Atheist Ireland Publishes 25 Blasphemous Quotes

From today, 1 January 2010, the new Irish blasphemy law becomes operational, and we begin our campaign to have it repealed.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.

In response, we have published a list of 25 blasphemous quotes, which have previously been published by or uttered by or attributed to Jesus Christ, Muhammad, Mark Twain, Tom Lehrer, Randy Newman, James Kirkup, Monty Python, Rev Ian Paisley, Conor Cruise O’Brien, Frank Zappa, Salman Rushdie, Bjork, Amanda Donohoe, George Carlin, Paul Woodfull, Jerry Springer the Opera, Tim Minchin, Richard Dawkins, Pope Benedict XVI, Christopher Hitchens, PZ Myers, Ian O’Doherty, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor and Dermot Ahern.

You can read the quotes on the website here:

http://blasphemy.ie/2010/01/01/atheist-ireland-publishes-25-blasphemous-quotes/

Have your say on our forum:

http://www.atheist.ie/phpBB3/

Happy New Year.

Be Sociable, Share!
This entry was posted in Blasphemy, Politics, Religion. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

14 Comments

  1. John|Seonaidh Morton
    Posted 3 January, 2010 at 7:30 pm | Permalink

    I’m no atheist. However, I’ve always been of the view that no god needs any protection whatsoever by the laws of humankind. This is absurd! Whatever next – legalised child molesting by religious groups?

  2. Clerlic
    Posted 4 January, 2010 at 1:44 pm | Permalink

    This law could be easily abused by creating a bunch of small cults with different rules and outlawing practically everything as blasphemy.

  3. patrick finnegan
    Posted 4 January, 2010 at 6:37 pm | Permalink

    What is the point of blaspheming religion? at best it is small-minded pettiness by millitant athiests, and at worst it can have detrimental social consequences, for example, the danish cartoons blaspheming islam.

    Either the universe was created by a creator, God, or the ‘big bang’ somehow magically ignited itself , as even athiest scientists admit nothing, matter or energy, existed prior to it.

    Iwill give up my belief in God as soon as somebody tells me how anything can come into being from nothing

  4. Robert
    Posted 5 January, 2010 at 2:36 pm | Permalink

    I don’t think there’s a need for this new blasphemy law. I also don’t see what all the fuss is about. I’m a theist (not of any particular religion) and I would never criticize or hold anything against atheists. But why are atheists condemning this law? Why would be want to confront believers? Their belief is ok, isn’t it?I respect all beliefs and so to should atheists. Are atheists against this law because they want to confront peoples beliefs in a disrespectful way?
    The publication of 25 Blasphemous quotes on this website was deliberate and it represents a clear disrespect for the law. And any law that is deliberately broken is in my opinion an even more serious offence. If I were running this organisation(And I would run it and help and support atheists to protect their beliefs), I would handle this situation better. Theres a way to do this. The constitution must with protected and if the constitution required this law, then this law is perfectly acceptable as the constitution was written by the people. You might say “well it was written years ago”. Well then I say “Yes I know. It needs to be updated. And what do you need to update or change a constitution?” A Referendum. This I think, is the proper way to handle this. If all atheists got together and campaigned for a referendum, it would be a more lawful idea and a peacefully constructive idea. The organisation of Atheist Ireland is not above the law. And religious citizens are not below it. This law was designed to protect religious people. Thank god (no offence, I use this term as a figure of speech only) we have a country that respects its constitution and upholds its constitution. If you don’t like this law, then come on lets have a referendum! Lets prevent conflict and have a civilized vote on it. Causing conflict and debate is not a way to simply get rid of this law. Also, email petitions and groups on social networking sites will not work. Is their anybody in atheist Ireland who knows how to tackle politics?

  5. Jay Lee
    Posted 5 January, 2010 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

    Laws should protect individuals, not institutions or ideas.

  6. Kev Condron
    Posted 7 January, 2010 at 12:27 pm | Permalink

    It`s the 21st century & there is no evidence that any god exists. On the contrary the exploration of our planet and the rest of the universe over the past 100 years would suggest that in all probability (at least 95% & for myself 99%) there is no God. I would have thought this presented some difficulty with justifyication for such legislation. However, as mentioned in previous posts, many other countries do have simmilar laws. My comment is a simple observation from a citizen of the world.

  7. Posted 8 January, 2010 at 8:40 am | Permalink

    Oh My God! Whatever next? Ooops, sorry! Is that blasphemous?
    Seriously though, I think God should come down and ban all religions. Most of the unrest and wars would cease as most are caused by religion. This totally irrational belief in something with no evidence to back it up. If I said I believed in ghosts or witches, or Harry Potter, I would be, rightly, laughed at. If I were a witness in a court case who believed something because someone else said it existed I would be ignored. Imagine being questioned by Tony Blair, a lawyer, and told that my evidence would be disbelieved because there is no evidence – yet he believes in an imaginary being who was invented by superstitious uneducated people, and who has been used to control people for centuries.

    Don’t even get me on to the subject of priests abusing children then church leaders cover ups.

    This is a dangerous law, I am shocked at the Irish governemnt.

  8. patrick finnegan
    Posted 8 January, 2010 at 7:39 pm | Permalink

    Athiests are right when they say God cannot be proved, however a supreme creator would bydefinition, exist outside of creation, and therefore be invisible to the instruments of science, which are after all, designed to measure and examine the created universe.
    There are just too many coincidences in the scientific account of the’Big Bang’ for it to be accepted as the only explaination for the beginning of the universe.
    For example: there were a few particles more of matter, than antimatter created just after the Big Bang, why? if there had been an equal number of both types of particle created, they would have annihilated each other and the universe would never have got started .
    The Earth’s Moon, is the largest Moon in comparison to it’s parent planet in the Solar system, and because of that, as well as it’s close proximity to Earth, it’s gravitational pull keeps the Earth’s axis from tumbling wildly about in space and making life as we know it impossible, another coincidience?.

    According to science, all effects must have a cause , the ‘Big Bang was an effect, so what was the cause?

  9. TheLordAkira
    Posted 13 January, 2010 at 6:24 pm | Permalink

    Blasphemy is used to protect church from regular questions.
    It is also a way to say, i dont like what you are saying, i will not listen, and you will pay for talking to me.

  10. Adrian Lea
    Posted 17 January, 2010 at 12:32 am | Permalink

    It has been suggested that Irish Atheists set up an official Church of No God. This nontheist religion would hold sacred the concept that there is no god or gods, and that to state otherwise is blasphemous and an offence to all that it’s followers hold sacred. Under the terms of the law, if there were sufficient followers, then no theistic statement could be made in public without breaching the terms of the new act. Checkmate?

  11. patrick finnegan
    Posted 18 January, 2010 at 3:35 am | Permalink

    If belief in God really is as meaningless to athiests as say, the tooth fairy, why do they get so upset when they subject of blasphemy or religion comes up?

    It is almost as if they know deep down subconciously that that God really exists and are desperately trying to convince themselves otherwise, under the guise of ‘rationality’.

    by the way Josef Stalin of Russia, and Chairman Mao of China, killed an estimated 100 million of their fellow countrymen and women in an effort to destroy religion, and impose athestic communism on their respective nations, far more than all the religious wars in history put together.

  12. Amy Wells
    Posted 21 January, 2010 at 7:37 pm | Permalink

    Chosen Ignorance is the True Blasphemy of this world! Bliss through ignorance does not equate to reality. The Truth is Religion is an acceptable form of cultism. Religion kills! When you sign on to religion you sign out of logical thinking-WHICH IS EXTREMLY DANGEROUS! When will enough people stand against such non sense???

  13. Ryan
    Posted 2 February, 2010 at 1:26 am | Permalink

    What a lot of people fail to see when defending this law is not specifically that it protects religions, but it makes it illegal to voice one’s opinion just because it offends a specific group. I am not familiar with the laws in Ireland but why should some groups be protected from criticism? And make no mistake, religious institutions are going to try and use this to fight any negative comments about them that they can. Who draws the line between someone merely mocking a religion and someone trying to point out flaws in a belief system. Satire is very often used in social criticism, and it could very easily be caught under this “blasphemy” umbrella.

    Another note about the Muhammad cartoons. I believe those incidents speak more to the dangers of zealotry and fundamentalism than they do to censoring people’s opinions.

  14. Hooter
    Posted 3 February, 2010 at 1:03 am | Permalink

    Everyone who is arguing over whether or religion is right, or atheism is right, is missing the point. The point comes down to whether or not a group of people should be told what they can or cannot say. If someone chooses to part of a specific group, then they should have to abide by the rules of that group. However, being born into a society that is composed of many different groups, should be able to pick and choose — FOR THEMSELVES — what they want to believe and how they want to express it. if there is a person who sees a problem with the contradictions of the bible, or holds the (albeit misinformed and misguided) beliefs that secularism requires a “something out of nothing”, they should be able to point it out. Just because a specific group gets all buthurt when their own mistakes are shown is no basis for a law. Laws should protect people from oppressive practices, not enforce oppressive practices. If you want to believe in the sky magician and talking snake, then fine. But, when you want to use it to bash people who are looking for more logic and point out where your logic is lacking, then YOU are creating a problem. YOUR god should be (if he exists) condemn me to hell if I don’t pretend to eat a zombie, that’s fine. But, the people in charge of everyone should not be able to punish me for calling bullshit. George Carlin “millions of dead motherfuckers, all because they gave the wrong answer to the God question: “Do you believe in God?” “No.” Boom! Dead. “Do you believe in God?” “Yes…” “Do you believe in my God?” “No.” Boom! Dead. “My god has a bigger dick than your god!”

5 Trackbacks