Saonara Italy to impose Blasphemy fine

[stvdv]

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.

You need very good ear plugs I guess

 

[danieldemol]

So the word "blasphemy" is the problem.

Yep

The details don't matter?

The article gives the details as, it is illegal “to blaspheme against any faith or religion” which is completely unnecessary to prevent cussing, illegal dumping and a host of other unrelated offences.

 

[stvdv]

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.

Tough questions in life for me are:
1) Who am "I"
2) Why am "I" here
3) Where do "I" come from
4) Where am "I" going after "I" die

At least I know I am not this body, so to me it is not about "having the body extricate from the car before they (body and car) blow up to peaces"
That is not a question, it's 99% sure that the body blows up to peaces (unless the Divine intervenes or some other miracle happens)

Therefore it is important to solve above questions before you step in that car that is going to explode

Silence in this context stands for devotion, concentration, contemplation, meditation, "Being the Witness", introspection and other keys given by the Saints to practice to solve the above "tough questions" in life.

 

[Glaurung]

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

If the law is well written it need not be ambiguous. To invoke the sacred for vulgar reasons is a form of cursing. It is actually the most serious form of cursing there is.

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.

Indonesia already interferes in matters of faith. It has six official religions and a monotheistic state ideology.

In any case, Islamic style blasphemy laws (which are often used as a pretext to attack religious minorities) are not what is being considered. All I see being considered is a crackdown on public vulgarity. Not a ban on religious criticism, which I would oppose.

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.

Invocation of the divine name in vulgar or vain ways is a form of cursing.

 

[stvdv]

Yep

The article gives the details as, it is illegal “to blaspheme against any faith or religion” which is completely unnecessary to prevent cussing, illegal dumping and a host of other unrelated offences.

One really good thing in all of this is, that they realize it should be to "any faith or religion". So a Christian should also not belittle (blaspheme) other religions. And nice it is done in Italy, where the Vatican is. Would be even better if they also had included "do not belittle Atheism etc. as well".

I think it is never good to belittle others on their feelings/faith. Criticizing harmful acts, done in name of (non) faith, is okay IMO.

 

[stvdv]

Yep

The article gives the details as, it is illegal “to blaspheme against any faith or religion” which is completely unnecessary to prevent cussing, illegal dumping and a host of other unrelated offences.

Giving a 400€ fine is quite big. I know people who use "God be damned" many times a day, just their habit. Some habits are very hard to stop. But 400€ might be a good incentive. When I was in Singapore you get fined 1000$ (this was 25 years ago) for spitting. Compared to Blasphemy, spitting seems a minor thing (not talking about spitting in the face; just on the ground). And it did work. Plenty of Indians in Singapore, who usually (what I have seen in India) spit anywhere any time of day, but I did not see 1 person spit in Singapore.

Singapore (what I saw 25 years ago) was a clean and nice place. A world without belittling (blasphemy) is a good thing to strive for IMO.

 

[stvdv]

Yep

The article gives the details as, it is illegal “to blaspheme against any faith or religion” which is completely unnecessary to prevent cussing, illegal dumping and a host of other unrelated offences.

Probably they realize soon, or get reminded by non-Christians, that even evangelizing might be quite a bit blasphemous after all.
I am curious what the Italian Law will do about this, in the country ऑफ़ the Vatican and the Pope; I am really curious.

 

[Estro Felino]

Probably they realize soon, or get reminded by non-Christians, that even evangelizing might be quite a bit blasphemous after all.
I am curious what the Italian Law will do about this, in the country ऑफ़ the Vatican and the Pope; I am really curious.

We are not the country of the Vatican.
The books bashing the Vatican are the best sellers here.

 

[Notanumber]

I am all in favour of a law against spitting in public and littering providing there is concrete evidence.

The problem with Blasphemy laws is that what one person considers to be Blasphemous another person may not.

Who is going to provide the concrete evidence for Blasphemy and who will be given the power to decide what is and what is not Blasphemous?

 

[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.

400€ seems a bit steep, but already a big improvement compared to what the Bible tells us to do. Vatican (Italy) goes easy on blasphemy it seems

Bible Gateway passage: Leviticus 24 - New International Version
Anyone who blasphemes the name of the Lord is to be put to death. The entire assembly must stone them. Whether foreigner or native-born, when they blaspheme the Name they are to be put to death.

 

[Estro Felino]

I am all in favour of a law against spitting in public and littering providing there is concrete evidence.

The problem with Blasphemy laws is that what one person considers to be Blasphemous another person may not.

Who is going to provide the concrete evidence for Blasphemy and who will be given the power to decide what is and what is not Blasphemous?

I am with abolishing these mulcts ...especially because they contradict the art 21 of the Constitution on freedom of speech.
Besides...if someone offends your deity, why should you care?

 

[stvdv]

We are not the country of the Vatican.
The books bashing the Vatican are the best sellers here.

Still, I do think the Vatican has a big say in matters, regarding Italy. This Blasphemy Fine has Vatican "all over it", don't you think?
And we all know that money talks, and Vatican has plenty of that also. Maybe they do need some extra income though, hence the fines?

Evangelizing is still big in Christianity. But Christians do use blasphemy (belittling other's faith) to sell Christian faith

So, in the end, they might discover that Blasphemy Fine is not such a good thing for Vatican (if they want to continue evangelizing successfully)
Although I do believe that, now people don't buy this Hell threat that easily anymore, blasphemy is a bit outdated nowadays. They better start selling Christianity with positive incentives instead of threats.

 

[stvdv]

The problem with Blasphemy laws is that what one person considers to be Blasphemous another person may not.

Who is going to provide the concrete evidence for Blasphemy and who will be given the power to decide what is and what is not Blasphemous?

I don't think it is such a big deal. I asked so many (maybe 50 in past few years) people about how they feel if others belittled their feelings/faith (also non religious people). Not one person liked that. Although quite a few did have no problem doing it to others, but it should not be done to them

Maybe they use the Bible to decide what is and what is not Blasphemous
Bible Gateway passage: Leviticus 24:16 - New International Version
"anyone who blasphemes the name of the Lord is to be put to death. The entire assembly must stone them. Whether foreigner or native-born, when they blaspheme the Name they are to be put to death"

 

[stvdv]

I am with abolishing these mulcts ...especially because they contradict the art 21 of the Constitution on freedom of speech.

I don't like fines either, especially big ones for just saying the wrong thing. Next step is burning you like a witch; back a few hundred years in time

But "freedom of Speech" to me means that we are free to say how we feel. No need to bash others. You can say it in a nice way, if you don't like it
We are not apes anymore. Why not teach others to speak out in a respectful way? Why using "freedom of speech" to allow disrespectful speech?
I just don't believe that "freedom of speech" was meant for disrespectful bashing other's feelings/beliefs

Nobody agrees that "physical hurting others should be allowed"; except when you defend yourself against someone trying to hurt you
You need not be a psychiatrist to know that emotional hurting others can me far more damaging than physical hurting someone

 

[stvdv]

Besides...if someone offends your deity, why should you care?

But I do agree that it is better not to get upset if someone else offends your deity
My Master even said "I don't want you to defend me", do you think I can't handle myself?

If deity is real and Divine and powerful, then deity does not need our help
If deity is unreal then for sure it would be strange to get upset about an illusion

 

[dybmh]

Yep

The article gives the details as, it is illegal “to blaspheme against any faith or religion” which is completely unnecessary to prevent cussing, illegal dumping and a host of other unrelated offences.

If the same provisions executed in the same manner are not a problem, and the inclusion of the word "blasphemy" is all that matters, then it's much ado about nothing.

 

[danieldemol]

If the same provisions executed in the same manner are not a problem, and the inclusion of the word "blasphemy" is all that matters, then it's much ado about nothing.

View attachment 31361

The provision against blasphemy is not the same as the provision against cussing. But I wouldn’t expect you to be able to see the difference even though it is clear.

And there are no guarantees that it will be executed the same way in the future, Indonesia is a classic example of how these things can get out of control

 

[dybmh]

The provision against blasphemy is not the same as the provision against cussing. But I wouldn’t expect you to be able to see the difference even though it is clear.

And there are no guarantees that it will be executed the same way in the future, Indonesia is a classic example of how these things can get out of control

You're acting a little paranoid about if you think Italy will become like Indonesia.

 

[Notanumber]

We atheists should get automatic immunity from any Blasphemy laws.

 

[Estro Felino]

We atheists should get automatic immunity from any Blasphemy laws.

Thinking of Lauren Southern...I can, you can go to the East Gates of the Vatican and distribute leaflets with "Jesus is gay" on it.
That place is full of cops...they will smile at you .


These laws are not about freedom of speech...they are about vulgar language . I can exclamate Per l'amor di Dio...(for God's sake)...but not calling God a pig in a vulgar way.