"Blasphemy!"
Creates the crime of ridicule of religious beliefs or practices which is a class B misdemeanor; provides that a person is guilty of the crime when in a public place he/she holds up the deity or the religious beliefs of any religious class of people to ridicule or hatred or presents religious beliefs in an obscene, lewd, profane or lascivious manner.
Does this make your stomach turn? It should. It's from bill number S2167, introduced to the Senate of the state of New York one year ago by Senator Serphin R. Maltese.
Here's more:
A person is guilty of ridicule of religious beliefs or practices when in a public place, he holds up the deity or the religious beliefs of any religious class of people, to ridicule or hatred.Furthermore, a person is guilty of religious ridicule when he presents the religious beliefs, practices, symbols, figures or objects of any religious class in an obscene, lewd, profane, or lascivious manner.
Cries of "Blasphemy!" used to echo in the streets of our nation, but not in "modern" times. But if Senator Maltese had his way, people would now be able to be arrested for dissing religion in the Empire State.
How or why did Maltese feel such legislation is justified? Hope you're sitting down:
Since Monty Python's "Life of Brian" was boycotted for its ridicule of all religions through a reluctant messiah named Jesus, religious ridicule has been a major issue among the clergy. The movie was seen by religious leaders as a cruel and blasphemous mockery of religion, Holy Scripture, the ancient Jewish faith, and the life and death of Christ.
Doesn't that make you just want to puke? (As a side note, I was once present at a talk given by Monty Python founder Graham Chapman, not long before his death. One girl in the audience stood up and asked, "Why did you feel it necessary to make a movie mocking our Lord Jesus Christ?" After the audience's own mockery died down, Graham calmly asked her, "Did you see the movie?" When she replied in the negative, he nodded knowingly, for the movie doesn't mock Jesus at all. It's not about Jesus. It's about Brian, a poor sod mistaken for the messiah.)
But wait! Don't reach for the barf bag just yet! There's more:
This legislation is religiously neutral while focusing on the need for protection against attacks on religion that frustrate society itself. In addition, these attacks directly inflict injury on the members of the targeted group while undermining the validity of religious oaths.
Oh, the arrogance of these theists…
This law is religiously neutral, yes… but only with regard to religions. It does not single out a particular faith, ostensibly treating them all equally in the eyes of the law. But what about non-religion? What if someone were to disparage atheism in a public forum? Would the law apply? Nope.
The imaginary "need for protection against attacks on religion" is nothing more than an attempt at forcing government to support religion by threatening detractors with the law.
Think of it. This wording is so ambiguous that anyone pointing out such things as obvious contradictions in the bible could be slapped with a misdemeanor, if he/she did it in public. This very site constitutes a public forum. Wonder how many misdemeanors I'd rack up in New York?
Groups such as American Atheists or the Freedom From Religion Foundation, among others, would routinely be breaking the law. So I guess, in a sense, what Senator Maltese has in mind is making atheism illegal.
Do I think this legislation has a snowball's chance of passing? No. In fact, given the time passed since introduction, it could be stone dead. As my friend Rich pointed out, it might not have been "serious" to begin with, but a reaction to the proposals of "hate crime" laws.
But there's nothing to say that such legislation won't be seriously proposed somewhere else (did someone say Utah?) and have it pass. I think it's positively frightening that such legislation could even be under consideration by a political body.
If we let down our guard for a moment, it could happen. For only by continually pointing out idiocy such as this, only by loudly vocalizing reason to the masses, will we prevent such laws from being enacted, and ourselves from being repressed.
