Blasphemy day — a new tradition
The following is a gift from my facebook friend, Torbjorn Nordhagen
A Life of Blasphemy or, My Thoughts on International Blasphemy Day
Share
Yesterday at 8:58pmTomorrow, September 30, 2009, is International Blasphemy Day. The date was chosen to mark the four-year anniversary of the Muslim “Danish cartoon riots.” Rather than merely fire off another one of my pithy facebook status updates (although I reserve the right to do this as well), I thought I’d write down a few of my thoughts on the event itself and my own feelings on it.
From the official site: “International Blasphemy Day is not just a day. It is a movement to dismantle the wall which exists between religion and criticism.”
My guess is that almost anyone reading this note knows something of my background: raised Evangelical Christian, went through a protracted and very painful period of deconversion from late 2003 to mid-2005. I’ve long maintained the line touted by such “new atheist” luminaries as Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens that religion should be subject to criticism. In all honesty, I’ve wrestled with formulating my own position on this: how to be candid and honest about one’s opinions while still maintaining cordial and amicable relations with friends and family members who are of faith. And yes, at times I was rather leery of the “new atheist” movement.
Today, however, I am a proud “new” atheist. Having come to my views through no small struggle I hold that freethought and religious skepticism is precious. It is a blood-bought treasure of Western civilization. Consider this: at the time of the American Revolution, Maryland had an anti-blasphemy statute. If you spoke blasphemy against the Holy Trinity three times (the magic number, three) and were of sound mind, the sentence was death without benefit of clergy. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
The bloody history of the suppression of religious dissent is well-known and needs little elaborating, but here we go anyway:
The Medieval Inquisition was instituted in the early 13th century (if memory serves) by Pope Innocent III for the purpose of persecuting “heretics.” The focus was southern Europe, where trade across the Mediterranean had engendered the rise of the Cathari in southern France (also known as the Albigensians). The heinous Albigensian Crusade down the Rhone and into northern Italy was the result.
The European Witch Craze began in the late 15th century and raged throughout the sixteenth, mostly in northern Europe–especially the “Holy” Roman Empire (modern-day Germany) and Scotland. Around the same time that the Spanish Inquisition revived the bloodshed and madness in Spain (and then Portugal, and it spread from both places–even to Goa and Malabar with the Portuguese). The Salem Witch Trials of 1692 came at the very tail end of the appalling affront to human dignity. The vast majority of the victims of the Witch Craze were women. The Inquisition in Spain targeted Jews and conversos, derisively known as “Marranos” (pigs)–Jews who had converted to Catholicism to escape persecution. Spain’s remnant Muslim population was also not exempt. The Portuguese targeted Jews in Portugal and “heretic” Christians of the Syrian Church in India.
These are only two particularly notorious historic examples. Today, Ireland has a blasphemy law, as does Afghanistan–proof positive that the medieval streak runs deep in both Catholicism and Islam alike.
Source: http://www.blasphemyday.com/
But hang on, friends, because we haven’t even got to the meat of the argument yet. And for that, we must consider the source: the sacra, the canonical texts of the religions themselves. For purposes of brevity and salience I will confine my remarks to Christianity, as I am less familiar with Islam’s sacra for obvious reasons (never having been a Muslim).
You see, the barbaric and medieval notion currently enshrined in the jurisprudence of the Republic of Ireland has its source solidly in the Bible itself. I am referring, of course, to the Unpardonable Sin. In the words attributed to Christ:
28 “Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter; 29 but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation”— 30 because they said, “He has an unclean spirit.”
~Mark 3:28-30, NKJV.Luke concurs:
10 “And anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but to him who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven.
~Luke 12:10, NKJV.Source: www.biblegateway.com
But what does it MEAN to blaspheme the Holy Spirit? The pastoral opinion regnant in most circles (to my knowledge) is that “blaspheming the Holy Spirit” is the rejection of the Gospel–the perpetual, ongoing, ultimate rejection of the work and mission of the Holy Spirit.
Whether you accept this definition or take the passages in question at slightly more face value and maintain that this means a verbal denunciation of the Holy Spirit, the mentality that this doctrine engenders and its ramifications are very clear and, for me as a skeptic, extremely noxious. Whatever interpretation you adopt, you are still left with an explicit doctrine of the sacred that precludes criticism–or at the very least, criticism beyond a certain point. In other words, these passages are the heart and soul of the anti-dissent doctrine in Christianity.
However I would submit to you, dear readers, that even discarding these passages–supposing for a moment that they were never written, or were found to be apocryphal in some way–that the problem remains. And the problem goes deeper than Christianity, to encompass certainly all of the three major monotheistic religions. The reason is simple: in Christopher Hitchens’s words, all of these religions enshrine a doctrine of god as Celestial Dictator, a kind of Divine Big Brother who monitors your every thought, word and deed–and finds you wanting. He can and does convict you of “thought-crime”–at least in Christianity. In Judaism and in Islam he demands a series of ritual observances and practices–certainly far more than in most Christian denominations.
Hitchens goes so far as to liken at least the Christian god to North Korea’s Kim Il-Sung, the “Great Leader,” and his son Kim Jong-il, the “Dear Leader”: both of which have been deified through Kim Il-Sung’s elaborate personality cult. North Korea, like the Abrahamic religions, extensively monitors the actions and deeds (they’re not quite up to the level of sophisticated thought-surveillance, to be fair, but watch out) of its citizens. Dissenters are silenced. There are slave-labor camps for not only dissenters but FAMILIES of dissenters and escapees. Indeed, the parallels are positively chilling.
And what is the ultimate fate of dissenters and blasphemers? While in North Korea the government has absolute power over its citizenry only in life, the god of the Bible and the Qu’ran has no such limitations. The Qu’ran speaks of the “fire whose fuel is men and stones.” I’m rather more familiar with the Bible’s stance:
[Christ speaking]:
28 And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
~Matthew 10:28, NKJV.
[In the words of John of Patmos]:
15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.
~Revelation 20:15, NKJV.
8 But the cowardly, unbelieving,[a] abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”
~Revelation 21:8, NKJV.
Source: www.biblegateway.com
There you have it: by failing to accept the gift of salvation offered by the meek-and-mild savior, those of us who do not believe merit eternal perdition. So much for a loving god. The first conclusion that I draw from this is that it is religious morality that is fundamentally immoral, not atheistic morality. Secondly, dear readers, I propose that under this system those of us who do not believe are ALREADY COMMITTING BLASPHEMY. There is NOTHING that we can say, do, write or depict tomorrow or any other day which can further compound the blasphemy of our very lives of unbelief under such a system.I am all for an International Blasphemy Day. But we must use it as a reminder of the true scope and scale of blasphemy. We must remember that blasphemy does not solely consist of pithy and humorous slogans and witticisms, of provocative pictures and images. There is no need to state “I deny the Holy Spirit” when our very LIVES are lived in denial of the EXISTENCE of the same!
So tomorrow, if you wake up in a time and place in history where you have the freedom to criticize the prevalent religion in your society if you so choose–be very thankful and be very humble. I don’t care if you’re a theist, atheist or whatever–free speech is precious. Dissent is precious.
And happy International Blasphemy Day, to believers and unbelievers alike! Remember, even if you ARE a believer, you’re not exempt–there will always be other believers of other sects and religions who find you a heretic or unbeliever in your own right.
Cheers, all, ~Tor
Note: The illustration is a portion of manuscript, which is identified by Wiki as Armenian and contains the passage from Mark concerning blasphemy.
Related articles by Zemanta
- Blasphemy Day (tuibguy.com)
How Idiot America got that way

- Image by permanently scatterbrained via Flickr
… increasingly frenzied claims have become so detached from reality that they often seem like black comedy. The right-wing magazine US Investors’ Daily claimed that if Stephen Hawking had been British, he would have been allowed to die at birth by its “socialist” healthcare system. Hawking responded with a polite cough that he is British, and “I wouldn’t be here without the NHS”.
This tendency to simply deny inconvenient facts and invent a fantasy world isn’t new; it’s only becoming more heightened. It ran through the Bush years like a dash of bourbon in water. When it became clear that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction, the US right simply claimed they had been shipped to Syria. When the scientific evidence for man-made global warming became unanswerable, they claimed – as one Republican congressman put it – that it was “the greatest hoax in human history”, and that all the world’s climatologists were “liars”. The American media then presents itself as an umpire between “the rival sides”, as if they both had evidence behind them. …
How do they train themselves to be so impervious to reality? It begins, I suspect, with religion. They are taught from a young age that it is good to have “faith” – which is, by definition, a belief without any evidence to back it up. You don’t have “faith” that Australia exists, or that fire burns: you have evidence. You only need “faith” to believe the untrue or unprovable. Indeed, they are taught that faith is the highest aspiration and most noble cause. Is it any surprise this then percolates into their political views? Faith-based thinking spreads and contaminates the rational.
If children are taught to not only believe things on faith, but to also reject claims that are supported by evidence and reason when those claims contradict faith, then it shouldn’t be surprising that we get beliefs like those listed above. This sort of attitude is a great benefit to authority figures since they are, of course, the ultimate arbiters of which beliefs should be taken on faith and which shouldn’t.
What would happen if American schools instituted not just classes on critical thinking and skepticism, but actually inserted lessons on critical thinking throughout the curriculum? What would happen if students in public schools were consistently taught the importance of believing things based on evidence and reasoned arguments, not faith or slavish adherence to tradition or authorities? Who would be able to object without looking completely foolish? — Austin Cline, About.com
Religion Makes Conservative Republicans Impervious to Facts
Related articles by Zemanta
- The Rise of Idiot America (endhereditaryreligion.com)
- A Q&A with Charles P. Pierce, author of Idiot America (endhereditaryreligion.com)
- The Anti-Evolution Movement in Texas Highlights Idiot America (usnews.com)
- FDL Book Salon: Idiot America with Charles Pierce (firedoglake.com)
- Birthers are citizens of Idiot America (guardian.co.uk)
- Liars for Jesus (endhereditaryreligion.com)
A Q&A with Charles P. Pierce, author of Idiot America

- Image by Getty Images via Daylife
Question: What inspired, or should I say drove, you to write Idiot America?
Charles P. Pierce: The germ of the idea came as I watched the extended coverage of the death of Terri Schiavo. I wondered how so many people could ally themselves with so much foolishness despite the fact that it was doing them no perceptible good, politically or otherwise. And it looked like the national media simply could not help itself but be swept along. This started me thinking and, when I read a clip in the New York Times about the Creation Museum, I pitched an idea to Mark Warren, my editor at Esquire, that said simply, “Dinosaurs with saddles.” What we determined the theme of the eventual piece—and of the book—would be was “The Consequences Of Believing Nonsense.”
Question: You visited the Creation Museum while writing Idiot America. Describe your experience there. What was your first thought when you saw a dinosaur with a saddle on its back?
Charles P. Pierce: My first thought was that it was hilarious. My second thought was that I was the only person in the place who thought it was, which made me both angry and a little melancholy. Outside of the fact that its “science” is a god-awful parodic stew of paleontology, geology, and epistemology, all of them wholly detached from the actual intellectual method of each of them. The most disappointing thing is that the completed museum is so dreadfully grim and earnest and boring. It even makes dragon myths servant to its fringe biblical interpretations. Who wants to live in a world where dragons are boring?
Question: Is there a specific turning point where, as a country, we moved away from prizing experience to trusting the gut over intellect?
Charles P. Pierce: I don’t know if there’s one point that you can point to and say, “This is when it happened.” The conflict between intellectual expertise and reflexive emotion—often characterized as “good old common sense,” when it is neither common nor sense—has been endemic to American culture and politics since the beginning. I do think that my profession, journalism, went off the tracks when it accepted as axiomatic the notion that “Perception is reality.” No. Perception is perception and reality is reality, and if the former doesn’t conform to the latter, then it’s the journalist’s job to hammer and hammer the reality until the perception conforms to it. That’s how “intelligent design” gets treated as “science” simply because a lot of people believe in it.
Question: You delve into Ignatius Donnelly’s life story. In 1880, he published the book Atlantis: The Antediluvian World in an attempt to prove that the lost city existed. Yet, you characterize Donnelly as a lovable crank, and don’t take issue with him as you do with modern eccentrics, like Rush Limbaugh. What’s the difference between a harmless crank and a crank in Idiot America?
Charles P. Pierce: Cranks are noble because cranks are independent. Cranks do not care if their ideas succeed—they’d like them to do so—but cranks stand apart. Their value comes when, occasionally, their lonely dissents from the commonplace affect the culture, at which point either the culture moves to adopt them and their ideas come to influence the culture. The American crank is not someone with 600 radio stations spewing bilious canards to an audience of “dittoheads.” The concept of a “dittohead” is anathema to the American crank. He is a freethinker addressing an audience of them, whether that audience is made up of one person or a thousand. A charlatan is a crank who sells out.
Question: What is the most dangerous aspect of Idiot America?
Charles P. Pierce: The most dangerous aspect of Idiot America is that it encourages us to abandon our birthright to be informed citizens of a self-governing republic. America cannot function on automatic pilot, and, too often, we don’t notice that it has been until the damage has already been done.
Question: Is there a voice or leader of Idiot America?
Charles P. Pierce: The leaders of Idiot America are those people who abandoned their obligations to the above. There are lots of people making an awful lot of money selling their ideas and their wares to Idiot America. Idiot America is an act of collective will, a product of lassitude and sloth.
Question: What is the difference between stupidity and glorifying ignorance?
Charles P. Pierce: Stupidity is as stupidity does, to quote a uniquely stupid movie. It has been with us always and always will be. But we moved into an era in which stupidity was celebrated if it managed to sell itself well, if it succeeded, if it made people money. That is “glorifying ignorance.” We moved into an era in which the reflexive instincts of the Gut were celebrated at the expense of reasoned, informed opinion. To this day, we have a political party—the Republicans—who, because it embraced a “movement of Conservatism” that celebrated anti-intellectualism is now incapable of conducting itself in any other way. That has profound political and cultural consequences, and the truly foul part about it was that so many people engaged in it knowing full well they were peddling poison.
Question: While writing Idiot America, what story or incident made you the most incensed?
Charles P. Pierce: Without question, it was talking to the people at Woodside Hospice, who shared with me what it was like to be inside the whirlwind stirred up by people who used the prolonged death of Terri Schiavo as a political and social volleyball to advance their own unpopular and reckless agenda. There are people—Sean Hannity comes to mind—who, if there is a just god in heaven, should be locked in a room for 20 minutes with Annie Santa Maria, the indomitable woman who works with the patients at the hospice. Only one of them would come out, and it wouldn’t be him.
Question: With the election of President Obama, is Idiot America coming to an end? Or, will there always be a place for idiocy in America?
Charles P. Pierce: Look at the political opposition to President Obama. “Socialist!” “Fascist!” “Coming to get your guns.” Hysteria from the hucksters of Idiot America is still at high-tide. People are killing other people and specifically attributing their action to imaginary oppression stoked by radio talk-show stars and television pundits. That Glenn Beck has achieved the prominence he has makes me wonder if there is a just god in heaven.
Question: Are there any positive signs that we are moving away from Idiot America? If you could create a twelve step program to America back on track, what would be your first suggestion?
Charles P. Pierce: Remember that perception is not reality, that opinion, no matter how widely held, is not fact. An old and wise friend of mine said that the only question that any American citizen is required to answer is “Do you govern or are you governed?” It has to be answered in the former, and that answer has to be continuous. We have to get back to that.
(Photo © Brendan Doris Pierce, 2008)
From Publishers Weekly
Journalist Pierce delivers a rapier-sharp rant on how the America of Franklin and Edison, Fulton and Ford has devolved into America the Uninformed, where citizens hostile to science are exchanging fact for fiction, and faith for reason, and glutting themselves on reality TV and conspiracy theories. Pierce makes no apologies for his liberal bias, and some conservatives—notably evolution opponents and Rush Limbaugh—endure a good deal of bashing. Pierce writes that in the U.S., Fact is merely what enough people believe, and truth lies only in how fervently they believe it. He supports his thesis with references to James Madison and other founding fathers, who may have foreseen and rued the emergence of cranks who would threaten the Enlightenment-based nation they were shaping. Although the book is not likely to win any converts from the right wing Pierce so energetically decries, it is an engaging catalogue of those unscientifically verified truths that enthrall and impassion millions of Americans. (June)Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Related articles by Zemanta
- Rush and Beck on the Fairness Doctrine threat (michellemalkin.com)
- Frum unloads on talk-show wingnuts for distorting health-care debate, while Kurtz tweaks Fox hypocrisy (crooksandliars.com)
- Jonah Goldberg’s ‘Liberal Fascism’ fraud is now right-wing conventional wisdom (crooksandliars.com)
- Hate Speech: So Easy A Caveman Could Do It– More Glenn Beck Advertisers Pull Off His Show (crooksandliars.com)
- Right-Wing Fearfest: Beck says ‘free speech is under attack,’ then Limbaugh tells him Obama brings ‘totalitarianism’ (crooksandliars.com)
- Signal To Noise Ratio (tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com)
- Sue Wilson: Talk Radio Rules Blue Dog States (huffingtonpost.com)


![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=2acca8cb-37b5-44f1-9686-d4f876999868)

![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=33c922d3-70fb-47af-9361-8cf620cb8ade)

![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=1538859f-db69-48b2-9e44-fe519168ecb5)

![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=6f879ac2-d5f6-4b8a-82d6-55950dbcb778)

![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=887f6902-ee29-4204-9e99-0273e2c4ccc3)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=806871d1-8cfa-483e-a2b3-58ff64c65e31)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=e2a7928a-ea5e-4a42-b44b-cf90d6c0cc34)
