Ireland goes medieval (1 Viewer)

Martin

Martin

Senior Member
#1
Dec 31, 2000
56,913
#1
Selected excerpt:

From today, 1 January 2010, the new Irish blasphemy law becomes operational, and we begin our campaign to have it repealed. Blasphemy is now a crime punishable by a €25,000 fine. The new law defines blasphemy as publishing or uttering matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby intentionally causing outrage among a substantial number of adherents of that religion, with some defences permitted.

This new law is both silly and dangerous. It is silly because medieval religious laws have no place in a modern secular republic, where the criminal law should protect people and not ideas. And it is dangerous because it incentives religious outrage, and because Islamic States led by Pakistan are already using the wording of this Irish law to promote new blasphemy laws at UN level.

We believe in the golden rule: that we have a right to be treated justly, and that we have a responsibility to treat other people justly. Blasphemy laws are unjust: they silence people in order to protect ideas. In a civilised society, people have a right to to express and to hear ideas about religion even if other people find those ideas to be outrageous.
Click to expand...
http://blasphemy.ie/2010/01/01/atheist-ireland-publishes-25-blasphemous-quotes/
 

Buy on AliExpress.com
IrishZebra

IrishZebra

Western Imperialist
#3
Jun 18, 2006
23,327
#3
Section 36B
(b) that employs oppressive psychological manipulation—


(i) of its followers, or


(ii) for the purpose of gaining new followers.


Get Out Clause Supreme.




16.— (1) It shall be a defence (to be known and in this Act referred to as the “ defence of truth ”) to a defamation action for the defendant to prove that the statement in respect of which the action was brought is true in all material respects.

:D I love this act.
 
IrishZebra

IrishZebra

Western Imperialist
#6
Jun 18, 2006
23,327
#6
20.—(1) It shall be a defence (to be known, and in this section
referred to, as the “defence of honest opinion”) to a defamation
action for the defendant to prove that, in the case of a statement
consisting of an opinion, the opinion was honestly held.
(2) Subject to subsection (3), an opinion is honestly held, for the
purposes of this section, if—

  • (a) at the time of the publication of the statement, the defendant
  • believed in the truth of the opinion or, where the
  • defendant is not the author of the opinion, believed that
  • the author believed it to be true,
  • (b)
  • (i)the opinion was based on allegations of fact—
  • (I)
  • specified in the statement containing the
  • opinion, or
  • (II) referred to in that statement, that were known,
  • or might reasonably be expected to have been
  • known, by the persons to whom the statement
  • was published,



Come and get me :)
 
OP
Martin

Martin

Senior Member
Thread Starter #9
Dec 31, 2000
56,913
  • Thread Starter
    • Thread Starter #9
    IrishZebra said:
    20.—(1) It shall be a defence (to be known, and in this section
    referred to, as the “defence of honest opinion”) to a defamation
    action for the defendant to prove that, in the case of a statement
    consisting of an opinion, the opinion was honestly held.
    (2) Subject to subsection (3), an opinion is honestly held, for the
    purposes of this section, if—

    • (a) at the time of the publication of the statement, the defendant
    • believed in the truth of the opinion or, where the
    • defendant is not the author of the opinion, believed that
    • the author believed it to be true,
    • (b)
    • (i)the opinion was based on allegations of fact—
    • (I)
    • specified in the statement containing the
    • opinion, or
    • (II) referred to in that statement, that were known,
    • or might reasonably be expected to have been
    • known, by the persons to whom the statement
    • was published,



    Come and get me :)
    Click to expand...
    what tha f....

    Who in their right mind writes a law that is based on "the defendant
    believed in the truth of the opinion"?? How the hell do you establish that, you bozo?? :wth:
     
    mikhail

    mikhail

    Senior Member
    #18
    Jan 24, 2003
    9,576
    #18
    ja5per said:
    How could you guys let this law be passed? Was it not publicised at all? If this happened in Britain there would be riots.
    Click to expand...
    It's been ridiculed in the media here, and the public is mostly indifferent - the law isn't intended to be used, according to the moron who wrote it. A vocal minority of us want it repealed. We're getting nowhere until someone gets prosecuted under it, whereupon any judge worth his salt will strike it down, but it's not going to be easy. Truth be told, the first prosecution under it, if it ever happens, will be something which has the Sun-reading public riotous.
     
    Lawnchair Bes

    Lawnchair Bes

    The Loser
    #20
    Jan 7, 2004
    29,704
    #20
    Finally, as a bonus, Micheal Martin, Irish Minister for Foreign Affairs, opposing attempts by Islamic States to make defamation of religion a crime at UN level, 2009: “We believe that the concept of defamation of religion is not consistent with the promotion and protection of human rights. It can be used to justify arbitrary limitations on, or the denial of, freedom of expression. Indeed, Ireland considers that freedom of expression is a key and inherent element in the manifestation of freedom of thought and conscience and as such is complementary to freedom of religion or belief.” Just months after Minister Martin made this comment, his colleague Dermot Ahern introduced Ireland’s new blasphemy law.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.

    Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)