Saonara Italy to impose Blasphemy fine

[We Never Know]

We are a liberal secular country. You can write books against Christianity and the Pope...and many writers did and do.

Religious people and non-religious people condemn each other daily.
They fight a war of beliefs and lack of beliefs with insults and empty threats of sin and somehow they both think they are better than the other or anyone else.

For example a believer will tell a non-believer you're a sinner and will burn in hell or a non-believer will say you're stupid for believing in a god. Both are pointless attacks only because of what one believes or lacks belief in. When in reality how the other lives doesn't affect the other in any way.

 

[Estro Felino]

Religious people and non-religious people condemn each other daily.
They fight a war of beliefs and lack of beliefs with insults and empty threats of sin and somehow they both think they are better than the other or anyone else.

For example a believer will tell a non-believer you're a sinner and will burn in hell or a non-believer will say you're stupid for believing in a god. Both are pointless attacks only because of what one believes or lacks belief in. When in reality how the other lives doesn't affect the other in any way.

There is a very powerful atheist organization here, the UAAR Unione atei agnostici razionalisti who acts like secular police

 

[Neutral Name]

‘A northern Italian town has had enough of people taking the Lord’s name in vain and those who do will be fined up to €400 (£360) for blasphemy.

The city council of Saonara, a town with 10,000 inhabitants just outside Padua, has introduced a new law making it illegal “to blaspheme against any faith or religion” and utter foul language in public.’

Read more here Thou shalt not take the Lord's name in vain: Italian town to issue €400 blasphemy fines

I would say that there are a few of ways to look at this. First, it is illegal “to blaspheme against any faith or religion”. I like that. It is very open, not just Christianity. Second, it is nice to not have to listen to people cuss. Third, blaspheming is also lying about God. I hope that they realize this. Because when you do something in vain, you are doing it "to no end : without success or result" per the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, as in proclaiming God to use the name without actual belief as many greedy people do. So, I like what they are doing. No freedom of speech but at least they will be civil.

 

[Neutral Name]

Religious people and non-religious people condemn each other daily.
They fight a war of beliefs and lack of beliefs with insults and empty threats of sin and somehow they both think they are better than the other or anyone else.

For example a believer will tell a non-believer you're a sinner and will burn in hell or a non-believer will say you're stupid for believing in a god. Both are pointless attacks only because of what one believes or lacks belief in. When in reality how the other lives doesn't affect the other in any way.

I actually think that either could fear having their beliefs shattered by other information or why would they be so annoyed by other people's ideas. I was an adamant atheist, then an adamant Christian. Now I'm not adamant but I believe there is a God. I also believe in science but I believe that they both fit together.

 

[Notanumber]

When in reality how the other lives doesn't affect the other in any way.

I could agree with that if Islam did not exist.

 

[danieldemol]

I would say that there are a few of ways to look at this. First, it is illegal “to blaspheme against any faith or religion”. I like that.

I don’t, religions inherently blaspheme each other, for example it was blasphemy in Judaism that Jesus considered himself the Son of God. Which brings us to the point - who gets to judge what is and is not blasphemy?

If it is the majority that gets to decide, the minoritys are at risk of having their rights trampled.

Besides legitimate criticism has been stifled as blasphemy in societies around the world.

Third, blaspheming is also lying about God.

Not necessarily.

 

[Neutral Name]

I don’t, religions inherently blaspheme each other, for example it was blasphemy in Judaism that Jesus considered himself the Son of God. Which brings us to the point - who gets to judge what is and is not blasphemy?

If it is the majority that gets to decide, the minoritys are at risk of having their rights trampled.

Besides legitimate criticism has been stifled as blasphemy in societies around the world.


Not necessarily.

You are absolutely right. I believe in our Constitution and freedom of speech. I just don't like having to listen to people who have to use cuss words every other word.

 

[Glaurung]

I don’t, religions inherently blaspheme each other, for example it was blasphemy in Judaism that Jesus considered himself the Son of God. Which brings us to the point - who gets to judge what is and is not blasphemy?

The law as written. Whether or not the claims of one religion is offensive to another is not the issue at hand. Rather, it seems to me to be more of a crackdown on offensive language. Particularly the use of sacred to curse.

If it is the majority that gets to decide, the minoritys are at risk of having their rights trampled.

I'm not convinced that cursing and blaspheming in public is a right. And it isn't just bad language in the cross hairs here.

The blasphemy ban is part of a far-reaching local law aimed at tackling uncivil behaviour. It includes 75 articles with hefty sanctions for those who mow the lawn outside designated hours, walk their dog without a leash or dump their rubbish in public places.​

I don't know what these articles are so I can't give an informed opinion on the law, but the desire to improve the general level of conduct and consideration for others in the public sphere is something I agree with. I often lament how low public standards can be these days.

Besides legitimate criticism has been stifled as blasphemy in societies around the world.

I read the article and I see no suggestion of banning religious criticism. I'm sure if you were in Italy and you wrote a book entitled "101 reasons why [insert religion] is wrong" you would be just fine. But I'm not Italian so I could be wrong there.

 

[Revoltingest]

‘A northern Italian town has had enough of people taking the Lord’s name in vain and those who do will be fined up to €400 (£360) for blasphemy.

The city council of Saonara, a town with 10,000 inhabitants just outside Padua, has introduced a new law making it illegal “to blaspheme against any faith or religion” and utter foul language in public.’

Read more here Thou shalt not take the Lord's name in vain: Italian town to issue €400 blasphemy fines

I could never live there.
Working on old machinery means numerous little accidents,
which prompt exclamations about Jesus's sex life.

 

[Estro Felino]

I could never live there.
Working on old machinery means numerous little accidents,
which prompt exclamations about Jesus's sex life.

Hey...did you think I wouldnt read it?

 

[Revoltingest]

Hey...did you think I wouldnt read it?

I know you're an avid reader.

 

[Estro Felino]

I know you're an avid reader.

Come on..I mean....free healthcare, free university...it's not that bad...

 

[Neutral Name]

I don’t, religions inherently blaspheme each other, for example it was blasphemy in Judaism that Jesus considered himself the Son of God. Which brings us to the point - who gets to judge what is and is not blasphemy?

If it is the majority that gets to decide, the minoritys are at risk of having their rights trampled.

Besides legitimate criticism has been stifled as blasphemy in societies around the world.


Not necessarily.

They did say against ANY faith or religion. Isn't that just saying to play nice. I do agree with freedom of speech but, to me, this is a nice sentiment. We could use more of this thinking. To not do so goes along with hate speech, not playing nice.

 

[Estro Felino]

They did say against ANY faith or religion. Isn't that just saying to play nice. I do agree with freedom of speech but, to me, this is a nice sentiment. We could use more of this thinking. To not do so goes along with hate speech, not playing nice.

Thank you. It is a matter of good manners. You can say a religion is wrong but using vulgar language on a deity.. yes.. it is bad.

 

[stvdv]

‘A northern Italian town has had enough of people taking the Lord’s name in vain and those who do will be fined up to €400 (£360) for blasphemy.

The city council of Saonara, a town with 10,000 inhabitants just outside Padua, has introduced a new law making it illegal “to blaspheme against any faith or religion” and utter foul language in public.’

Read more here Thou shalt not take the Lord's name in vain: Italian town to issue €400 blasphemy fines

Hinduism story I heard, has a different POV on this
Krishna was verbally abused by a man quite a bit, and finally chopped the man's head off with his Chakra Disc
Head and blood dropped on Krishna's feet. All people got angry, because this was a major blessing "merging in Krishna"
Krishna explained "he thought of Me 24/7 ... that's enough ,Praise or Blame is the Same ... "

 

[danieldemol]

The law as written. Whether or not the claims of one religion is offensive to another is not the issue at hand. Rather, it seems to me to be more of a crackdown on offensive language. Particularly the use of sacred to curse.

If the issue was cursing they could ban cursing without the need to bring ambiguous words like blasphemy into the law.

In Indonesia when they bought blasphemy laws in they only prosecuted 8 times in its first four decades of implementation, but surely enough, given enough time for the public to get used to the idea that it was acceptable for government to interfere in matters of faith and look at how often it happens now.

Better to nip blasphemy laws in the bud before they can take root in the minds of the people. After all if this is truly about cursing outlaw cursing only.

 

[SugarOcean]

I wonder how enforceable law like that would be. Virginia has such a law since the 1800s. Far as I know, it's still on the books.

It’s Illegal to Swear in Public in This One U.S. State—Seriously

Anyways you're talkin about a bunch of Italians here. *Grin*

When the law is still on the books it is technically still enforceable.

This in Saonara is one more reason to be grateful for our first amendment.
Blasphemy fine. I wonder what they'd say if you took it to court? Lady, what's your defense?
You fined me for blasphemy based on thou shalt not take the Lord's name in vain?
Yes.
Well then, it's wrong. I didn't take the Lord's name in vain! I took the Lord's name with malice and forethought when I said your blasphemy laws are G-dd____ stupid!
Case dismissed.


Yeah , right.

 

[SugarOcean]

Hinduism story I heard, has a different POV on this
Krishna was verbally abused by a man quite a bit, and finally chopped the man's head off with his Chakra Disc
Head and blood dropped on Krishna's feet. All people got angry, because this was a major blessing "merging in Krishna"
Krishna explained "he thought of Me 24/7 ... that's enough ,Praise or Blame is the Same ... "

Silence solves the tough questions in life ... IMHO,
How about, sir or madam, may I use these jaws of life to extricate you from your car before it blows up due to the gas leak and fire near your trunk?
Just askin.

 

[dybmh]

If the issue was cursing they could ban cursing without the need to bring ambiguous words like blasphemy into the law.

In Indonesia when they bought blasphemy laws in they only prosecuted 8 times in its first four decades of implementation, but surely enough, given enough time for the public to get used to the idea that it was acceptable for government to interfere in matters of faith and look at how often it happens now.

Better to nip blasphemy laws in the bud before they can take root in the minds of the people. After all if this is truly about cursing outlaw cursing only.

So the word "blasphemy" is the problem. The details don't matter?

It's not only about cursing. BTW.

From the article in the OP:

"
The blasphemy ban is part of a far-reaching local law aimed at tackling uncivil behaviour. It includes 75 articles with hefty sanctions for those who mow the lawn outside designated hours, walk their dog without a leash or dump their rubbish in public places.
"

 

[Estro Felino]

When the law is still on the books it is technically still enforceable.

This in Saonara is one more reason to be grateful for our first amendment.
Blasphemy fine. I wonder what they'd say if you took it to court? Lady, what's your defense?
You fined me for blasphemy based on thou shalt not take the Lord's name in vain?
Yes.
Well then, it's wrong. I didn't take the Lord's name in vain! I took the Lord's name with malice and forethought when I said your blasphemy laws are G-dd____ stupid!
Case dismissed.


Yeah , right.

O my God...many of you didn't understand the law.
We Italians say OMG, oh Christ, oh Jesus...all the time. This is allowed.
What is not allowed is to call God a pig....to use vulgar language with the name of God. Period.