Policing Belief: The Impact of Blasphemy Laws on Human Rights

[Skybird]

http://freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=383&report=95

From the introduction:

This study assesses blasphemy and religious insult laws in Algeria, Egypt, Greece, Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, and Poland, analyzing their compatibility with international law and their impact on human rights. By definition, these laws, which are designed to protect religious institutions, doctrines, figures, and concepts—in other words, nonhuman entities and ideas—from insult or offense, impose undue restrictions on freedom of expression. Moreover, blasphemy laws are often vaguely worded and ill-defined, making them prone to arbitrary or overly broad application, particularly in settings where there are no checks and balances in place to prevent such abuses. In countries with weak democracies, authoritarian systems, or compromised judiciaries, these laws have a particularly pernicious effect:

• Governments have abused blasphemy laws to silence the political opposition, government critics, and other dissidents.
• Individuals have fabricated charges of blasphemy against others in their communities to settle petty disputes.
• Religious extremists have exploited blasphemy laws to justify attacks on religious minorities, thereby fostering an environment of intolerance where discrimination is effectively condoned by the state.
• Religious institutions, often with official or unofficial government backing, have used blasphemy laws to impose the state-sanctioned interpretations of religious doctrine on members of minority sects that are deemed deviant or heretical.

While freedom of expression is always constrained by blasphemy laws, through direct enforcement as well as the self-censorship they engender, this report identifies a host of other human rights that are negatively affected by such laws:

• The selective application of blasphemy laws gives rise to discrimination based on religion and belief, as religious minorities and heterodox sects are often targeted disproportionately.
• In many cases, alleged blasphemers have been arbitrarily arrested based on false or unsubstantiated accusations of blasphemy, and reports of unfair trials, lax legal procedures, and prolonged periods of pretrial or administrative detention on blasphemy charges are plentiful.
• Individuals accused of blasphemy have endured torture and ill-treatment in custody.
• Blasphemy suspects, including those who have been acquitted, have experienced breaches of their right to security of the person in the form of death threats, mob beatings, and other violence by nonstate actors.

There is no question that discrimination based on religion or belief is a genuine grievance for many and in some instances leads to limitations on freedom of religion. However, the notion that insults or criticism aimed at a religion or religious doctrine somehow restrict adherents’ ability to freely practice their religion has been rejected by renowned experts and human rights activists, who have emphasized the interdependence and indivisibility of freedom of expression, freedom of religion, and all other human rights. Freedom of expression is considered a “cornerstone right” without which other rights fall into jeopardy. As one expert has pointed out, “freedom of expression is also essential to the exercise of freedom of religion.”
Moreover, there is little evidence to support the argument that prohibiting defamation of religions is an effective means of combating racial and religious hatred. In fact, the application of blasphemy laws appears to instigate and exacerbate communal conflict rather than prevent it.

With criticism of religion now being criminalised in the EU by seeing well thought-out arguments and true facts against religion's claims and ideologies as equal to "discrimination" and thus giving the opportunity to prosecute criticism of religion by using the anti-discrimination laws, this report is a valid comment on the distorted legislation implemented by the EU as well. How absurd it all is can be seen in the Wilders trial in Holland, where the state attorney has refused to raise charges against Wilders (although another court ordered him to do so), and the whole trial has currently collapsed due to the judges being found to be biased, they must be replaced and the whole trial has to be relaunched. As a commentator on radio threatened the same day when the news was made known, pro-Islamic groups plan to bring the whole Wilders case to a European court in case the next Dutch court does not sentence Wilders for alleged hate speech when he referred (correctly) to the totalitarian nature of Islamic ideology.

In a way, the EU has imposed blasphemy laws on itself, too. It just does not call them like that, nor are national legislative structure all that willing to fully embrace that insane EU-commanded course.

[the_tyrant]

In comparison, laws in canada allow special privilege for religious reasons

[Betonov]

With criticism of religion now being criminalised in the EU

WHAT ????
That's just wrong. Just having an idea about criminilasing any criticism should be criminalised.

[MH]

Since Europe accepted millions of Muslim it a cake that must be dealt with.
It would be good idea to simply close borders and try to absorb Muslims currently living there -because of cultural differences its a process that may take a long time.
Now question is if Europeans have a problem with radical Islam or with Muslims as whole.
A comunity of educated Muslims that goes to mosque instead of church on sunday or simply fast on Ramadan would still be a problem?

[tater]

I think there is a fundamental problem with Islam itself, personally. It is, unlike other major religions fundamentally political in nature. Shar'ia is a goal that most probably aspire to. IMHO, the extant religion is incompatible with Western progressive democracy.

The trouble is that even were some true moderate sect to emerge, it's merely the ability to read Arabic away from fundamentalism because the very worst bits are right there in black and white.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by MH

A comunity of educated Muslims that goes to mosque instead of church on sunday or simply fast on Ramadan would still be a problem?

Islam is not "Christianity oriental style", but a totally different, alien hierarchy of values and goals. The problem is not the question of polite manners and praying on Sunday or Friday, but the content of a totalitarian ideology that is deeply inhumane in itself and promotes slavery of women and subjugation or killing of infidels, in order to acchieve monocultural purity. Jesus' message and Muhammad's message - in no way compare. They are totally antagonistic. The one talked against violence. The other declared violence a mandatory duty.

Especially from Iran there come a lot of very educated, quite burgoise people to Germany, many of them flee from the autocratic tyranny they have there. The question then is whether they are willing enough to leave behind certain key aspects of Islam that are incompatible with Western constitutions and valuie systems and the tradition of Western humanism. Some are like that, some or not.

Islam is different from Christianity, not only by content, but by structure as well, you cannot alter and reform and modify it that easily without bringing the whole conceotion of Islam to fall. That is why I say Islam must not be reformed and modenrised, but overcome. They should define themselves on with what top replace it, else it will not find legitimation amongst them. Their choices on what they reject in Islam and to what degree they embrace Western values if they want to live here and contribute to our nations and societies, shall decide whether we welcome them, or not.

But that they have to integrate in full in our socieites, and that not we need to chnage oursaelves in order to adapt to them- this condition is non-negotiable for me. Whenever there is a conflict between the value system they have brought with them colliding with ours, they have to step down and give it up, because they came to our country - not we went to theirs. I have seen Islamic social orders in a variety on different Muhammeddan countries and their societies, I have been there. And I do not want them one bit in the world that I call my and our home. Islam is no contribution to our cultural life. It is a reduction and eradication of cultural value and diversity.

However. The article is not just aiming at Islam, but religion in general, which amongst the exmained countries means orthodox Christian church in Greece, and Catholic church in Poland.

[tater]

Here we see the not so strange bedfellows of the religious. There have been other occasions where the Catholic reaction to perceived blasphemy against Islam has been to attack blasphemy as the problem, not the insane Muslim reaction to it.

We see the same in domestic politics where the hyper-religious wish for an easing of separation of church and state (prayers in school, or religious "just-so" stories taught as science), not realizing or not caring that this is an open door for islam to demand equal time in the future since setting a "state" church is something that even they realize is illegal, so there can never be allowances for Christian beliefs in the US without also allowing Islam to have equal time... a terrible spiral to begin.

[Betonov]

A comunity of educated Muslims that goes to mosque instead of church on sunday or simply fast on Ramadan would still be a problem?

Wouldnt be a problem, speaking from personal experience. As long as they dont go fundamental.

Their choices on what they reject in Islam and to what degree they embrace Western values if they want to live here and contribute to our nations and societies, shall decide whether we welcome them, or not.

!00% agree, some will lie their way in but if it limits the imigration of religius whackjobs to the point that they will be harmeless being in such minority and it will be easier to deport them later.

But that they have to integrate in full in our socieites, and that not we need to chnage oursaelves in order to adapt to them- this condition is non-negotiable for me. Whenever there is a conflict between the value system they have brought with them colliding with ours, they have to step down and give it up, because they came to our country - not we went to theirs

agree, no more and no less than what is given to us

all in all, religion is a concept hijacked by politics, that's why we should steer clear from it

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by tater

Here we see the not so strange bedfellows of the religious. There have been other occasions where the Catholic reaction to perceived blasphemy against Islam has been to attack blasphemy as the problem, not the insane Muslim reaction to it.

We see the same in domestic politics where the hyper-religious wish for an easing of separation of church and state (prayers in school, or religious "just-so" stories taught as science), not realizing or not caring that this is an open door for islam to demand equal time in the future since setting a "state" church is something that even they realize is illegal, so there can never be allowances for Christian beliefs in the US without also allowing Islam to have equal time... a terrible spiral to begin.

Yes, the Catholic church supports Islam in the West so massively becasue it hopes to win back terrain in respectability and recognition if as a side-effect of boosting public acceptance for Islam, acceptance for the church's claim for authority hopefully should come along as well. But that is not only a strange union, but also a terrible misconception. Maybe the chrcub would will to coexist with Muhammad'S reincarnations - but Muhammad coexists with other cultures only as long as he is not powerfull enough to destroy and subjugate them.

Christian priests I certainly do not expect to understand this. They all too often conclude on the other by their own motivation.

Pat Condell has it absolutely right when he says that if you want to fight against Islam in the West, then you need to fight against religion in general - including the church. The Vatican needed until 1994 (that is just 16 years ago!) to rehabilitate Gallilei in full - what else is there that needs to be known about the church in order to understand what one is dealing with when talking about the church...?

Submission to Islam or to the Catholic dogma, that does not seem to be that important to the Vatican, I soemtrimes think. That people are made unfree again, and get subjuigated to any theistic dogma, no matter what it is - that seems to be what counts for the church. Tyranny is soemthing that the church is not unfamiliar with, totalitarian control it has practiced itself, and is prone to practice until today. The greatest evil it can imagine is not a rivalling, inhumane religiuon - but the absence of any theistic submission, the unbwillingness of free human mind to bow to the undeserved claim that theistic dogmas are to be respected and are representative for the only true truth.

Blasphemy laws and laws forbidding criticism of religions, no matter which ones, are unacceptable and incompatible with human dignity and the freedom of human thought and independence of human mind. It must be fought against, unconditionally. There are conflicts were compromise is not possible without self-destruction. This conflict of freedom versus blasphemy laws is one of these.

[Sailor Steve]

We actually used to have 'Blasphemy Laws' here in the US. Until Jefferson's Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom was enacted in 1786 that state had laws on the books making denial of the Holy Trinity punishable by thirty days in jail, and blasphemy against the Anglican Church punishable by death. It had been decades since either was enforced, but they were still there.

But, supposedly, we've grown since then.

[MH]

I just hope that fighting radical islam will not get confused with fighting multi tradition society that europe now became by its choice.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

We actually used to have 'Blasphemy Laws' here in the US. Until Jefferson's Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom was enacted in 1786 that state had laws on the books making denial of the Holy Trinity punishable by thirty days in jail, and blasphemy against the Anglican Church punishable by death. It had been decades since either was enforced, but they were still there.

But, supposedly, we've grown since then.

Dead bodies in the cellar? The German federal state of Hessen still mentions in article 21 of the federal constitution that the death penalty can be given in case of very serious crimes.

The national Basic Law, as the constitution is called over here, overrules that, though.

Verfassung des Landes Hessen
Art. 21 Verf(Gesetz) - Landesrecht Hessen

(1) Ist jemand einer strafbaren Handlung für schuldig befunden worden, so können ihm auf Grund der Strafgesetze durch richterliches Urteil die Freiheit und die bürgerlichen Ehrenrechte entzogen oder beschränkt werden. Bei besonders schweren Verbrechen kann er zum Tode verurteilt werden.

(2) Die Strafe richtet sich nach der Schwere der Tat.

(3) Alle Gefangenen sind menschlich zu behandeln.

Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland

Art. 102 GG

Die Todesstrafe ist abgeschafft.

[Sailor Steve]

I did say "supposedly".