, from Moses to Salman Rushdie |date=1995 |publisher=University of North Carolina Press Books |page=242}}</ref> The last person hanged for blasphemy in Great Britain was ] aged 20, in ] in 1697. He was prosecuted for denying the veracity of the Old Testament and the legitimacy of Christ's miracles.<ref name=truth>{{cite web|url=http://www25.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/thomasaikenhead.html |title=Thomas Aikenhead |publisher=5.uua.org |access-date=10 November 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111001011446/http://www25.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/thomasaikenhead.html |archive-date=1 October 2011}}</ref> | |||
In the United States, blasphemy was recognized as proscribed speech well into the 20th-century.<ref name="Harvard Law"/><ref>{{cite book |title=Church-State Issues in America Today (3 volumes) |date=2007 |publisher=Bloomsbury |isbn=9781573567541 |page=18}}</ref> The Constitution entailed a right to articulate views on religion, but not to commit blasphemy, with the '']'' stating, "The English common law had punished blasphemy as a crime, while excluding "disputes between learned men upon particular controverted points" from the scope of criminal blasphemy. Looking to this precedent, 19th-century American appellate courts consistently upheld proscriptions on blasphemy, drawing a line between punishable blasphemy and protected religious speech."<ref name="Harvard Law"/> | |||
The common law offences of blasphemy and ] were repealed in England & Wales by the ]. In the 18th and 19th centuries, this meant that promoting atheism could be prosecuted.<ref>Owen Chadwick, ''The Victorian Church: Vol 1 1829–1859'' (1966) pp 487–489.</ref> The last successfully prosecuted case was '']'' (1976) where the court repeated what had by then become a textbook standard for ]:<ref name=Frances>{{cite book |last1=Knight |first1=Frances |title=Religion, Identity and Conflict in Britain |date=2016 |publisher=Routledge}}</ref> | |||
<blockquote>It is not blasphemous to speak or publish opinions hostile to the Christian religion, or to deny the existence of God, if the publication is couched in decent and temperate language. The test to be applied is as to the manner in which the doctrines are advocated and not as to the substance of the doctrines themselves.</blockquote> | |||
The common law offense of blasphemy was abolished in Scotland via the ].<ref>{{Cite web |date= |title=Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2024 |url=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2021/14/section/16 |access-date=3 April 2024 |website=gov.uk}}</ref> | |||
==By religion== | |||
===Christianity=== | |||
{{anchor|Blasphemy in Christianity}} | {{anchor|Blasphemy in Christianity}} | ||
====Biblical texts==== | |||
] condemns blasphemy. It is spoken of in ] ], where blaspheming the ] is spoken of as unforgivable—the ]. However, there is dispute over what form this blasphemy may take and whether it qualifies as blasphemy in the conventional sense; and over the meaning of "unforgivable". In 2 Kings 18, the ] gave the word from the king of Assyria,{{Clarify|reason=unclearly phrased|date=September 2015}} dissuading trust in the Lord, asserting that God is no more able to deliver than all the gods of the land. | |||
] condemns blasphemy. "]", one of the ], forbids blasphemy, which Christians regard as "an affront to God's holiness".<ref name="Sherwood2021">{{cite book |last1=Sherwood |first1=Yvonne |title=Blasphemy: A Very Short Introduction |date=26 August 2021 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-251819-4 |page=50 |language=en}}</ref><ref name="Bright2005">{{cite book |author1=] |title=The Joy of Faithful Obedience |date=2005 |publisher=Cook Communications |isbn=978-0-7814-4252-7 |page=52 |language=English}}</ref> | |||
Leviticus 24:16 states that "anyone who blasphemes the name of Yahweh will be put to death".<ref name="Netton1996">{{cite book |last1=Netton |first1=Ian Richard |title=Text and Trauma: An East-West Primer |date=1996 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-7007-0325-8 |page=2 |language=en}}</ref> | |||
In {{bibleref2|Matthew|9:2-3}}, Jesus told a paralytic "your sins are forgiven" and was accused of blasphemy. | |||
In ] ], blaspheming the ] is spoken of as unforgivable—an ].<ref name="Saunders2021">{{cite book |last1=Saunders |first1=Craig D. |title=A Mediator in Matthew: An Analysis of the Son of Man's Function in the First Gospel |date=1 March 2021 |publisher=Wipf and Stock Publishers |isbn=978-1-5326-9704-3 |page=77 |language=en}}</ref> | |||
Blasphemy has been condemned as a serious, or even the most serious, sin by the major creeds and Church theologians (] and ]ity were generally considered to be the gravest sins, with ] a greater sin than blasphemy, cf. Thomas Aquinas' ''Summa Theologiae'').<ref>ST II-II q10a3, q11a3, q12. Q11A3: "With regard to heretics two points must be observed: one, on their own side; the other, on the side of the Church. On their own side there is the sin, whereby they deserve not only to be separated from the Church by excommunication, but also to be severed from the world by death. For it is a much graver matter to corrupt the faith which quickens the soul, than to forge money, which supports temporal life. Wherefore if forgers of money and other evil-doers are forthwith condemned to death by the secular authority, much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."</ref> | |||
*] says that “ we compare murder and blasphemy as regards the objects of those sins, it is clear that blasphemy, which is a sin committed directly against God, is more grave than murder, which is a sin against one's neighbor. On the other hand, if we compare them in respect of the harm wrought by them, murder is the graver sin, for murder does more harm to one's neighbor, than blasphemy does to God.”<ref>Thomas Aquinas: 2:2, q. 13.</ref> | |||
*The ] calls blasphemy “the greatest sin that can be outwardly committed”.<ref> ''The Large Catechism,'' §55.</ref> | |||
*The '']'' says: “Therefore, to swear vainly or rashly by the glorious and awesome name of God…is sinful, and to be regarded with disgust and detestation. …For by rash, false, and vain oaths, the Lord is provoked and because of them this land mourns.”<ref> Ch. 23, §2–3.</ref> | |||
*''The ]'' answers question 100 about blasphemy by stating that “no sin is greater or provokes God's wrath more than the blaspheming of His Name”.<ref> Q. 100.</ref> | |||
*The '']'' explains that “The sins forbidden in the third commandment are, the abuse of it in an ignorant, vain, irreverent, profane...mentioning...by blasphemy...to profane jests, ...vain janglings, ...to charms or sinful lusts and practices.”<ref> Q. 113.</ref> | |||
*] found it intolerable “when a person is accused of blasphemy, to lay the blame on the ] of passion, as if God were to endure the penalty whenever we are provoked.”<ref>Jean Calvin: '''' vol. 4. Lev. 24:10.</ref> | |||
====Church history==== | |||
===Catholic prayers and reparations for blasphemy=== | |||
In the Catholic Church, there are specific prayers and devotions as ] for blasphemy.<ref> By Scott P. Richert, About.com</ref> For instance, ] first introduced by Sister ] in 1844 is recited "''in a spirit of reparation for blasphemy''". This devotion (started by Sister Marie and then promoted by the Venerable ]) was approved by Pope ] in 1885.<ref>* Dorothy Scallan. The Holy Man of Tours. (1990) ISBN 0-89555-390-2</ref> The ] Catholic prayer book includes a number of such prayers.<ref>Joseph P. Christopher et al., 2003 ''The Raccolta'', St Athanasius Press ISBN 978-0-9706526-6-9</ref> The ] devotions are done with the intention in the heart of making reparation to the Blessed Mother for blasphemies against her, her name and her holy initiatives. | |||
In the early history of the Church, blasphemy "was considered to show active disrespect to God and to involve the use of profane cursing or mockery of his powers".<ref name="Nash2007"/> | |||
The ] has specific "Pontifical organizations" for the purpose of the reparation of blasphemy through ], e.g. the ''Pontifical Congregation of the ].''<ref> Vatican archives</ref> | |||
In '']'', sometimes attributed to ] or ], blasphemy is described as "speaking any evil Thing of God", and as "the highest Degree whereof is cursing him; or if we do not speak it with our Mouths, yet if we do it in our Hearts, by thinking any unworthy Thing of him, it is look'd on by God, who sees the Heart, as the vilest Dishonour."<ref>{{cite book |last1=Allestree |first1=Richard |title=The whole duty of man, laid down in a plain and familiar way |url=https://archive.org/details/wholedutyofmanla00alle |date=1658}}</ref> | |||
===Punishment=== | |||
The most common punishment for blasphemers was ] through hanging or stoning, justified by the words of {{bibleref2|Leviticus|24:13-16}}. | |||
{{quote|Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, “Bring out of the camp the one who cursed, and let all who heard him lay their hands on his head, and let all the congregation stone him. And speak to the people of Israel, saying, Whoever curses his God shall bear his sin. Whoever blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death. All the congregation shall stone him. The sojourner as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death."}} | |||
* ] says that " we compare murder and blasphemy as regards the objects of those sins, it is clear that blasphemy, which is a sin committed directly against God, is more grave than murder, which is a sin against one's neighbor. On the other hand, if we compare them in respect of the harm wrought by them, murder is the graver sin, for murder does more harm to one's neighbor, than blasphemy does to God".<ref>Thomas Aquinas: 2:2, q. 13.</ref> | |||
The last person hanged for blasphemy in Great Britain was ] aged 20, in Scotland in 1697. He was prosecuted for denying the veracity of the Old Testament and the legitimacy of Christ's miracles.<ref name=truth>{{cite web|url=http://www25.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/thomasaikenhead.html |title=Thomas Aikenhead |publisher=5.uua.org |accessdate=10 November 2011}}</ref> | |||
* The '']'' calls blasphemy "the greatest sin that can be outwardly committed".<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090315051445/http://bookofconcord.org/lc-3-tencommandments.php |date=15 March 2009 }} ''The Large Catechism,'' §55.</ref> | |||
* The '']'' says: "Therefore, to swear vainly or rashly by the glorious and awesome name of God…is sinful, and to be regarded with disgust and detestation. …For by rash, false, and vain oaths, the Lord is provoked and because of them this land mourns".<ref> {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100407070838/http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/creeds/bcof.htm |date= 7 April 2010 }} Ch. 23, §2–3.</ref> | |||
* ''The ]'' answers question 100 about blasphemy by stating that "no sin is greater or provokes God's wrath more than the blaspheming of His Name".<ref> {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090613033525/http://www.wts.edu/resources/heidelberg.html |date=13 June 2009 }} Q. 100.</ref> | |||
* The '']'' explains that "The sins forbidden in the third commandment are, the abuse of it in an ignorant, vain, irreverent, profane...mentioning...by blasphemy...to profane jests, ...vain janglings, ...to charms or sinful lusts and practices".<ref> Q. 113.</ref> | |||
* ] found it intolerable "when a person is accused of blasphemy, to lay the blame on the ] of passion, as if God were to endure the penalty whenever we are provoked".<ref>Jean Calvin: '''' vol. 4. Lev. 24:10.</ref> | |||
====Catholic prayers and reparations for blasphemy==== | |||
==Islam== | |||
] was accused of blasphemy and subject of a '']'' issued by ] ], the ], in February 1989.]] | |||
{{Main|Islam and blasphemy}} | |||
In Islamic literature, blasphemy is of many types, and there are many different words for it: ''sabb'' (insult) and ''shatm'' (abuse, vilification), ''takdhib'' or ''tajdif'' (denial), ''iftira'' (concoction), ''la`n'' or ''la'ana'' (curse) and ''ta`n'' (accuse, defame).<ref>See: | |||
*Siraj Khan, Blasphemy against the Prophet, in Muhammad in History, Thought, and Culture (ed: Coeli Fitzpatrick Ph.D., Adam Hani Walker), ISBN 978-1610691772, pp. 59-67; | |||
*Hassner, R. E. (2011). Blasphemy and Violence. International Studies Quarterly, 55(1), pages 23-4; | |||
*Lewis, Bernard. "Behind the Rushdie affair." ''The American Scholar'' 60.2 (1991), pages 185-196; | |||
*Stanfield-Johnson, R. (2004). The tabarra'iyan and the early Safavids. Iranian Studies, 37(1), pages 47-71</ref> In Islamic literature, the term blasphemy sometimes also overlaps with ] (''kufr'', disbeliever), ''fisq'' (depravity), ''isa'ah'' (insult), and ''ridda'' (apostasy).<ref>Talal Asad, in Hent de Vries (Ed.), Religion: Beyond a Concept, Fordham University Press (2008), ISBN 978-0823227242; pages 589-592</ref><ref name=lw/> There are a number of ]h in Qur'an and ] in hadith relating to blasphemy, from which Quranic verses 5:33-34 and 33:57-61 have been most commonly used in Islamic history to justify and punish blasphemers.<ref name=khan>Siraj Khan, Blasphemy against the Prophet, in Muhammad in History, Thought, and Culture (ed: Coeli Fitzpatrick Ph.D., Adam Hani Walker), ISBN 978-1610691772, pp. 59-67</ref> For example,<ref name=khan/> | |||
In the Catholic Church, there are specific prayers and devotions as ] for blasphemy.<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080118184246/http://catholicism.about.com/od/prayers/qt/Reparation_HN.htm |date=18 January 2008 }} By Scott P. Richert, About.com</ref> For instance, ] first introduced by Sister ] in 1844 is recited "''in a spirit of reparation for blasphemy''". This devotion (started by Sister Marie and then promoted by the Venerable ]) was approved by Pope ] in 1885.<ref>Dorothy Scallan. The Holy Man of Tours. (1990) {{ISBN|0-89555-390-2}}</ref> The ]book includes a number of such prayers.<ref>Joseph P. Christopher et al., 2003 ''The Raccolta'', St Athanasius Press {{ISBN|978-0-9706526-6-9}}</ref> The ] devotions are done with the intention in the heart of making reparation to the Blessed Mother for blasphemies against her, her name and her holy initiatives. | |||
{{quote|The only punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is that they should be murdered, or crucified, or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides, or they should be imprisoned. This shall he a disgrace for them in this world, and in the Hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement. Except those who repent before you overpower them; so know that Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.|]|{{quran-usc|5|33|end=34}}||}} | |||
The ] has specific "Pontifical organizations" for the purpose of the reparation of blasphemy through ], e.g. the ''Pontifical Congregation of the ].''<ref> {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080502234831/https://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/2000/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_20001021_riparatrici_en.html |date=2 May 2008 }} Vatican archives</ref> | |||
{{quote|Those who annoy Allah and His Messenger - Allah has cursed them in this World and in the Hereafter, and has prepared for them a humiliating Punishment. Truly, if the Hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and those who stir up sedition in the City, desist not, We shall certainly stir thee up against them: Then will they not be able to stay in it as thy neighbours for any length of time: They shall have a curse on them: whenever they are found, they shall be seized and slain (without mercy).|]|{{quran-usc|33|57|end=61}}||}} | |||
====Disputation of Paris==== | |||
A variety of actions, speeches or behavior can constitute blasphemy in Islam. Some examples include insulting or cursing Allah, or Muhammad; mockery or disagreeable behavior towards beliefs and customs common in Islam; criticism of Islam's holy personages. ], that is act of abandoning Islam, or finding faults or expressing doubts about Allah (''ta'til'') and Qur'an, rejection of Muhammed or any of his teachings, or leaving the Muslim community to become an atheist is a form of blasphemy. Questioning religious opinions (fatwa) and normative Islamic views can also be construed as blasphemous. Improper dress, drawing offensive cartoons, tearing or burning holy literature of Islam, creating or using music or painting or video or novels to mock or criticize Muhammad are some examples of blasphemous acts.<ref></ref><ref>Lawton, D. (1993). Blasphemy. Univ of Pennsylvania Press</ref><ref>CW Ernst, in Eliade (Ed), ''Blasphemy - Islamic Concept'', The encyclopedia of religion, New York (1987)</ref><ref>Marshall and Shea (2011), ''Silenced'', Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0199812288</ref> In the context of those who are non-Muslims, the concept of blasphemy includes all aspects of ]ity (kufr). | |||
During the ] a series of debates on ] were staged by the ], including the ] (1240), the ] (1263), and ] (1413–14), and during those disputations, Jewish converts to Christianity, such as ] (in Paris) and ] (in Barcelona) claimed the Talmud contained insulting references to Jesus.<ref>Carroll, James, Constantine's sword: the church and the Jews : a history, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2002</ref><ref>Seidman, Naomi, Faithful renderings: Jewish-Christian difference and the politics of translation, University of Chicago Press, 2006 p. 137</ref><ref>Cohn-Sherbok, Dan, Judaism and other faiths, Palgrave Macmillan, 1994, p. 48</ref> | |||
===Blasphemy in different Islamic schools of jurisprudence=== | |||
{{Main|Blasphemy in Islam|Islamic criminal jurisprudence}} | |||
The ] does not explicitly mention any worldly punishment for blasphemy (''sabb allah'' or ''sabb al-rasul''), as it does for ] (''riddah''). Islamic jurisprudence (]) of Sunni and Shia ]s have declared different punishments for the religious crime of blasphemy, and they vary between schools. These are as follows:<ref name = "Saeed">{{Cite book | last = Saeed | first = Abdullah |author2=Hassan Saeed | title = Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam | publisher = Ashgate Publishing Company | year = 2004 | location = Burlington VT | pages = 37–39 | isbn = 978-0-7546-3083-8}}</ref><ref>Wiederhold, Lutz. "Blasphemy against the Prophet Muhammad and his companions (sabb al-rasul, sabb al-sahabah): The introduction of the topic into shafi'i legal literature and its relevance for legal practice under Mamluk rule."Journal of semitic studies 42.1 (1997): 39-70.</ref><ref>Saeed, Abdullah. "AMBIGUITIES OF APOSTASY AND THE REPRESSION OF MUSLIM DISSENT." The Review of Faith & International Affairs 9.2 (2011): 31-38.</ref> | |||
The ], also known as the Trial of the Talmud, took place in 1240 at the court of the reigning king of France, ] (St. Louis). It followed the work of ], a Jewish convert to ], who translated the ] and pressed 35 charges against it to ] by quoting a series of alleged blasphemous passages about ], ] or Christianity.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rZGx-bS3vcgC&pg=PA137|title=Faithful Renderings: Jewish-Christian Difference and the Politics of Translation|first=Naomi|last=Seidman|date=2010|publisher=University of Chicago Press|via=Google Books|pages=136–138|isbn=978-0-226-74507-7 }}</ref> Four ] defended the Talmud against Donin's accusations. A commission of Christian theologians condemned the Talmud to be burned and on 17 June 1244, twenty-four carriage loads of Jewish religious manuscripts were ] in the streets of Paris.<ref>{{cite book|title=The history of the Talmud, from the time of its formation, about 200 B.C.|first=Michael Levi|last=Rodkinson|pages= 66–75|year= 1918|publisher=Talmud Society}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=Judaism on Trial: Jewish-Christian Disputations in the Middle Ages|url=https://archive.org/details/judaismontrialje00macc|url-access=registration|first=Hyam |last=Maccoby|year= 1982|publisher=Associated University Presses|isbn=978-0-8386-3053-2}}</ref> The translation of the Talmud from ] to non-Jewish languages stripped Jewish discourse from its covering, something that was resented by Jews as a profound violation.<ref></ref> | |||
:] – views blasphemy as synonymous with apostasy, and therefore, accepts the repentance of apostates. Those who refuse to repent, their punishment is death if the blasphemer is a Muslim man, and if the blasphemer is a woman, she must be imprisoned with coercion (beating) till she repents and returns to Islam.<ref> | |||
*Abu al-Layth al-Samarqandi (983), Mukhtalaf al-Riwayah, vol. 3, pp. 1298–1299 | |||
*Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Tahawi (933), Mukhtasar Ikhtilaf al-Ulama, vol. 3, p. 504 | |||
*Ali ibn Hassan al-Sughdi (798); Kitab al-Kharaj; Quote: “أيما رجل مسلم سب رَسُوْل اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أو كذبه أو عابه أوتنقصه فقد كفر بالله وبانت منه زوجته ، فإن تاب وإلا قتل ، وكذلك المرأة ، إلا أن أبا حنيفة قَالَ: لا تقتل المرأة وتجبر عَلَى الإسلام”; Translation: “A Muslim man who blasphemes the Messenger of Allah, denies him, reproaches him, or diminishes him, he has committed apostasy in Allah, and his wife is separated from him. He must repent, or else is killed. And this is the same for the woman, except Abu Hanifa said: Do not kill the woman, but coerce her back to Islam.”</ref> If a non-Muslim commits blasphemy, his punishment must be a ] (discretionary, can be death, arrest, caning, etc.).<ref>Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Tahawi (933), Mukhtasar Ikhtilaf al-Ulama, vol. 3, p. 504</ref><ref>P Smith (2003), Speak No Evil: Apostasy, Blasphemy and Heresy in Malaysian Syariah Law, UC Davis Journal Int'l Law & Policy, 10, pp. 357-373; | |||
*N Swazo (2014), The Case Of Hamza Kashgari: Examining Apostasy, Heresy, And Blasphemy Under Sharia, The Review of Faith & International Affairs, 12(4), pp. 16-26</ref> | |||
:] – view blasphemy as an offense distinct from, and more severe than apostasy. Death is mandatory in cases of blasphemy for Muslim men, and repentance is not accepted. For women, death is not the punishment suggested, but she is arrested and punished till she repents and returns to Islam or dies in custody.<ref>] (1145), Kitab Ash-shifa (كتاب الشفاء بتعريف حقوق المصطفى), pp. 373-441 (Translated in English by AA Bewley, {{oclc|851141256}}, (Review Contents in , Read , Accessed on: January 10, 2015)</ref><ref>D Jordan (2003), Dark Ages of Islam: Ijtihad, Apostasy, and Human Rights in Contemporary Islamic Jurisprudence, The. Wash. & Lee Race & Ethnic Anc. Law Journal, Vol. 9, pp. 55-74</ref> A non-Muslim who commits blasphemy against Islam must be punished; however, the blasphemer can escape punishment by converting and becoming a devout Muslim.<ref>Carl Ernst (2005), "Blasphemy: Islamic Concept", Encyclopedia of Religion (Editor: Lindsay Jones), Vol 2, Macmillan Reference, ISBN 0-02-865735-7</ref> | |||
:] – view blasphemy as an offense distinct from, and more severe than apostasy. Death is mandatory in cases of blasphemy, for both Muslim men and women, and repentance is not accepted.<ref>Abdullah Saeed and Hassan Saeed (2004), Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam, Ashgate Publishing, ISBN 978-0754630838</ref><ref> | |||
*] (a ], related to Hanbali school), ''al-Sārim al-Maslūl ‘ala Shātim al-Rasūl'' (Translation: A ready sword against those who insult the Messenger), Published in 1297 AD in Arabic, Reprinted in 1975 and 2003 by Dar-ibn Hazm (Beirut)</ref> | |||
:] – recognizes blasphemy as a separate offense from apostasy, but accepts the repentance of blasphemers. If the blasphemer does not repent, the punishment is death.<ref name=lw>L Wiederhold L, Blasphemy against the Prophet Muhammad and his companions (sabb al-rasul, sabb al-sahabah) : The introduction of the topic into Shafi'i legal literature, Jrnl of Sem Studies, Oxford University Press, 42(1), pp. 39-70</ref><ref>P Smith (2003), Speak No Evil: Apostasy, Blasphemy and Heresy in Malaysian Syariah Law, UC Davis Journal Int'l Law & Policy, 10, pp. 357-373; | |||
*F Griffel (2001), Toleration and exclusion: al-Shafi ‘i and al-Ghazali on the treatment of apostates, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 64(3), pp. 339-354</ref> | |||
:] (Shia) – views blasphemy against Islam, the Prophet, or any of the Imams, to be punishable with death, if the blasphemer is a Muslim.<ref>Ayatullah Abu al-Qasim al-Khoei (1992), Minhaj al-Salihin, vol. 2, pp. 43-45; | |||
*Ali ibn Ahmad al-Amili al-Thani (1602), Sharh al-Luma al-Dimashqiya, vol. 9, pp. 194-195; | |||
*Muhammad ibn al-Hassan al-Tusi (1067), Al-Nihaya, pp. 730-731 and Tadhib al-Ahkam, vol. 10, p. 85; | |||
*Ali ibn al-Hussein “Sharif al-Murtada” (1044). Al-Intisar, pp. 480–481; | |||
*Ali ibn Babawaih al-Qummi al-Saduq (991), Al-Hidaya fi al-Usul wa al-Furu, pp. 295–297</ref> In case the blasphemer is a non-Muslim, he is given a chance to convert to Islam, or else killed.<ref>Ali ibn al-Hussein al-Murtada (1044), Al-Intisar, pp. 480-481</ref> | |||
Between 1239 and 1775, the Roman Catholic Church at various times either forced the censoring of parts of the Talmud that it considered theologically problematic or the destruction of copies of the Talmud.<ref name="expunged">{{cite book |url = https://books.google.com/books?id=bunHURgi7FcC&q=talmud+censorship&pg=PA110| title = Encyclopedia of Censorship |author=Jonathon Green |author2=Nicholas J. Karolides|publisher = Infobase Publishing| page = 110 |year = 2009| isbn = 978-1-4381-1001-1| access-date= 13 February 2014}}</ref> During the inquisition, sects deemed heretical such as the ] were also charged with blasphemy.<ref name="Napier 2017 p. 60">{{cite book | last=Napier | first=G. | title=Maleficium: Witchcraft and Witch Hunting in the West | publisher=Amberley Publishing | year=2017 | isbn=978-1-4456-6511-5 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=H2AuDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT60 | access-date=2023-05-09 | page=60}}</ref> | |||
Some jurists suggest that the sunnah in ]<ref>{{hadith-usc|usc=yes|Bukhari|3|45|687}}, {{hadith-usc|usc=yes|Bukhari|5|59|369}}</ref> provide a basis for a death sentence for the crime of blasphemy, even if someone claims not to be an apostate, but has committed the crime of blasphemy. Some<ref>Declan O'Sullivan (2001), The Interpretation of Qur'anic Text to Promote or Negate the Death Penalty for Apostates and Blasphemers, Journal of Qur'anic Studies, 3(2), pp. 63-93</ref><ref> Guardian 20 January 2010. Retrieved 23 January 2010</ref> modern Muslim scholars contest that Islam supports ], stating that ] made the offense part of ]. | |||
====2024 Summer Olympics opening ceremony==== | |||
The Islamic law considers blasphemy against Muhammad a more severe offense than blasphemy against God. Repentance can lead to forgiveness by God when God is blasphemed, however since Muhammad is no longer alive, forgiveness is not possible when Muhammad is blasphemed, and the Muslim community must punish his blasphemy by avenging blasphemer's death.<ref name = "Saeed"/><ref>Jordan, David A. "Dark Ages of Islam: Ijtihad, Apostasy, and Human Rights in Contemporary Islamic Jurisprudence, The." Wash. & Lee Race & Ethnic Anc. LJ 9 (2003): 55.</ref><ref>Kamali, Mohammad Hashim. Freedom of expression in Islam. Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1997.</ref> | |||
Some Christians described parts of the ] as blasphemy. While blasphemy is legal in France, this event has been criticized for singling out one particular religion and being ].<ref name="w629">{{cite web | title=Drag performance resembling Last Supper at Olympic opening ceremony rankles conservatives | website=NBC News | date=27 July 2024 | url=https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/drag-performance-resembling-last-supper-olympics-opening-ceremony-rcna163927 | access-date=28 July 2024}}</ref> | |||
===Islam=== | |||
In Islamic jurisprudence, Kitab al ] and ] cover punishment for blasphemous acts.<ref>Peters, R. (2005). Crime and punishment in Islamic Law: Theory and practice from the Sixteenth to the Twenty-First Century (Vol. 2). Cambridge University Press.</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://islaminstitut.de/uploads/media/Apostasy2.pdf|format=PDF|last=Schirrmacher|first=C.|year=2008|title= Defection from Islam: A Disturbing Human Rights Dilemma|website=islaminstitut.de}}</ref> The penalties for blasphemy can include fines, imprisonment, flogging, amputation, hanging, or beheading.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.islamicvoice.com/April2006/QuestionHour-DrZakirNaik/ |title=Islamic Voice |publisher=Islamic Voice |accessdate=10 November 2011}}</ref> Many nations prescribe and carry out the death penalty for ], a similarly motivated action, and Pakistan and Egypt demand execution for some ]. Muslim clerics may call for revenge against an alleged blasphemer by issuing a ] (legal ruling), or simply provide guidelines on behaviors and lifestyle that is blasphemous. For example, in Malaysia, Islamic scholars issued a fatwa declaring ] as blasphemous, because yoga is a form of spiritual practice in Hinduism.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.welt.de/english-news/article2766685/Muslims-warned-to-avoid-blasphemous-yoga.html|title=Malaysia: Muslims warned to avoid blasphemous yoga - DIE WELT|date=22 November 2008|work=DIE WELT}}</ref><ref>Holike, C. (2011), in Andrea Fleschenberg, Claudia Derich (Eds), THE STATE OF ISLAM–NEGOTIATING DEMOCRACY, MUSLIM WOMEN’S RIGHTS AND MORALITY IN INDONESIA AND MALAYSIA, ''Women and Politics in Asia: A Springboard for Democracy?'', LIT Verlag (Zurich), 15, page 71-80</ref><ref></ref> | |||
===Blasphemy in RSS & BJP' Fundamentalism in INDIA=== | |||
<ref> In the context of Arun Jatli's DDCA Scam Case BJP Govt minister Smriti Irani use the term #blasphamous in order to political protection of Arun Jetli. This argument from a female central minister describe the boss worshiping fundamentalism of these organizations.</ref> | |||
] was executed in Baghdad amid political intrigue and charges of blasphemy in 922.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Avery|first1=Kenneth|title=Psychology of Early Sufi Sama: Listening and Altered States|date=2004|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-0-415-31106-9|page=3}}</ref>]] | |||
===Notable cases and debate on blasphemy=== | |||
{{Main|Islam and blasphemy}} | |||
One famous case of the Islamic blasphemy law was the fatwa against English author ] for his book entitled ], the title of which refers to an account that Muhammad, in the course of revealing the Quran, received a revelation from Satan and incorporated it therein until made by Allah to retract it (see '']''). Several translators of his book into foreign languages have been murdered.<ref name="Rushdie">{{cite web| title = Blasphemy Salman Rushdie| publisher = Constitutional Rights Foundation| year = 2009| url = http://www.crf-usa.org/america-responds-to-terrorism/blasphemy-salman-rushdie.html| accessdate = 10 July 2009}}</ref> | |||
====Punishment and definition==== | |||
{{anchor | Punishment in Islam }} | |||
Blasphemy in ] is impious utterance or action concerning ], ] or anything considered sacred in Islam.<ref>"" at dictionary.com</ref><ref name="Wiederhold, Lutz 1997">Wiederhold, Lutz. "Blasphemy against the Prophet Muhammad and his companions (sabb al-rasul, sabb al-sahabah): The introduction of the topic into shafi'i legal literature and its relevance for legal practice under Mamluk rule". ''Journal of semitic studies'' '''42'''.1 (1997): 39–70.</ref> The ] admonishes blasphemy, but does not specify any worldly punishment for blasphemy.<ref name="SaeedSaeed2004">{{Cite book |last1 = Saeed |first1 = Abdullah |last2 = Saeed |first2= Hassan |title = Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam |publisher = Ashgate Publishing Company |year = 2004 |location = Burlington VT |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=sjQKAQAAMAAJ&q=Freedom+of+Religion,+Apostasy+and+Islam |isbn = 978-0-7546-3083-8|pages=38–39}}</ref> The ]s, which are another source of ], suggest various punishments for blasphemy, which may include ].<ref name="SaeedSaeed2004"/><ref>Siraj Khan. ''Blasphemy against the Prophet, in Muhammad in History, Thought, and Culture'' (ed: Coeli Fitzpatrick PhD, Adam Hani Walker). {{ISBN|978-1-61069-177-2}}, pp. 59–67.</ref> However, it has been argued that the death penalty applies only to cases where there is ] involved that may seriously harm the ] community, especially during times of war.<ref>{{cite book|author=Taha Jabir Alalwani|url=http://iiit.org/iiitftp/publications/Bibs/Books-in-Brief%20Apostasy%20in%20Islam%20A%20Historical%20and%20Scriptural%20Analysis.pdf|title=Apostasy in Islam: a Historical and Scriptural Analysis|location=Herndon, VA|publisher=International Institute of Islamic Thought|year=2012|isbn=978-1-56564-585-1|type=Archived copy |access-date=2015-09-18 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150219032457/http://iiit.org/iiitftp/publications/Bibs/Books-in-Brief%20Apostasy%20in%20Islam%20A%20Historical%20and%20Scriptural%20Analysis.pdf |archive-date=19 February 2015}}</ref> Different traditional ] prescribe different punishment for blasphemy, depending on whether the blasphemer is Muslim or non-Muslim, a man or a woman.<ref name="SaeedSaeed2004"/> In the modern ], the laws pertaining to blasphemy ], and some countries prescribe punishments consisting of fines, imprisonment, ], ], or ].<ref name=psns>P Smith (2003). "Speak No Evil: Apostasy, Blasphemy and Heresy in Malaysian Syariah Law". ''UC Davis Journal Int'l Law & Policy''. 10, pp. 357–373. | |||
* N Swazo (2014). "The Case of Hamza Kashgari: Examining Apostasy, Heresy, and Blasphemy Under Sharia". ''The Review of Faith & International Affairs'' '''12'''(4). pp. 16–26.</ref> Blasphemy laws were rarely enforced in pre-modern Islamic societies, but in the modern era some states and radical groups have used charges of blasphemy in an effort to burnish their religious credentials and gain popular support at the expense of liberal Muslim intellectuals and religious minorities.<ref name=failed3>{{cite encyclopedia|encyclopedia=Encyclopedia of Islam|title=Blasphemy|editor= Juan Eduardo Campo|publisher=Infobase Publishing|year=2009}}</ref> In recent years, accusations of blasphemy against Islam have sparked international controversies and played part in incidents of mob violence and assassinations of prominent figures. | |||
====Failed OIC anti-blasphemy campaign at UN==== | |||
{{anchor | UN | IOC campaign | IOC UN campaign | Islamic Cooperation's UN campaign }} | |||
{{Main|Blasphemy and the United Nations}} | |||
The campaign for worldwide criminal penalties for the "defamation of religions" had been spearheaded by ] (OIC) on behalf of the United Nations' large Muslim bloc. The campaign ended in 2011 when the proposal was withdrawn in Geneva, in the Human Rights Council because of lack of support, marking an end to the effort to establish worldwide blasphemy strictures along the lines of those in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. This resolution had passed every year since 1999, in the United Nations, with declining number of "yes" votes with each successive year.<ref name=failed1> Nina Shea, National Review (31 March 2011)</ref> In the early 21st century, blasphemy became an issue in the ] (UN). The United Nations passed several resolutions which called upon the world to take action against the "defamation of religions".<ref>U.N. Resolutions: | |||
* | |||
* | |||
</ref> However, in July 2011, the ] (UNHRC) released a 52-paragraph statement which affirmed the freedom of speech and rejected the laws banning "display of lack of respect for a religion or other belief system'.<ref name=failed2></ref> | |||
====Depictions of Muhammad==== | |||
{{see|Depictions of Muhammad}} | |||
When the Danish newspaper ], its editor-in-chief wrote an editorial that the newspaper was publishing the cartoons because Muslims had to get over their "sickly oversensitivity". Another editor looked upon it as a cultural initiation: "By making fun of people we're also including them in our society. It's not always easy for those concerned, but that the price they're got to pay".<ref> | |||
Laborde C. The Danish Cartoon Controversy and the Challenges of Multicultural Politics: A Discussion of The Cartoons That Shook the World. Perspectives on Politics. 2011;9(3):603-605. doi:10.1017/S1537592711002817</ref> Editors expressed concern that Danish comedians, artists and so on were self-censoring because they were afraid of a violent response from Muslims. | |||
The global protests that erupted in February 2006 shocked the artists who submitted cartoons. After receiving a bomb threat one cartoonist was angry that Muslims fleeing persecution in their own countries would "want the laws they have fled" to be enforced in Denmark. The editors stood their ground: "Everyone had to accept being subject to satire."<ref name=Klausen>{{cite book |last=Klausen |first=Jytte |title=The Cartoons That Shook the World |publisher=Yale University Press |date=2009}}</ref> | |||
] claimed responsibility for a car bombing at the Danish embassy in ] in June 2008 which they said was revenge for the "insulting drawings".<ref name=Klausen/> | |||
After the ] in 2015 '']'' became a rallying cry for secular, free speech advocates. The attacks took place in France where the culture of militant secularism celebrates blasphemy but permits viewpoint based restrictions and prior restraint of speech. ] was very skeptical and critical of the "right to blasphemy" narrative. Skeptics thought it amounted to little more than ridicule of a marginalized group. Scholars rebutting Todd's study have found that many of the protestors were liberal, tolerant people who did not have Islamophobic or xenophobic views. For many of the ''Je Suis Charlie'' protestors the sentiment of the protest was simply: it is not ok to kill someone because they have offended you.<ref>{{cite book |title=After Charlie Hebdo: Terror, Racism and Free Speech |publisher=Zed Books |date=2017 |page=53-9}}</ref> | |||
As of 2011, all Islamic majority nations, worldwide, had criminal laws on blasphemy. Over 125 non-Muslim nations worldwide did not have any laws relating to blasphemy.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pewforum.org/Government/Laws-Penalizing-Blasphemy,-Apostasy-and-Defamation-of-Religion-are-Widespread.aspx|title=Laws Penalizing Blasphemy, Apostasy and Defamation of Religion are Widespread|date=21 November 2012|work=Pew Research Center's Religion & Public Life Project}}</ref><ref>Rehman, Javaid. "THE SHARI ‘AH, INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW AND THE RIGHT TO HOLD OPINIONS AND FREE EXPRESSION: AFTER BILOUR’S FATWA." Islam and International Law: Engaging Self-Centrism from a Plurality of Perspectives (2013): 244.</ref> In Islamic nations, thousands of individuals have been arrested and punished for blasphemy of Islam.<ref>Forte, David F. "Apostasy and Blasphemy in Pakistan." Conn. J. Int'l L. 10 (1994): 27.</ref><ref>Silence. How Apostasy and Blasphemy Codes Are Choking Freedom Worldwide. By Paul Marshall and Nina Shea. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.</ref> Several Islamic nations have argued in the United Nations that blasphemy against Muhammad is unacceptable, and laws should be passed worldwide to place "limits on the freedom of expression." Non-Muslim nations that do not have blasphemy laws, have pointed to abuses of blasphemy laws in Islamic nations, and have disagreed.<ref></ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/19/us-protests-religions-blasphemy-idUSBRE88I1EG20120919|title=Islamic states to reopen quest for global blasphemy law|work=Reuters}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/Blasphemy_Cases.pdf|format=PDF|title=Blasphemy Laws Exposed - The Consequences of Criminalizing Defamation of Religions |year=2012|website=humanrightsfirst.org}}</ref> | |||
==Judaism== | ===Judaism=== | ||
{{See also|List of capital crimes in the Torah}} | {{See also|List of capital crimes in the Torah}} | ||
] over his sex scandal with Bathsheba the wife of Uriah the Hittite, saying "by this deed you have given occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme" (]:14).]] | |||
{{bibleref2|Leviticus|24:16|NKJV}} states that he that blasphemes the ] "shall surely be put to death". In ] the only form of blasphemy which is punishable by death is blaspheming the ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/3354-blasphemy|title=BLASPHEMY - JewishEncyclopedia.com|work=jewishencyclopedia.com}}</ref> | |||
In {{bibleverse|Leviticus|24:16|NRSV}} the punishment for blasphemy is death. In ] the only form of blasphemy which is punishable by death is blaspheming the ].<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/3354-blasphemy|title=Blasphemy|encyclopedia=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref> Leviticus 24:16 states that "anyone who blasphemes the name of Yahweh will be put to death".<ref name="Netton1996">{{cite book |last1=Netton |first1=Ian Richard |title=Text and Trauma: An East-West Primer |date=1996 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-7007-0325-8 |page=2 |language=en}}</ref> | |||
The ], which Judaism sees as applicable to all people, prohibit blasphemy.<ref name="Jewishvirtuallibrary.org">{{cite web|url=https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/The_Seven_Noahide_Laws.html|title=The Seven Noachide Laws - Jewish Virtual Library|publisher=Jewishvirtuallibrary.org|accessdate=8 November 2014}}</ref> | |||
The ], which Judaism sees as applicable to all people, prohibit blasphemy.<ref name="Jewishvirtuallibrary.org">{{cite web|url=https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/The_Seven_Noahide_Laws.html|title=The Seven Noachide Laws |publisher=JewishVirtualLibrary.org|access-date=8 November 2014}}</ref> | |||
==The United Nations== | |||
{{Main|Blasphemy and the United Nations}} | |||
In one of the texts of the ], called the ], violence against non-Jews (also called ]) is prohibited, except in cases where it is sanctioned by a Jewish governing authority "so that they will not blaspheme".<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia| publisher = Oxford University Press| isbn = 978-0-19-508450-4| title = Gentiles –. Oxford Reference| encyclopedia = Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls| year = 2000| access-date = 2017-05-29| url = http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780195084504.001.0001/acref-9780195084504-e-183}}{{subscription required|via=]}}</ref> | |||
In the early 21st century, blasphemy became an issue in the United Nations. The ] passed several resolutions which called upon the world to take action against the "defamation of religions".<ref>U.N. Resolutions: | |||
* | |||
=== Hinduism === | |||
* | |||
Section 295A of the '']'' lays down the punishment for the deliberate and malicious acts, that are intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.<ref name="Indian Express 295A">{{cite news |title=Hate speech, IPC Sec 295A, and how courts have read the law |url=https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/hate-speech-ipc-sec-295a-how-courts-have-read-the-law-7972371/ |access-date=29 June 2022 |work=The Indian Express |date=16 June 2022 |language=en}}</ref> It is one of the ]. This law prohibits ] against all religions in India. This law originated due to Hindu-Muslim conflict | |||
=== Buddhism === | |||
] has no concept of blasphemy. In contrast, in ], the birthplace of ] (namely ], ], and ]), there was no room for such tolerance and respect for dissent where heretics and blasphemers had to pay with their lives. | |||
Insulting Buddhism is a punishable offence in some Buddhist majority counties like Sri Lanka and Myanmar. In 2015 a man from New Zealand was sentenced to prison for depicting a picture of Buddha with headphones.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.dw.com/en/myanmar-court-jails-three-over-insult-to-buddhism/a-18320079 | title=Three jailed for insult to Buddha – DW – 03/17/2015 | website=] }}</ref> Similarly, in 2020 Shakthika Sathkumara, a Sri Lankan author was sentenced 10 years in prison for insulting Buddhism.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://newhumanist.org.uk/articles/5671/insulting-the-buddha | title=Insulting the Buddha | date=13 August 2020 }}</ref> | |||
=== Sikhism === | |||
Blasphemy is taken harshly by Sikhs. It is called “''beadbi''” by Sikhs. In October, 2021, a ] killed a man for ''beadbi'' of the ].<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last1=Sethi |first1=Chitleen K. |last2=ThePrint |date=2021-12-19 |title=What is 'beadbi' or sacrilege in Sikhism, which sees Guru Granth Sahib as living Guru |url=https://theprint.in/india/what-is-beadbi-or-sacrilege-in-sikhism-which-sees-guru-granth-sahib-as-living-guru/784089/ |access-date=2023-07-06 |website=ThePrint |language=en-US}}</ref> In December, 2021, a man was beaten to death at the ] for committing blasphemy.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Mehmood |first=Asif |date=2021-12-18 |title=Hindu man beaten to death at Golden Temple in Amritsar |url=https://tribune.com.pk/story/2334545/hindu-man-beaten-to-death-at-golden-temple-in-amritsar?amp=1 |access-date=2023-07-06 |website=The Express Tribune}}</ref> Such punishments are justified with orthodox Sikhs saying, “instant justice” is deserving for ''beadbi'' which is the “ultimate act of crime”.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Taskin |first=Bismee |date=2021-10-15 |title='He was running with a Sikh holy book': The 'crime' for which Sikh man was lynched & hacked |url=https://theprint.in/india/he-was-running-with-a-sikh-holy-book-the-crime-for-which-sikh-man-was-lynched-hacked/751375/ |access-date=2023-07-06 |website=ThePrint |language=en-US}}</ref><ref name=":0" /> | |||
== Backlash against anti-blasphemy laws == | |||
{{anchor | Backlash | Opposition | Rejections }} | |||
=== Affirmation of Freedom of Speech (FOS) === | |||
{{anchor | FOS | Freedom | Speech | Freedom of Speech | Freedom of speech }} | |||
Multilateral global institutes, such as the ] and UN, have rejected the imposition of ''"anti-blasphemy laws"'' (ABL) and have affirmed the ].<ref name=aff1/><ref name=failed2/> | |||
==== The Council of Europe's rejection of ABL and affirmation of FOS ==== | |||
{{anchor | EU }} | |||
The ], after deliberating on the issue of blasphemy law passed the resolution that blasphemy should not be a criminal offence,<ref name=aff1>{{cite web|url=http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=17569&lang=en|title=PACE - Recommendation 1805 (2007) - Blasphemy, religious insults and hate speech against persons on grounds of their religion|website=assembly.coe.int}}</ref> which was adopted on 29 June 2007 in the ''"Recommendation 1805 (2007) on blasphemy, religious insults and hate speech against persons on grounds of their religion"''. This Recommendation set a number of guidelines for member states of the ] in view of Articles 10 (freedom of expression) and 9 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion) of the ]. | |||
==== UN's rejection of ABL and affirmation of FOS ==== | |||
{{anchor | UN }} | |||
{{ main | Defamation of religion and the United Nations }} | |||
After OIC's (''Organisation of Islamic Cooperation'') campaign at UN (United Nations) seeking impose of punishment for "defamation of religions" was withdrawn due to consistently dwindling support for their campaign,<ref name=failed1/> the ] (UNHRC), in July 2011, released a 52-paragraph statement which affirmed the freedom of speech and rejected the laws banning "display of lack of respect for a religion or other belief system'. UNHRC's ''"General Comment 34 - Paragraph 48"'' on the ] (ICCPR) 1976, concerning freedoms of opinion and expression states:<ref name=failed2/> | |||
{{blockquote|Prohibitions of displays of lack of respect for a religion or other belief system, including blasphemy laws, are incompatible with the Covenant, except in the specific circumstances envisaged in article 20, paragraph 2, of the Covenant. Such prohibitions must also comply with the strict requirements of article 19, paragraph 3, as well as such articles as 2, 5, 17, 18 and 26. Thus, for instance, it would be impermissible for any such laws to discriminate in favor of or against one or certain religions or belief systems, or their adherents over another, or religious believers over non-believers. Nor would it be permissible for such prohibitions to be used to prevent or punish criticism of religious leaders or commentary on religious doctrine and tenets of faith.<ref name=failed4>.</ref>}} | |||
=== International Blasphemy Day === | |||
{{anchor | BD | IBD | Blasphemy Day | International Blasphemy Day | International blasphemy day | Blasphemy day }} | |||
International ], observed annually on September 30, encourages individuals and groups to openly express ] and ]s. It was founded in 2009 by the ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/entry/penn_jillette_celebrates_blasphemy_day/ |title=Penn Jillette Celebrates Blasphemy Day in "Penn Says" |publisher=Center for Inquiry |date=2009-09-29 |access-date=2013-09-30}}</ref> A student contacted the Center for Inquiry in ], ] to present the idea, which CFI then supported. Ronald Lindsay, president and CEO of the Center for Inquiry, said, regarding Blasphemy Day, "e think religious beliefs should be subject to examination and criticism just as political beliefs are, but we have a taboo on religion", in an interview with ].<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/09/30/first.blasphemy.day/ |title=Taking aim at God on 'Blasphemy Day'|work=CNN.com|date= 30 September 2009|first=Moni|last= Basu}}</ref> | |||
Events worldwide on the first annual Blasphemy Day in 2009 included an art exhibit in ], and a ] festival in ].<ref name=USAT>{{cite news|url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-10-02-blasphemy-day_N.htm|title= Did you celebrate Blasphemy Day?|newspaper=USAToday.com|first=Leanne |last=Larmondin|date= 2 October 2009}}</ref> | |||
=== Removal of blasphemy laws by several nations === | |||
{{anchor | Remove | Removal }} | |||
Other countries have removed bans on blasphemy. ] did so in 1881 (this did not extend to ], then part of Germany, after it joined France) to allow freedom of religion and freedom of the press. Blasphemy was abolished or repealed in ] in 1970, ] and ] in 2008, Norway with Acts in 2009 and 2015, the Netherlands in 2014, ] in 2015, France for its Alsace-Moselle region in 2016, Malta in 2016, Denmark in 2017,<ref name="Denmark"/> ] in 2018, New Zealand in 2019, and Ireland in 2020.<ref>]</ref> | |||
==Nations with blasphemy laws== | |||
{{Main|Blasphemy law}} | |||
[[File:Blasphemy laws worldwide.svg|thumb|upright=1.4|right| | |||
{{legend|#37c837|Historic restrictions}} | |||
{{legend|#f9dc36|Local restrictions}} {{legend|#ec8028|Fines and restrictions}} {{legend|#e73e21|Prison sentences}} {{legend|#800000|Death sentences}} {{legend|#b9b9b9ff|None}}]] | |||
In ] with a ], blasphemy is outlawed under the criminal code. | |||
===Purpose of blasphemy laws=== | |||
In some states, blasphemy laws are used to impose the religious beliefs of a majority, while in other countries, they are justified as putatively offering protection of the religious beliefs of minorities.<ref name=IceNews/><ref name="Scolnicov2010">{{cite book|last=Scolnicov|first=Anat|title=The Right to Religious Freedom in International Law: Between Group Rights and Individual Rights|date=18 October 2010|publisher=Routledge|language=en|isbn=978-1-136-90705-0|page=261|quote=A different argument for the retention of the offence of blasphemy (and for its extension to the protection of all religions in the UK ) has been offered by Parekh: a majority religion does not need the protection offered by an offence of blasphemy, but minority religions do because of their vulnerability in the face of the majority.}}</ref><ref name="The Copenhagen Post">{{cite news|url=http://cphpost.dk/news14/national-news14/danes-overwhelmingly-support-their-own-blasphemy-law.html|title=Danes overwhelmingly support their own blasphemy law|date=21 September 2012|newspaper=]|language=en|access-date=17 May 2016|quote=Denmark's own blasphemy law makes it an offence to "mock legal religions and faiths in Denmark", and according to a study carried out on behalf of the liberal think-tank CEPOS, 66 per cent of the 1,000 Danes questioned answered that the law should not be repealed.}}</ref> Where blasphemy is banned, it can be either some laws which directly punish religious blasphemy,<ref>See ]</ref> or some laws that allow those who are offended by blasphemy to punish blasphemers. Those laws may condone penalties or retaliation for blasphemy under the labels of ],<ref>{{cite web | last = Kerr | first = ine | title = Libel and blasphemy bill passed by the Dail |work=The Irish Independent | date = 9 July 2009 | url = http://www.independent.ie/national-news/libel-and-blasphemy-bill-passed-by-the-dail-1813479.html | access-date = 17 November 2009}}</ref> expression of opposition, or "vilification," of religion or of some religious practices,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_act/aa1991204/s124a.html |title=Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 – Sect 124A: Vilification on grounds of race, religion, sexuality or gender identity unlawful |publisher=Austlii.edu.au |access-date=10 November 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content.asp?document_id=23370 |title=Victoria Police – Racial and religious vilification |publisher=Police.vic.gov.au |access-date=10 November 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110927090124/http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content.asp?document_id=23370 |archive-date=27 September 2011}}</ref> religious insult,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://merlin.obs.coe.int/redirect.php?id=11512 |title=European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), ''Report on the relationship between freedom of expression and freedom of religion: the issue of regulation and prosecution of blasphemy, religious insult and incitement to religious hatred'', 17–18 October 2008, Doc. No. CDL-AD(2008)026 |publisher=Merlin.obs.coe.int |access-date=10 November 2011 |archive-date=2 October 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111002221825/http://merlin.obs.coe.int/redirect.php?id=11512 }}</ref> or ].<ref>See ] and ].</ref> | |||
=== Nations with blasphemy laws === | |||
{{anchor | law }} | |||
As of 2012{{Update inline|date=September 2023}}, 33 countries had some form of anti-blasphemy laws in their legal code.<ref name=pewres/> Of these, 21 were Muslim-majority nations – ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], the ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], the ] and ]. Blasphemy is treated as a ] (death penalty) in some Muslim nations.<ref name=wsj/> In these nations, such laws have led to the persecution, lynchings, murder or arrest of minorities and dissident members, after flimsy accusations.<ref> The Economist (29 November 2014)</ref><ref>Sources of claims: | |||
* {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091119105151/http://www.religiouswatch.com/rwworld.htm|date=19 November 2009}} ''Religious Watch''. Retrieved 5 October 2011 | |||
<!-- Multiple MALWARE threats 5Oct2011, this URL disabled: h*t*t*p://www.christianpost.com/article/20091113/100-groups-oppose-u-n-defamation-of-religions-proposals/index.html --> | |||
* ''International Humanist and Ethical Union''. Retrieved 5 October 2011 | |||
* {{cite web |date=11 August 2009 |title=Muslim scholar says Scrap blasphemy laws |url=http://www.heraldmalaysia.com/news/Muslim-scholar-says-Scrap-blasphemy-laws-which-bring-shame-on-Islam-and-Pakistan-2058-1-1.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120305213255/http://www.heraldmalaysia.com/news/Muslim-scholar-says-Scrap-blasphemy-laws-which-bring-shame-on-Islam-and-Pakistan-2058-1-1.html |archive-date=5 March 2012 |access-date=5 October 2011 |work=Herald Malaysia Online}} | |||
* May 2009 (Pakistan, etc.). Retrieved 5 October 2011 | |||
* U.N. January 1999. Retrieved 5 October 2011 | |||
* {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091121192723/http://report2009.amnesty.org/en/regions/asia-pacific/indonesia|date=21 November 2009}} ''Amnesty International''. Retrieved 5 October 2011 | |||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
The other twelve nations with anti-blasphemy laws in 2012 included ] and ], as well as ], including ] (abolished in 2017),<ref name="Denmark"> 2 June 2017 the Guardian</ref> ], ], ] (abolished in 2019), ] (abolished in 2020), Italy, ] (abolished in 2016), the ] (abolished in 2014), ], ] (abolished in 2015) and ].<ref name=pewres/> ]'s "offending religious feelings" law is also, effectively, a prohibition on blasphemy.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://end-blasphemy-laws.org/countries/europe/spain/|title=Spain country profile|work=End Blasphemy Laws|publisher=]|access-date=20 November 2018}}</ref> In Denmark, the former blasphemy law which had support of 66% of its citizens in 2012, made it an offence to "mock legal religions and faiths in Denmark".<ref name="The Copenhagen Post"/> Many Danes saw the "blasphemy law as helping integration because it promotes the acceptance of a multicultural and multi-faith society."<ref name=IceNews>{{cite web|url=http://www.icenews.is/2012/10/02/denmark-still-largely-in-support-of-blasphemy-law/#axzz48tCovTxj|title=Denmark still largely in support of 'blasphemy' law |date=2 October 2012|publisher=IceNews|language=en|access-date=17 May 2016|quote=A recent survey has shown that Danish citizens still largely back the country's 'blasphemy' law. The law, which makes it illegal to "mock legal religions and faiths in Denmark", is supported by around 66 per cent of Danish voters, according to a recent survey conducted by the liberal group CEPOS. Speaking about the report, religious expert Tim Jensen from the University of Southern Denmark said, "Danes may see the blasphemy law as helping integration because it promotes the acceptance of a multicultural and multi-faith society. But it can also be problematic if it reflects a belief that the feelings of religious people have a special status and require special protection," the Berlingske news agency reports.}}</ref> | |||
The campaign for worldwide criminal penalties for the "defamation of religions" had been spearheaded by ] on behalf of the United Nations' large Muslim bloc. The campaign ended in 2011 when the proposal was withdrawn in Geneva, in the Human Rights Council because of lack of support, marking an end to the effort to impose worldwide blasphemy strictures along the lines of those in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. This resolution had passed every year since 1999, in the United Nations, with declining number of "yes" votes with each successive year.<ref> Nina Shea, National Review (MARCH 31, 2011)</ref> | |||
In the judgment '']'' (2018), the ] declined to strike down the blasphemy law in ] on ] (freedom of speech) grounds, saying that criminalisation of blasphemy could be supported within a state's ]. This decision was widely criticised by human rights organisations and commentators both in Europe and ].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://iheu.org/european-court-fails-overturn-blasphemy-conviction-austria/|title=IHEU 'frustrated', as European Court fails to overturn 'blasphemy' conviction in Austria|date=26 October 2018|access-date=15 November 2018|publisher=]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://humanism.org.uk/2018/10/29/european-court-of-human-rights-rules-that-austria-can-keep-its-blasphemy-law/|work=Humanists UK|date=29 October 2018|title=European Court of Human Rights rules that Austria can keep its blasphemy law}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/europe-rules-against-free-speech/574369/|title=A Flawed European Ruling on Free Speech|work=]|access-date=15 November 2018|last=Cottee|first=Simon|date=31 October 2018}}</ref> | |||
==Hyperbolic use of the term ''blasphemy''== | |||
In July, 2011, the ] released a 52-paragraph statement, General Comment 34 on the ] (ICCPR) 1976, concerning freedoms of opinion and expression.<ref></ref> Paragraph 48 states: | |||
{{anchor | Hyper }} | |||
{{quote|Prohibitions of displays of lack of respect for a religion or other belief system, including blasphemy laws, are incompatible with the Covenant, except in the specific circumstances envisaged in article 20, paragraph 2, of the Covenant. Such prohibitions must also comply with the strict requirements of article 19, paragraph 3, as well as such articles as 2, 5, 17, 18 and 26. Thus, for instance, it would be impermissible for any such laws to discriminate in favor of or against one or certain religions or belief systems, or their adherents over another, or religious believers over non-believers. Nor would it be permissible for such prohibitions to be used to prevent or punish criticism of religious leaders or commentary on religious doctrine and tenets of faith.}} | |||
In contemporary language, the notion of blasphemy is often used ] (in a deliberately exaggerated manner). This usage has garnered some interest among linguists recently, and the word ''blasphemy'' is a common case used for illustrative purposes.<ref> | |||
==Colloquial usage== | |||
Recanati, F. (1995) "The alleged priority of literal interpretation". ''Cognitive Science'' 19: 207–232. | |||
In contemporary language, the notion of blasphemy is often used ]. This usage has garnered some interest among linguists recently, and the word 'blasphemy' is a common case used for illustrative purposes.<ref> | |||
:] (1997) "Enrichment and loosening: complementary processes in deriving the proposition expressed?" ''Linguistische Berichte'' 8: 103–127. | |||
Recanati, F. (1995) The alleged priority of literal interpretation. Cognitive Science 19: 207–32. | |||
:Carston, R. (2000). "Explicature and semantics." UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 12: 1–44. Revised version to appear in Davis & Gillon (forthcoming{{when|date=September 2022}}). | |||
:Carston, R. (1997) Enrichment and loosening: complementary processes in deriving the proposition expressed? Linguistische Berichte 8: 103–127. | |||
:Sperber, D. & D. Wilson (1998) "The mapping between the mental and the public lexicon". In Carruthers & Boucher (1998: 184–200).{{ISBN?}} | |||
:Carston, R. (2000). Explicature and semantics. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 12: 1–44. Revised version to appear in Davis & Gillon (forthcoming). | |||
:Glucksberg, S. (2001) ''Understanding Figurative Language: From Metaphors to Idioms''. Oxford: Oxford University Press.{{ISBN?}} | |||
:Sperber, D. & D. Wilson (1998) The mapping between the mental and the public lexicon. In Carruthers & Boucher (1998: 184–200). | |||
:Wilson, D. & D. Sperber (2002) "Truthfulness and relevance". ''Mind'' 111: 583–632. | |||
:Glucksberg, S. (2001) Understanding Figurative Language: From Metaphors to Idioms. Oxford: Oxford University Press. | |||
:Wilson, D. & D. Sperber (2002) Truthfulness and relevance. Mind 111: 583–632. | |||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
*] | * ] | ||
* ] | |||
*] | |||
* ] | |||
*] is a holiday in which individuals and groups are encouraged to openly express their criticism of, or even disdain for, religion. | |||
*] | * ] | ||
*] | * ] | ||
* ] | |||
*] | |||
* ] | |||
*] | |||
*] | * ] | ||
*] | * ] | ||
* ] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
==References== | == References == | ||
{{ |
{{Reflist}} | ||
==Further reading== | ==Further reading== | ||
* '']: The International Journal of Verbal Aggression'' |
* '']: The International Journal of Verbal Aggression'' {{ISSN|0363-3659}}. | ||
*Levy, L. ''Blasphemy''. Chapel Hill, 1993. | * Levy, L. ''Blasphemy''. Chapel Hill, 1993. | ||
* Dartevelle, P., Denis, Ph., Robyn, J. (eds.). ''Blasphèmes et libertés''. Paris: CERF, 1993. | |||
* | |||
* {{cite book|last=Plate|first=S. Brent|title=Blasphemy: Art that Offends|location=London|publisher=Black Dog Publishing|year=2006|isbn=1-904772-53-6}} | |||
*Dartevelle, P., S Borg, Denis, Ph., Robyn, J. (eds.). Blasphèmes et libertés. Paris: CERF, 1993 | |||
*Plate, S. Brent ''Blasphemy: Art that Offends'' (London: Black Dog Publishing, 2006) ISBN 1904772536 | |||
== External links == | |||
{{wiktionary}} | |||
{{Commons category|Blasphemy}} | |||
{{Wikiquote}} | |||
* The Rational Response Squad: | |||
* . | |||
* | |||
* {{CathEncy |wstitle = Blasphemy |author = John Webster Melody }} | |||
* – Blasphemy | |||
* {{cite Americana |wstitle = Blasphemy |short = x }} | |||
{{Clear}} | |||
==External links== | |||
{{commons category|Blasphemy}} | |||
*The Rational Response Squad: | |||
*. | |||
* | |||
*{{CathEncy|wstitle=Blasphemy|author=John Webster Melody}} | |||
* – Blasphemy | |||
*{{Cite Americana|wstitle=Blasphemy |short=x}} | |||
{{Blasphemy law}} | {{Blasphemy law}} | ||
{{Authority control}} | |||
{{Ten Commandments}} | |||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] |
Latest revision as of 00:20, 26 December 2024
Act of insulting of religion Not to be confused with Heresy. "Blasphemous" redirects here. For the video game, see Blasphemous (video game). For other uses, see Blasphemy (disambiguation).Blasphemy refers to an insult that shows contempt, disrespect or lack of reverence concerning a deity, an object considered sacred, or something considered inviolable. Some religions, especially Abrahamic ones, regard blasphemy as a crime, including insulting the Islamic prophet Muhammad in Islam, speaking the sacred name in Judaism, and blasphemy of God's Holy Spirit is an eternal sin in Christianity. It was also a crime under English common law, and it is still a crime under Italian law (Art. 724 del Codice Penale).
In the early history of the Church, blasphemy "was considered to show active disrespect to God and to involve the use of profane cursing or mockery of his powers". In the medieval world, those who committed blasphemy were seen as needing discipline. By the 17th century, several historically Christian countries had legislation against blasphemy. Blasphemy was proscribed speech in the U.S. until well into the 20th century. Blasphemy laws were abolished in England and Wales in 2008, and in Ireland in 2020. Scotland repealed its blasphemy laws in 2021. Many other countries have abolished blasphemy laws including Denmark, the Netherlands, Iceland, Norway and New Zealand. As of 2019, 40 percent of the world's countries still had blasphemy laws on the books, including 18 countries in the Middle East and North Africa, or 90% of countries in that region. Indian religions, such as Hinduism and Buddhism have no concept of blasphemy and hence prescribe no punishment.
Etymology
The word blasphemy came via Middle English blasfemen and Old French blasfemer and Late Latin blasphemare from Greek βλασφημέω, from βλασ, "injure" and φήμη, "utterance, talk, speech". From blasphemare also came Old French blasmer, from which the English word blame came. Blasphemy: 'from Gk. blasphemia "a speaking ill, impious speech, slander," from blasphemein "to speak evil of." "In the sense of speaking evil of God this word is found in Ps. 74:18; Isa. 52:5; Rom. 2:24; Rev. 13:1, 6; 16:9, 11, 21. It denotes also any kind of calumny, or evil-speaking, or abuse (1 Kings 21:10 LXX; Acts 13:45; 18:6, etc.)."
History
Middle Ages
Heresy received more attention than blasphemy throughout the Middle Ages because it was considered a more serious threat to Orthodoxy, while blasphemy was mostly seen as irreverent remarks made by persons who may have been drunk or diverged from good standards of conduct in isolated incidents of misbehavior. When the fundamental understanding of the sacred became more contentious during the Reformation, blasphemy started to be regarded as similar to heresy.
The intellectual culture of the early English Enlightenment embraced ironic or scoffing tones in contradistinction to the idea of sacredness in revealed religion. The characterization of "scoffing" as blasphemy was defined as profaning the Scripture by irreverent "Buffoonery and Banter". From at least the 18th century on, the clergy of the Church of England justified blasphemy prosecutions by distinguishing "sober reasoning" from mockery and scoffing. Religious doctrine could be discussed "in a calm, decent and serious way" (in the words of Bishop Gibson) but mockery and scoffing, they said, were appeals to sentiment, not to reason.
Common law
It was a common law crime according to William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England:
Blasphemy against the Almighty is denying his being or providence, or uttering conteumelious reproaches on our Savior Christ. It is punished, at common law by fine and imprisonment, for Christianity is part of the laws of the land".
In 1636, the Puritan controlled Massachusetts Bay Colony made blasphemy – defined as "a cursing of God by atheism, or the like" – punishable by death. The last person hanged for blasphemy in Great Britain was Thomas Aikenhead aged 20, in Scotland in 1697. He was prosecuted for denying the veracity of the Old Testament and the legitimacy of Christ's miracles.
In the United States, blasphemy was recognized as proscribed speech well into the 20th-century. The Constitution entailed a right to articulate views on religion, but not to commit blasphemy, with the Harvard Law Review stating, "The English common law had punished blasphemy as a crime, while excluding "disputes between learned men upon particular controverted points" from the scope of criminal blasphemy. Looking to this precedent, 19th-century American appellate courts consistently upheld proscriptions on blasphemy, drawing a line between punishable blasphemy and protected religious speech."
The common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel were repealed in England & Wales by the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008. In the 18th and 19th centuries, this meant that promoting atheism could be prosecuted. The last successfully prosecuted case was Whitehouse v. Lemon (1976) where the court repeated what had by then become a textbook standard for blasphemy law cases in the UK:
It is not blasphemous to speak or publish opinions hostile to the Christian religion, or to deny the existence of God, if the publication is couched in decent and temperate language. The test to be applied is as to the manner in which the doctrines are advocated and not as to the substance of the doctrines themselves.
The common law offense of blasphemy was abolished in Scotland via the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021.
By religion
Christianity
Biblical texts
Christian theology condemns blasphemy. "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain", one of the Ten Commandments, forbids blasphemy, which Christians regard as "an affront to God's holiness".
Leviticus 24:16 states that "anyone who blasphemes the name of Yahweh will be put to death".
In Mark 3:29, blaspheming the Holy Spirit is spoken of as unforgivable—an eternal sin.
Church history
In the early history of the Church, blasphemy "was considered to show active disrespect to God and to involve the use of profane cursing or mockery of his powers".
In The Whole Duty of Man, sometimes attributed to Richard Allestree or John Fell, blasphemy is described as "speaking any evil Thing of God", and as "the highest Degree whereof is cursing him; or if we do not speak it with our Mouths, yet if we do it in our Hearts, by thinking any unworthy Thing of him, it is look'd on by God, who sees the Heart, as the vilest Dishonour."
- Thomas Aquinas says that " we compare murder and blasphemy as regards the objects of those sins, it is clear that blasphemy, which is a sin committed directly against God, is more grave than murder, which is a sin against one's neighbor. On the other hand, if we compare them in respect of the harm wrought by them, murder is the graver sin, for murder does more harm to one's neighbor, than blasphemy does to God".
- The Book of Concord calls blasphemy "the greatest sin that can be outwardly committed".
- The Baptist Confession of Faith says: "Therefore, to swear vainly or rashly by the glorious and awesome name of God…is sinful, and to be regarded with disgust and detestation. …For by rash, false, and vain oaths, the Lord is provoked and because of them this land mourns".
- The Heidelberg Catechism answers question 100 about blasphemy by stating that "no sin is greater or provokes God's wrath more than the blaspheming of His Name".
- The Westminster Larger Catechism explains that "The sins forbidden in the third commandment are, the abuse of it in an ignorant, vain, irreverent, profane...mentioning...by blasphemy...to profane jests, ...vain janglings, ...to charms or sinful lusts and practices".
- Calvin found it intolerable "when a person is accused of blasphemy, to lay the blame on the ebullition of passion, as if God were to endure the penalty whenever we are provoked".
Catholic prayers and reparations for blasphemy
In the Catholic Church, there are specific prayers and devotions as Acts of Reparation for blasphemy. For instance, The Golden Arrow Holy Face Devotion (Prayer) first introduced by Sister Marie of St Peter in 1844 is recited "in a spirit of reparation for blasphemy". This devotion (started by Sister Marie and then promoted by the Venerable Leo Dupont) was approved by Pope Leo XIII in 1885. The Raccoltabook includes a number of such prayers. The Five First Saturdays devotions are done with the intention in the heart of making reparation to the Blessed Mother for blasphemies against her, her name and her holy initiatives.
The Holy See has specific "Pontifical organizations" for the purpose of the reparation of blasphemy through Acts of Reparation to Jesus Christ, e.g. the Pontifical Congregation of the Benedictine Sisters of the Reparation of the Holy Face.
Disputation of Paris
During the Middle Ages a series of debates on Judaism were staged by the Catholic Church, including the Disputation of Paris (1240), the Disputation of Barcelona (1263), and Disputation of Tortosa (1413–14), and during those disputations, Jewish converts to Christianity, such as Nicholas Donin (in Paris) and Pablo Christiani (in Barcelona) claimed the Talmud contained insulting references to Jesus.
The Disputation of Paris, also known as the Trial of the Talmud, took place in 1240 at the court of the reigning king of France, Louis IX (St. Louis). It followed the work of Nicholas Donin, a Jewish convert to Christianity, who translated the Talmud and pressed 35 charges against it to Pope Gregory IX by quoting a series of alleged blasphemous passages about Jesus, Mary or Christianity. Four rabbis defended the Talmud against Donin's accusations. A commission of Christian theologians condemned the Talmud to be burned and on 17 June 1244, twenty-four carriage loads of Jewish religious manuscripts were set on fire in the streets of Paris. The translation of the Talmud from Hebrew to non-Jewish languages stripped Jewish discourse from its covering, something that was resented by Jews as a profound violation.
Between 1239 and 1775, the Roman Catholic Church at various times either forced the censoring of parts of the Talmud that it considered theologically problematic or the destruction of copies of the Talmud. During the inquisition, sects deemed heretical such as the Waldensians were also charged with blasphemy.
2024 Summer Olympics opening ceremony
Some Christians described parts of the 2024 Summer Olympics opening ceremony as blasphemy. While blasphemy is legal in France, this event has been criticized for singling out one particular religion and being divisive.
Islam
Main article: Islam and blasphemyPunishment and definition
Blasphemy in Islam is impious utterance or action concerning God, Muhammad or anything considered sacred in Islam. The Quran admonishes blasphemy, but does not specify any worldly punishment for blasphemy. The hadiths, which are another source of Sharia, suggest various punishments for blasphemy, which may include death. However, it has been argued that the death penalty applies only to cases where there is treason involved that may seriously harm the Muslim community, especially during times of war. Different traditional schools of jurisprudence prescribe different punishment for blasphemy, depending on whether the blasphemer is Muslim or non-Muslim, a man or a woman. In the modern Muslim world, the laws pertaining to blasphemy vary by country, and some countries prescribe punishments consisting of fines, imprisonment, flogging, hanging, or beheading. Blasphemy laws were rarely enforced in pre-modern Islamic societies, but in the modern era some states and radical groups have used charges of blasphemy in an effort to burnish their religious credentials and gain popular support at the expense of liberal Muslim intellectuals and religious minorities. In recent years, accusations of blasphemy against Islam have sparked international controversies and played part in incidents of mob violence and assassinations of prominent figures.
Failed OIC anti-blasphemy campaign at UN
Main article: Blasphemy and the United Nations
The campaign for worldwide criminal penalties for the "defamation of religions" had been spearheaded by Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) on behalf of the United Nations' large Muslim bloc. The campaign ended in 2011 when the proposal was withdrawn in Geneva, in the Human Rights Council because of lack of support, marking an end to the effort to establish worldwide blasphemy strictures along the lines of those in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. This resolution had passed every year since 1999, in the United Nations, with declining number of "yes" votes with each successive year. In the early 21st century, blasphemy became an issue in the United Nations (UN). The United Nations passed several resolutions which called upon the world to take action against the "defamation of religions". However, in July 2011, the UN Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) released a 52-paragraph statement which affirmed the freedom of speech and rejected the laws banning "display of lack of respect for a religion or other belief system'.
Depictions of Muhammad
Further information: Depictions of MuhammadWhen the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten decided to publish cartoons of Muhammad, its editor-in-chief wrote an editorial that the newspaper was publishing the cartoons because Muslims had to get over their "sickly oversensitivity". Another editor looked upon it as a cultural initiation: "By making fun of people we're also including them in our society. It's not always easy for those concerned, but that the price they're got to pay". Editors expressed concern that Danish comedians, artists and so on were self-censoring because they were afraid of a violent response from Muslims.
The global protests that erupted in February 2006 shocked the artists who submitted cartoons. After receiving a bomb threat one cartoonist was angry that Muslims fleeing persecution in their own countries would "want the laws they have fled" to be enforced in Denmark. The editors stood their ground: "Everyone had to accept being subject to satire."
Al Qaeda claimed responsibility for a car bombing at the Danish embassy in Islamabad, Pakistan in June 2008 which they said was revenge for the "insulting drawings".
After the Charlie Hebdo attack in 2015 Je Suis Charlie became a rallying cry for secular, free speech advocates. The attacks took place in France where the culture of militant secularism celebrates blasphemy but permits viewpoint based restrictions and prior restraint of speech. Emmanuel Todd was very skeptical and critical of the "right to blasphemy" narrative. Skeptics thought it amounted to little more than ridicule of a marginalized group. Scholars rebutting Todd's study have found that many of the protestors were liberal, tolerant people who did not have Islamophobic or xenophobic views. For many of the Je Suis Charlie protestors the sentiment of the protest was simply: it is not ok to kill someone because they have offended you.
Judaism
See also: List of capital crimes in the TorahIn Leviticus 24:16 the punishment for blasphemy is death. In Jewish law the only form of blasphemy which is punishable by death is blaspheming the name of the Lord. Leviticus 24:16 states that "anyone who blasphemes the name of Yahweh will be put to death".
The Seven Laws of Noah, which Judaism sees as applicable to all people, prohibit blasphemy.
In one of the texts of the Dead Sea Scrolls, called the Damascus Document, violence against non-Jews (also called Gentiles) is prohibited, except in cases where it is sanctioned by a Jewish governing authority "so that they will not blaspheme".
Hinduism
Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code lays down the punishment for the deliberate and malicious acts, that are intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs. It is one of the Hate speech laws in India. This law prohibits blasphemy against all religions in India. This law originated due to Hindu-Muslim conflict
Buddhism
Buddhism has no concept of blasphemy. In contrast, in West Asia, the birthplace of Abrahamic religions (namely Islam, Judaism, and Christianity), there was no room for such tolerance and respect for dissent where heretics and blasphemers had to pay with their lives.
Insulting Buddhism is a punishable offence in some Buddhist majority counties like Sri Lanka and Myanmar. In 2015 a man from New Zealand was sentenced to prison for depicting a picture of Buddha with headphones. Similarly, in 2020 Shakthika Sathkumara, a Sri Lankan author was sentenced 10 years in prison for insulting Buddhism.
Sikhism
Blasphemy is taken harshly by Sikhs. It is called “beadbi” by Sikhs. In October, 2021, a Nihang Singh killed a man for beadbi of the Sarbloh Granth. In December, 2021, a man was beaten to death at the Golden Temple for committing blasphemy. Such punishments are justified with orthodox Sikhs saying, “instant justice” is deserving for beadbi which is the “ultimate act of crime”.
Backlash against anti-blasphemy laws
Affirmation of Freedom of Speech (FOS)
Multilateral global institutes, such as the Council of Europe and UN, have rejected the imposition of "anti-blasphemy laws" (ABL) and have affirmed the freedom of speech.
The Council of Europe's rejection of ABL and affirmation of FOS
The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, after deliberating on the issue of blasphemy law passed the resolution that blasphemy should not be a criminal offence, which was adopted on 29 June 2007 in the "Recommendation 1805 (2007) on blasphemy, religious insults and hate speech against persons on grounds of their religion". This Recommendation set a number of guidelines for member states of the Council of Europe in view of Articles 10 (freedom of expression) and 9 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
UN's rejection of ABL and affirmation of FOS
Main article: Defamation of religion and the United Nations
After OIC's (Organisation of Islamic Cooperation) campaign at UN (United Nations) seeking impose of punishment for "defamation of religions" was withdrawn due to consistently dwindling support for their campaign, the UN Human Rights Committee (UNHRC), in July 2011, released a 52-paragraph statement which affirmed the freedom of speech and rejected the laws banning "display of lack of respect for a religion or other belief system'. UNHRC's "General Comment 34 - Paragraph 48" on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) 1976, concerning freedoms of opinion and expression states:
Prohibitions of displays of lack of respect for a religion or other belief system, including blasphemy laws, are incompatible with the Covenant, except in the specific circumstances envisaged in article 20, paragraph 2, of the Covenant. Such prohibitions must also comply with the strict requirements of article 19, paragraph 3, as well as such articles as 2, 5, 17, 18 and 26. Thus, for instance, it would be impermissible for any such laws to discriminate in favor of or against one or certain religions or belief systems, or their adherents over another, or religious believers over non-believers. Nor would it be permissible for such prohibitions to be used to prevent or punish criticism of religious leaders or commentary on religious doctrine and tenets of faith.
International Blasphemy Day
International Blasphemy Day, observed annually on September 30, encourages individuals and groups to openly express criticism of religion and blasphemy laws. It was founded in 2009 by the Center for Inquiry. A student contacted the Center for Inquiry in Amherst, New York to present the idea, which CFI then supported. Ronald Lindsay, president and CEO of the Center for Inquiry, said, regarding Blasphemy Day, "e think religious beliefs should be subject to examination and criticism just as political beliefs are, but we have a taboo on religion", in an interview with CNN.
Events worldwide on the first annual Blasphemy Day in 2009 included an art exhibit in Washington, D.C., and a free speech festival in Los Angeles.
Removal of blasphemy laws by several nations
Other countries have removed bans on blasphemy. France did so in 1881 (this did not extend to Alsace-Moselle region, then part of Germany, after it joined France) to allow freedom of religion and freedom of the press. Blasphemy was abolished or repealed in Sweden in 1970, England and Wales in 2008, Norway with Acts in 2009 and 2015, the Netherlands in 2014, Iceland in 2015, France for its Alsace-Moselle region in 2016, Malta in 2016, Denmark in 2017, Canada in 2018, New Zealand in 2019, and Ireland in 2020.
Nations with blasphemy laws
Main article: Blasphemy lawIn some countries with a state religion, blasphemy is outlawed under the criminal code.
Purpose of blasphemy laws
In some states, blasphemy laws are used to impose the religious beliefs of a majority, while in other countries, they are justified as putatively offering protection of the religious beliefs of minorities. Where blasphemy is banned, it can be either some laws which directly punish religious blasphemy, or some laws that allow those who are offended by blasphemy to punish blasphemers. Those laws may condone penalties or retaliation for blasphemy under the labels of blasphemous libel, expression of opposition, or "vilification," of religion or of some religious practices, religious insult, or hate speech.
Nations with blasphemy laws
As of 2012, 33 countries had some form of anti-blasphemy laws in their legal code. Of these, 21 were Muslim-majority nations – Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, the Maldives, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Turkey, the UAE and Western Sahara. Blasphemy is treated as a capital crime (death penalty) in some Muslim nations. In these nations, such laws have led to the persecution, lynchings, murder or arrest of minorities and dissident members, after flimsy accusations.
The other twelve nations with anti-blasphemy laws in 2012 included India and Singapore, as well as Christian majority states, including Denmark (abolished in 2017), Finland, Germany, Greece (abolished in 2019), Ireland (abolished in 2020), Italy, Malta (abolished in 2016), the Netherlands (abolished in 2014), Nigeria, Norway (abolished in 2015) and Poland. Spain's "offending religious feelings" law is also, effectively, a prohibition on blasphemy. In Denmark, the former blasphemy law which had support of 66% of its citizens in 2012, made it an offence to "mock legal religions and faiths in Denmark". Many Danes saw the "blasphemy law as helping integration because it promotes the acceptance of a multicultural and multi-faith society."
In the judgment E.S. v. Austria (2018), the European Court of Human Rights declined to strike down the blasphemy law in Austria on Article 10 (freedom of speech) grounds, saying that criminalisation of blasphemy could be supported within a state's margin of appreciation. This decision was widely criticised by human rights organisations and commentators both in Europe and North America.
Hyperbolic use of the term blasphemy
In contemporary language, the notion of blasphemy is often used hyperbolically (in a deliberately exaggerated manner). This usage has garnered some interest among linguists recently, and the word blasphemy is a common case used for illustrative purposes.
See also
- Blasphemy laws
- Defamation of religion and the United Nations
- Desecration
- Freedom of speech
- Hate crime
- International Blasphemy Day
- Quran desecration
- Religious offense
- Sacrilege
- Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain
References
- Miriam Díez Bosch and Jordi Sànchez Torrents (2015). On blasphemy. Barcelona: Blanquerna Observatory on Media, Religion and Culture. ISBN 978-84-941193-3-0.
- "Blasphemy". Random House Dictionary. Retrieved 12 January 2015.
Quote: impious utterance or action concerning God or sacred things.; the crime of assuming to oneself the rights or qualities of God.
- Blasphemy Merriam Webster (July 2013); 1. great disrespect shown to God or to something holy
2. irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolable - Blasphemies, in Webster's New World College Dictionary, 4th Ed,
1. profane or contemptuous speech, writing, or action concerning God or anything held as divine.
2. any remark or action held to be irreverent or disrespectful - Karesh, Sara; Hurvitz, Mitchell (2006). Encyclopedia of Judaism. United States: Facts on File. p. 180.
It is considered blasphemy to utter God's personal names...Interestingly, this prohibition has crept into the practice of writing God's name in English. Many Jews will choose to write "G-d" instead of "God" to avoid blasphemy.
- Concannon, Cavan W. (2017). Assembling Early Christianity: Trade, Networks, and the Letters of Dionysios of Corinth. Cambridge University Press. p. 114.
The Didache cites Mark 3:28-29 and implicitly defines blaspheming the holy spirit as testing or examining a prophet who is speaking in the spirit (11:7). This is the sin that cannot be forgiven, though other sins can be resolved through repentance. Epiphanius, in his discussion of the heretics he calls the Alogi, says they have committed the unforgivable sin. Because they reject the Gospel of John, which was inspired by the holy spirit, their teaching is therefore contrary to what the spirit has said and liable to the penalty imposed by Jesus' saying.
- ^ "Blasphemy and the Original Meaning of the First Amendment". Harvard Law Review. 10 December 2021.
Until well into the twentieth century, American law recognized blasphemy as proscribable speech. The blackletter rule was clear. Constitutional liberty entailed a right to articulate views on religion, but not a right to commit blasphemy — the offense of "maliciously reviling God", which encompassed "profane ridicule of Christ". The English common law had punished blasphemy as a crime, while excluding "disputes between learned men upon particular controverted points" from the scope of criminal blasphemy. Looking to this precedent, nineteenth-century American appellate courts consistently upheld proscriptions on blasphemy, drawing a line between punishable blasphemy and protected religious speech.
- ^ Nash, David (2007). Blasphemy in the Christian World. Oxford University Press. pp. 3–5.
- "Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill Information Note: Blasphemy" (PDF). gov.scot.
- countries and territories worldwide had blasphemy laws in 2019, Pew Research (25 January 2022)
- ^ Laws Penalizing Blasphemy, Apostasy and Defamation of Religion are Widespread Pew Research (21 November 2012)
- ^ Blasphemy Divide: Insults to Religion Remain a Capital Crime in Muslim Lands The Wall Street Journal (8 January 2015)
- Why Hinduism never developed a concept of blasphemy, Rediff.com, 4 February 2015.
- Doniger, Wendy (2015). "Prelude to Censorship: The Toleration of Blasphemy in Ancient India". University of Chicago. Retrieved 7 July 2024.
- Wickrematunge, Raisa (2019). "Blasphemy and the Prisoner of Buddhism". Groundviews. Retrieved 7 July 2024.
- "Online Etymology Dictionary – Blasphemy". Etymonline.com. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
- (from Easton's Bible Dictionary) Romans 2:24 – Revelation.13:1, 6; Rev.16:9, 11, 21 – 1Kings.21:10; Acts.13:45; Acts.18:6
- cf. Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologiae. ST II-II q10a3, q11a3, q12. Q11A3: "With regard to heretics two points must be observed: one, on their own side; the other, on the side of the Church. On their own side there is the sin, whereby they deserve not only to be separated from the Church by excommunication, but also to be severed from the world by death. For it is a much graver matter to corrupt the faith which quickens the soul, than to forge money, which supports temporal life. Wherefore if forgers of money and other evil-doers are forthwith condemned to death by the secular authority, much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
- Nash, David (2007). Blasphemy in the Christian World. Oxford University Press. p. 4.
- ^ Knight, Frances (2016). Religion, Identity and Conflict in Britain. Routledge.
- Williams Levy, Leonard (1995). Blasphemy: Verbal Offense Against the Sacred, from Moses to Salman Rushdie. University of North Carolina Press Books. p. 242.
- "Thomas Aikenhead". 5.uua.org. Archived from the original on 1 October 2011. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
- Church-State Issues in America Today (3 volumes). Bloomsbury. 2007. p. 18. ISBN 9781573567541.
- Owen Chadwick, The Victorian Church: Vol 1 1829–1859 (1966) pp 487–489.
- "Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2024". gov.uk. Retrieved 3 April 2024.
- Sherwood, Yvonne (26 August 2021). Blasphemy: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. p. 50. ISBN 978-0-19-251819-4.
- Bill Bright (2005). The Joy of Faithful Obedience. Cook Communications. p. 52. ISBN 978-0-7814-4252-7.
- ^ Netton, Ian Richard (1996). Text and Trauma: An East-West Primer. Routledge. p. 2. ISBN 978-0-7007-0325-8.
- Saunders, Craig D. (1 March 2021). A Mediator in Matthew: An Analysis of the Son of Man's Function in the First Gospel. Wipf and Stock Publishers. p. 77. ISBN 978-1-5326-9704-3.
- Allestree, Richard (1658). The whole duty of man, laid down in a plain and familiar way.
- Thomas Aquinas: Summa Theologica 2:2, q. 13.
- The Book of Concord Archived 15 March 2009 at the Wayback Machine The Large Catechism, §55.
- The Baptist Confession of Faith Archived 7 April 2010 at the Wayback Machine Ch. 23, §2–3.
- The Heidelberg Catechism Archived 13 June 2009 at the Wayback Machine Q. 100.
- Westminster Larger Catechism Q. 113.
- Jean Calvin: Harmony of the Law vol. 4. Lev. 24:10.
- Act of Reparation for Blasphemies Uttered Against the Holy Name, Righting Wrongs Through Prayer Archived 18 January 2008 at the Wayback Machine By Scott P. Richert, About.com
- Dorothy Scallan. The Holy Man of Tours. (1990) ISBN 0-89555-390-2
- Joseph P. Christopher et al., 2003 The Raccolta, St Athanasius Press ISBN 978-0-9706526-6-9
- Letter for 50th anniversary of the Benedictine Sisters of Reparation of the Holy Face, 2000 Archived 2 May 2008 at the Wayback Machine Vatican archives
- Carroll, James, Constantine's sword: the church and the Jews : a history, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2002
- Seidman, Naomi, Faithful renderings: Jewish-Christian difference and the politics of translation, University of Chicago Press, 2006 p. 137
- Cohn-Sherbok, Dan, Judaism and other faiths, Palgrave Macmillan, 1994, p. 48
- Seidman, Naomi (2010). Faithful Renderings: Jewish-Christian Difference and the Politics of Translation. University of Chicago Press. pp. 136–138. ISBN 978-0-226-74507-7 – via Google Books.
- Rodkinson, Michael Levi (1918). The history of the Talmud, from the time of its formation, about 200 B.C. Talmud Society. pp. 66–75.
- Maccoby, Hyam (1982). Judaism on Trial: Jewish-Christian Disputations in the Middle Ages. Associated University Presses. ISBN 978-0-8386-3053-2.
- Naomi Seidman, Faithful Renderings: Jewish-Christian Difference and the Politics of Translation, pp. 136–138
- Jonathon Green; Nicholas J. Karolides (2009). Encyclopedia of Censorship. Infobase Publishing. p. 110. ISBN 978-1-4381-1001-1. Retrieved 13 February 2014.
- Napier, G. (2017). Maleficium: Witchcraft and Witch Hunting in the West. Amberley Publishing. p. 60. ISBN 978-1-4456-6511-5. Retrieved 9 May 2023.
- "Drag performance resembling Last Supper at Olympic opening ceremony rankles conservatives". NBC News. 27 July 2024. Retrieved 28 July 2024.
- Avery, Kenneth (2004). Psychology of Early Sufi Sama: Listening and Altered States. Routledge. p. 3. ISBN 978-0-415-31106-9.
- "Blasphemy" at dictionary.com
- Wiederhold, Lutz. "Blasphemy against the Prophet Muhammad and his companions (sabb al-rasul, sabb al-sahabah): The introduction of the topic into shafi'i legal literature and its relevance for legal practice under Mamluk rule". Journal of semitic studies 42.1 (1997): 39–70.
- ^ Saeed, Abdullah; Saeed, Hassan (2004). Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam. Burlington VT: Ashgate Publishing Company. pp. 38–39. ISBN 978-0-7546-3083-8.
- Siraj Khan. Blasphemy against the Prophet, in Muhammad in History, Thought, and Culture (ed: Coeli Fitzpatrick PhD, Adam Hani Walker). ISBN 978-1-61069-177-2, pp. 59–67.
- Taha Jabir Alalwani (2012). Apostasy in Islam: a Historical and Scriptural Analysis (PDF) (Archived copy). Herndon, VA: International Institute of Islamic Thought. ISBN 978-1-56564-585-1. Archived from the original (PDF) on 19 February 2015. Retrieved 18 September 2015.
- P Smith (2003). "Speak No Evil: Apostasy, Blasphemy and Heresy in Malaysian Syariah Law". UC Davis Journal Int'l Law & Policy. 10, pp. 357–373.
- N Swazo (2014). "The Case of Hamza Kashgari: Examining Apostasy, Heresy, and Blasphemy Under Sharia". The Review of Faith & International Affairs 12(4). pp. 16–26.
- Juan Eduardo Campo, ed. (2009). "Blasphemy". Encyclopedia of Islam. Infobase Publishing.
- ^ An Anti-Blasphemy Measure Laid to Rest Nina Shea, National Review (31 March 2011)
- U.N. Resolutions:
- ^ General Comment 34
- Laborde C. The Danish Cartoon Controversy and the Challenges of Multicultural Politics: A Discussion of The Cartoons That Shook the World. Perspectives on Politics. 2011;9(3):603-605. doi:10.1017/S1537592711002817
- ^ Klausen, Jytte (2009). The Cartoons That Shook the World. Yale University Press.
- After Charlie Hebdo: Terror, Racism and Free Speech. Zed Books. 2017. p. 53-9.
- "Blasphemy". JewishEncyclopedia.com.
- "The Seven Noachide Laws". JewishVirtualLibrary.org. Retrieved 8 November 2014.
- "Gentiles –. Oxford Reference". Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Oxford University Press. 2000. ISBN 978-0-19-508450-4. Retrieved 29 May 2017. – via OUP (subscription required)
- "Hate speech, IPC Sec 295A, and how courts have read the law". The Indian Express. 16 June 2022. Retrieved 29 June 2022.
- "Three jailed for insult to Buddha – DW – 03/17/2015". Deutsche Welle.
- "Insulting the Buddha". 13 August 2020.
- ^ Sethi, Chitleen K.; ThePrint (19 December 2021). "What is 'beadbi' or sacrilege in Sikhism, which sees Guru Granth Sahib as living Guru". ThePrint. Retrieved 6 July 2023.
- Mehmood, Asif (18 December 2021). "Hindu man beaten to death at Golden Temple in Amritsar". The Express Tribune. Retrieved 6 July 2023.
- Taskin, Bismee (15 October 2021). "'He was running with a Sikh holy book': The 'crime' for which Sikh man was lynched & hacked". ThePrint. Retrieved 6 July 2023.
- ^ "PACE - Recommendation 1805 (2007) - Blasphemy, religious insults and hate speech against persons on grounds of their religion". assembly.coe.int.
- General Comment 34, p. 12.
- "Penn Jillette Celebrates Blasphemy Day in "Penn Says"". Center for Inquiry. 29 September 2009. Retrieved 30 September 2013.
- Basu, Moni (30 September 2009). "Taking aim at God on 'Blasphemy Day'". CNN.com.
- Larmondin, Leanne (2 October 2009). "Did you celebrate Blasphemy Day?". USAToday.com.
- ^ Denmark scraps 334-year-old blasphemy law 2 June 2017 the Guardian
- Blasphemy law#Ireland
- ^ "Denmark still largely in support of 'blasphemy' law". IceNews. 2 October 2012. Retrieved 17 May 2016.
A recent survey has shown that Danish citizens still largely back the country's 'blasphemy' law. The law, which makes it illegal to "mock legal religions and faiths in Denmark", is supported by around 66 per cent of Danish voters, according to a recent survey conducted by the liberal group CEPOS. Speaking about the report, religious expert Tim Jensen from the University of Southern Denmark said, "Danes may see the blasphemy law as helping integration because it promotes the acceptance of a multicultural and multi-faith society. But it can also be problematic if it reflects a belief that the feelings of religious people have a special status and require special protection," the Berlingske news agency reports.
- Scolnicov, Anat (18 October 2010). The Right to Religious Freedom in International Law: Between Group Rights and Individual Rights. Routledge. p. 261. ISBN 978-1-136-90705-0.
A different argument for the retention of the offence of blasphemy (and for its extension to the protection of all religions in the UK ) has been offered by Parekh: a majority religion does not need the protection offered by an offence of blasphemy, but minority religions do because of their vulnerability in the face of the majority.
- ^ "Danes overwhelmingly support their own blasphemy law". The Copenhagen Post. 21 September 2012. Retrieved 17 May 2016.
Denmark's own blasphemy law makes it an offence to "mock legal religions and faiths in Denmark", and according to a study carried out on behalf of the liberal think-tank CEPOS, 66 per cent of the 1,000 Danes questioned answered that the law should not be repealed.
- See Blasphemy law
- Kerr, ine (9 July 2009). "Libel and blasphemy bill passed by the Dail". The Irish Independent. Retrieved 17 November 2009.
- "Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 – Sect 124A: Vilification on grounds of race, religion, sexuality or gender identity unlawful". Austlii.edu.au. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
- "Victoria Police – Racial and religious vilification". Police.vic.gov.au. Archived from the original on 27 September 2011. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
- "European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), Report on the relationship between freedom of expression and freedom of religion: the issue of regulation and prosecution of blasphemy, religious insult and incitement to religious hatred, 17–18 October 2008, Doc. No. CDL-AD(2008)026". Merlin.obs.coe.int. Archived from the original on 2 October 2011. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
- See Blasphemy law and Hate speech.
- Bad-mouthing: Pakistan's blasphemy laws legitimise intolerance The Economist (29 November 2014)
- Sources of claims:
- World of Intolerance Archived 19 November 2009 at the Wayback Machine Religious Watch. Retrieved 5 October 2011
- United Nations will violate Human Rights International Humanist and Ethical Union. Retrieved 5 October 2011
- "Muslim scholar says Scrap blasphemy laws". Herald Malaysia Online. 11 August 2009. Archived from the original on 5 March 2012. Retrieved 5 October 2011.
- Annual Report of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom May 2009 (Pakistan, etc.). Retrieved 5 October 2011
- A call upon states to work toward abolishing the juvenile death penalty U.N. January 1999. Retrieved 5 October 2011
- Indonesia – Amnesty International Report 2009 Archived 21 November 2009 at the Wayback Machine Amnesty International. Retrieved 5 October 2011
- "Spain country profile". End Blasphemy Laws. International Humanist and Ethical Union. Retrieved 20 November 2018.
- "IHEU 'frustrated', as European Court fails to overturn 'blasphemy' conviction in Austria". International Humanist and Ethical Union. 26 October 2018. Retrieved 15 November 2018.
- "European Court of Human Rights rules that Austria can keep its blasphemy law". Humanists UK. 29 October 2018.
- Cottee, Simon (31 October 2018). "A Flawed European Ruling on Free Speech". The Atlantic. Retrieved 15 November 2018.
-
Recanati, F. (1995) "The alleged priority of literal interpretation". Cognitive Science 19: 207–232.
- Carston, R. (1997) "Enrichment and loosening: complementary processes in deriving the proposition expressed?" Linguistische Berichte 8: 103–127.
- Carston, R. (2000). "Explicature and semantics." UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 12: 1–44. Revised version to appear in Davis & Gillon (forthcoming).
- Sperber, D. & D. Wilson (1998) "The mapping between the mental and the public lexicon". In Carruthers & Boucher (1998: 184–200).
- Glucksberg, S. (2001) Understanding Figurative Language: From Metaphors to Idioms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Wilson, D. & D. Sperber (2002) "Truthfulness and relevance". Mind 111: 583–632.
Further reading
- Maledicta: The International Journal of Verbal Aggression ISSN 0363-3659.
- Levy, L. Blasphemy. Chapel Hill, 1993.
- Dartevelle, P., Denis, Ph., Robyn, J. (eds.). Blasphèmes et libertés. Paris: CERF, 1993.
- Plate, S. Brent (2006). Blasphemy: Art that Offends. London: Black Dog Publishing. ISBN 1-904772-53-6.
External links
- The Rational Response Squad: The Blasphemy Challenge
- A More4 news film report on how insulting the prophet Mohammed in Pakistan is a capital offence, and defiling the Koran carries life imprisonment.
- review of laws relating to blasphemy and sacrilege in various jurisdictions
- John Webster Melody (1913). "Blasphemy" . In Herbermann, Charles (ed.). Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
- Jewish Encyclopedia – Blasphemy
- "Blasphemy" . Encyclopedia Americana. 1920.
Blasphemy law by country | |
---|---|