Blasphemy
[7] 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".
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".
[19] The intellectual culture of the early English Enlightenment embraced ironic or scoffing tones in contradistinction to the idea of sacredness in revealed religion.
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.
"[7] The common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel were repealed in England & Wales by the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008.
[24] 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:[20] 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.
[29] 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".
[8] 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.
[37] 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".
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.
[45][46] 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.
[53][54] 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.
[55] 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.
[57] 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.
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.
[59] 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'.
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.
"[62] 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".
The attacks took place in France where the culture of militant secularism celebrates blasphemy but permits viewpoint based restrictions and prior restraint of speech.
Scholars rebutting Todd's study have found that many of the protestors were liberal, tolerant people who did not have Islamophobic or xenophobic views.
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.
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.
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,[58] 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'.
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.
[76] 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.
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,[78] Canada in 2018, New Zealand in 2019, and Ireland in 2020.
[11] 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.
[12] In these nations, such laws have led to the persecution, lynchings, murder or arrest of minorities and dissident members, after flimsy accusations.
