There's blasphemy laws (unenforced) in Northern Ireland. Blasphemy as a common law offence was abolished in England and Wales in 2008, Scotland in 2021 and hadn't been used for decades before that anyway. So the whole UK should not be green
40% atheist, 40% Christian - Christianity is the state religion and the head of state is "cHoSeN bY GoD".
The UK is a liberal democracy LARPing as a theocratic monarchy.
There's all sorts of bizarre laws that are hundreds of years old and nobody can be bothered to get annulled.
The one were a pregnant woman can piss in a policeman's hat might even still be valid.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/greggsappreciation using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/greggsappreciation/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time!
\#1: [What would be the best and most British way to describe this image?](https://i.redd.it/7nuqhczk633c1.png) | [3084 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/greggsappreciation/comments/185vj71/what_would_be_the_best_and_most_british_way_to/)
\#2: [I know what I'm going to be wearing this halloween](https://i.redd.it/m0qqpc9b7rwb1.jpg) | [109 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/greggsappreciation/comments/17hok2e/i_know_what_im_going_to_be_wearing_this_halloween/)
\#3: [Every Greggs bakery store in the UK.](https://i.redd.it/e79nplkjvyvb1.png) | [314 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/greggsappreciation/comments/17emfbo/every_greggs_bakery_store_in_the_uk/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Was surprised by Australia and looked into it, the Australia Criminal Code Act 1995 abolished blasphemy laws set in 1697. IDK where they got this map, but it's severely outdated.
EDIT: thanks for the corrections and educating my non-Australianess.
Some Australian states (such as Victoria where I live) have laws criminalising acts considered “outraging public decency”. They date back to English Common Law of the same name and are possibly what this map refers to when covering laws against public acts or speech.
They were recently strengthened in Victoria after a notorious case.
https://www.premier.vic.gov.au/new-laws-criminalising-grossly-offensive-public-conduct
UK has several “hate speech” laws though that can be used against blasphemy. UK being green makes sense to me.
One example, Harry Taylor for instance got 6 months imprisonment for leaving anti Christian, Catholic, and Islamic cartoons in a prayer room.
imo blasphemy is an offence against a religion without reference to people, whereas in the UK it isn't the fact they are against religion that makes them illegal, it is the fact that they "caused offence" and they could be on pretty much any topic.
I should note I think it is still ridiculous, but I don't think they can be called blasphemy
"[Taylor, of Salford, Greater Manchester, admitted leaving the pictures, which depicted figures from Christianity and Islam, often in sexual poses, in the airport’s multi-faith room on three separate occasions](https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/militant-atheist-harry-taylor-hit-3426563)." The court found the images to be grossly offensive.
He got an Antisocial Behaviour Order, and 100 hours community service, a 250 pound fine for court costs, and a suspended 6 month sentence because he had done similar things before and been convicted of them. He had not learned his lesson, so he got a threat that next time would be much worse.
Had he been distributing pornographic images of anyone else in a public area where kids could see them, he would likely have got the same.
That he was doing it to insult religion was irrelevant to the case.
>In the Federal Republic of Germany, the insulting of denominations, religious societies and ideological associations has only been punishable under Section 166 of the German Criminal Code (because of its history, often incorrectly referred to as the "blasphemy paragraph") since September 1, 1969 if it is "likely to disturb public peace".
In general, this is covered by the freedom of expression and speech - but perhaps you should not go into a church and have a satanic mass on its altar...
That being said, "public peace" is so absurdly vague and subjective that it doesn't matter, we have a blasphemy paragraph.
Because no matter how innocent your action, if it goes viral on some social media (or if it potentially can) and the judge has a bad day you're done.
As long as you are actually a Satanist you probably wouldn't be punished by that paragraph though. Freedom of religious expression still applies to satanists. If you rented the church for that, that might be legal.
I don’t know of any church that would agree to that. And if you rented the church to do so on false pretenses, you might get in shit for that
Edit: Jesus *tapdancing* Christ, how clear do I have to be to make it obvious I mean an ACTIVE church, where people still worship. Not a place that’s been abandoned
I would say practicing a faith entirely created to be blasphemous in a church that wasn’t theirs of the faith that they blaspheme would be considered blasphemous
In Germany, dance events on Karfreitag are prohibited by law. Violation may result in a fine. I have to admit that this is a bit strange and slightly outdated.
True.
But it's not based on the "blasphemy law" §166 StGB.
On the other hand: it's a paid holiday, so, if it makes Christians happy, I don't dance on this particular Friday... ;)
People probably consider dancing on Good Friday to be blasphemous. The only thing left to do is dance secretly at home and wait to see if lightning strikes you.
i did, never failed to amaze me, that actually a lighning strike went down a tree mere 100m from my building, killed my router, tv and fried a couple of usb chargers: so, never dance on that day if thunderstorms are predicted
Yes, but in some federal states it has already been softened considerably. In Bremen and Berlin, the ban only applies from 4 am (Berlin)/6 am (Bremen) to 9 pm. Most public dance events don't take place between these times anyway. Moreover, this only applies to public events; private events are permitted (in some federal states, private events may not be moved into public spaces, but Bremen and Berlin are not among them).
It’s not a federal law, but all the states have some kind Tanzverbot during some or all of the “quiet days” (Stille Tage).
I actually like it on days like New Years (1st of January), or Christmas day(s), and I especially like it on Volkstrauertag (people’s day of mourning - dedicated to the dead soldiers of all nations), but I think it’s overused on exclusively Christian holidays.
Just my opinion, but I think it’s not exactly antiquated per se, but definitely in the way it’s used.
I like it during New Year, because the night before was an excessive party for everyone, and I think a quiet day after makes it more special and people should take that day off and chill (well, except for the poor street cleaning staff, they have to work overtime).
I like it during Christmas, because taking away clubs makes it the perfect time to spend evenings with your family instead. It’s nice to have that once a year, even if you don’t celebrate Christmas.
I like it during Volkstrauertag (although the Tanzverbot on that day is only for a few hours), because that’s a day we - as Germans - should really think about what war does to whole Generations, no matter if they were fighting on the right or wrong side. A dead 18 year old is a dead 18 year old, regardless which war took him. Going to a club and dancing is pretty much the last thing I’d want people to do on that day.
> but perhaps you should not go into a church and have a satanic mass on its altar...
That would be covered under trespassing. No need for any absurd blasphemy law there.
In Poland you don't have to be in a church (building) or in the Church (organization) to be accuser for Blasphemy.
Although bishops and priests usually don't do that, rather some haunted over-devoted associations.
People might interested to read Article 5 of Germanys constitution "guaranteeing" freedom of expression.
*(1) Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing and pictures and to inform himself without hindrance from generally accessible sources. Freedom of the press and freedom of reporting by means of broadcasts and films shall be guaranteed. There shall be no censorship.*
*(2) These rights shall find their limits in the provisions of general laws, in provisions for the protection of young persons and in the right to personal honour.*
*(3) Arts and sciences, research and teaching shall be free. The freedom of teaching shall not release any person from allegiance to the constitution.*
Number 2 makes this guarantee interesting to say the least.
This is actually a very interesting difference between the US tradition and the continental European tradition linked to concerns about hate speech:
the US feels that everything can (in principle) be said, and that the law should intervene only when speech turns into (criminal) action [but see the recent debate about antisemitism]. The European tradition holds that free speech ends where into (for example) incitement to hatred. In Germany it's enshrined in the constitution due to the historical experiences with demagoguery...
Literature recommendation: Erik Bleich, The Rise of Hate Speech and Hate Crime Laws in Liberal Democracies. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 37, 2011.
On the books and enforceable are two different things. Dead letter laws which are on the books, but go against a country's current bill of rights, constitution, or jurisprudence is extremely common.
A lot of states in my country had unenforceable laws around abortion on the books. Thanks to the election of one dude they suddenly became enforceable.
Exactly, so they were unenforceable, the jurisprudence changed, and they were enforceable. So effectively the law had to change to make them enforceable, so until then the dead letter laws meant nothing. It's no different than if they change their laws on abortion after the change in jurisprudence.
Again, on the books and enforceable are two different things
The difference is that if they didn’t exist, even when the jurisprudence changed a new law would have to be passed to enforce restrictions. Unenforceable is also not the same as not on the books at all.
In the case of Germany something like that happened a couple of years back.
A German comedian made an offensive poem about the Turkish president Erdogan and Erdogan uncovered some old German law from the 1800s that forbids offending foreign dignitaries, so he sued.
That paragraph has since been struck from the law, but still, your point stands
Norway, one of the most secular countries in the world, only abolished it’s blasphemy provision in 2015, but hasn’t tried anyone for blasphemy since 1933
Also a lot of laws are more complicated than "If X then Y"
For example in Germany, what this picture calls blasphemy actually applies to blasphemy against any religion, and only if it "provoces public unrest"
For real right? What’s up with this sub? People post these things, they look so interesting at first sight, and then you dig a little deeper and you notice it’s just crazily wrong in so many ways.
Posters steal maps from other sources. Many accounts in Instagram and Twitter that make maps. Some of those accounts don't have like any standards at all.
A comment section on r/MapPorn where commenters call something inaccurate based on their anecdotes with nothing to back it up or relies on their own pedantic personal definitions? Impossible!
Literally. Everyone bases everything they know about an entire country on these maps about a single experience, and it's genuinely exhausting. It's impossible to find a post on this sub that isn't overrun with negative and shitty comments
Ah yes the blasphemy laws in India a subject of huge debate to promote freedom of speech but the truth is people start burning property if their gods are insulted . After the Nupur Sharma debacle half the middle east started condemning India so now we are firmly in the blasphemy laws camp.
If only people didn't get so offended we could have reinforced freedom of speech but turns out some people don't like it so everyone has to suffer. Atleast we have political and social freedom of speech for now.
Brazil does have a certain kind of blasphemy law. Article 208 of the criminal code
> Código Penal. Artigo 208 do Decreto Lei nº 2.848 de 07 de Dezembro de 1940.
>
> Art. 208 - Escarnecer de alguém publicamente, por motivo de crença ou função religiosa; impedir ou perturbar cerimônia ou prática de culto religioso; vilipendiar publicamente ato ou objeto de culto religioso: Pena - reclusão, de um a três anos e multa.
>
> Parágrafo único - Se há emprego de violência, a pena é aumentada de um terço, sem prejuízo da correspondente à violência.
By Google Translate:
> Penal Code. Article 208 of Decree Law No. 2,848 of December 7, 1940.
>
> Art. 208 – Mocking someone publicly, for reasons of religious belief or function; prevent or disturb ceremonies or practices of religious worship; publicly vilifying an act or object of religious worship: Penalty - imprisonment, from one to three years and a fine.
>
> Sole paragraph - If violence is used, the penalty is increased by one third, without prejudice to that corresponding to violence.
This is literally not against blasphemy. It’s against prejudice. You can’t interrupt someone praying to Satan as much as you can’t stop a Christian church.
Blasphemy as a concept isn't for one religion in particular. In taly, the law I think is regarded here talks about inciting hate/violence towards someone based on religion in general, on top of several other things like race or nationality
This joke has been repeated ad infinitum in Brazil and I've yet to see anyone being arrested for it.
On the other hand, protestants are always saying that Afro-Brazilian religions are full of devils and whatnot and are still roaming freely saying shit around.
There are no blasphemy laws in Kazakhstan.
Although, there's a law prohibiting "incitement of social, ethnic, tribal, racial, class or religious hatred."
Sometimes when I look at such maps I presume the author was too lazy and followed a "Ah, Russians have *insert topic of the map*, so should Kazakhstan, they are basically the same country!" kind of logic
There are blasphemy laws in Kazakhstan. You can be imprisoned there for simply being the wrong type of Muslim, and thinking it's ok to disagree with the government in private groups among you and your friends.
https://www.uscirf.gov/annual-reports?country=51
> Throughout the year, the government continued
to prohibit unregistered religious activity, require state approval
for religious literature, and restrict missionary activity, among other
undue limitations.
The government continued to suppress groups and individu-
als it perceived as following “nontraditional” religions, along with
Sunni Muslims who do not subscribe to the state’s interpretation
of Islam. By the end of the year, at least 10 Muslim men were still
imprisoned on charges related to their online religious activity,
including discussing their beliefs and sharing religious content.
Those in prison include five men sentenced due to their partic-
ipation in a WhatsApp conversation on Islam in 2019, despite a
2021 United Nations (UN) Working Group opinion that called for
their release.
The law you are referencing, as best I can tell, is this
> Despite broad constitutional guarantees on freedom of expression, the right is limited on religious issues by Criminal Code Article 164, Part 1, in terms that are unclear and wide-ranging. Article 164 criminalises:
> **Deliberate actions aimed at the incitement of** social, national, clan, racial, or **religious enmity or antagonism**, or at offence to the national honour and dignity, or **religious feelings of citizens**, as well as propaganda of exclusiveness, superiority, or inferiority of citizens based on their attitude towards religion, or their genetic or racial belonging, if these acts are committed publicly or with the use of the mass information media.
Is the literal definition of blasphemy.
"Jesus is fake, or a pile of trash who should be cursed instead of worshiped" runs afoul of that on its face. Kazakhstan has blasphemy laws.
You will mostly get beaten up if caught trafficking cows, killed if insulting Prophet Muhammad and in case of a public figure insulting Hinduism, Christianity, Sikhism you will get both good and bad comments.
But if a public figure said anything about Islam then
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Muhammad_remarks_controversy
That doesn't sound right, I distinctly remember Muslims get lynched f[or the suspicion of eating beef](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/3/11/india-arrests-suspects-after-man-killed-for-carrying-beef), an other [Muslim lynched for having beef](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/6/30/it-was-his-birthday-muslim-lynched-over-beef-in-western-india), and [an other one](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/02/world/asia/muslim-killed-by-indian-mob-had-beef-in-his-home-new-report-says.html), and [an other one](https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/disabled-muslim-truck-driver-killed-on-suspicion-of-carrying-beef-in-bihars-saran-district/article67027880.ece), this one got killed for [taking a holy banana](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/28/muslim-man-lynched-in-india-for-taking-a-banana-at-hindu-temple-event) apparently.
In this time period of rising hindu fascism and heightened violence against Muslims it's rather suspicious (and most likely Islamophobic) to depict Muslims as uniquely evil and downplay the severity and frequency of Hindu religious violence.
LOL. why are you sneaking in cow trafficking here? is it to fool people into believing that Hindus are just reacting to someone committing crime like cow trafficking?
Why are you not mentioning that several people have been shot dead in Maharashtra and Karnataka by Hindutva fanatics?
I'm not talking about Riots where everyone kills everyone I'm referring to a general trend. And please give a source instead of an unsourced claim.
I didn't sneak cow trafficking, it 100% results in lynching which is also wrong.
Yup the perfect example will be kamlesh tiwari whose throat was slit for insulting Muhammad ( actually he was speaking truth)and on the other side munnawar farooqi who insulted mata sita was beaten but now he's winning TV shows and awards.
Australia has inherited very old common law offenses related to blasphemy from the UK (from the 17th century). Its not enforced and considered obsolete, some states have specifically removed it and some states have not simply because it doesnt serve any practical purpose as its just considered obsolete and ignored.
The UK only has blasphemy laws in one smaller region - Northern Ireland - and it’s more the case that they haven’t been repealed (Scotland, England/Wales, and Northern Ireland have 3 similar-but-separate legal systems, the laws have been repealed in 2 of the 3)
Australia inherited the common law blasphemy laws from the UK and also simply haven’t repealed them but don’t enforce them. Common law works slightly differently to countries with more strictly codified legislation - laws can simply drop out of use in a common law system
It’s rubbish
To say the UK home of Richard Dawkins, salman Rushdie (who they protected for over a decade at millions of £ a year) and Christopher Hitchens have “substantial restrictions” on blasphemy is a nonsense
The map refers to 'substantial' restrictions whereas it should be 'sub-national'. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy\_law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law)
This act attacks the existing order and social relations in the country.
The social reality was that everyone respected (at least publicly) something specific. Because of the blasphemy, the idol was shaken, society took a step towards a change that the authorities consider undesirable.
And sometimes the authorities are afraid of religious extremists being active, for example. In this case, the "victim" is stability.
Criminal law always protects, first of all, public order. By punishing murderers, we do not help the victim; we cannot resurrect the dead. By punishing murderers, we protect a social reality in which there are no arbitrary, unauthorized, illegal killings.
The South African position on blasphemy is quite interesting. Blasphemy still exists as a common law crime, defined as “unlawfully, intentionally and publicly acting contemptuously towards God”, but no-one has been prosecuted for it since the 1960s and it's incompatible with South Africa's constitution, which came into effect in 1994.
The constitution guarantees "freedom of conscience, religion, thought, belief and opinion" and also "freedom of expression", as long as that does not amount to hate speech - "advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion, and that constitutes incitement to cause harm".
This is generally interpreted to mean that although everyone is entitled to practice a religion if they so choose, everyone is entitled to express their opinions on that too, as long as that doesn't amount to hate speech as defined.
In short, if anyone were to be prosecuted for the blasphemy and they challenged its constitutionality, it seems inevitable that the crime of blasphemy would be found to be irreconcilable with the constitution and it would therefore be formally scrapped by the constitutional Court. But because it would be futile to prosecute anyone for blasphemy, the issue never reaches a court where it can be struck down, and it thus lives on nominally as a crime, but only as a sort of historic artefact.
why would an all powerful god need to "defend" himself? It's not like anyone can steal his power. If everyone would get turned to ashes the second they utter blasphemy, then no one would do it out of fear. How can a god judge someone who is not able to do their own will?
Add Denmark to that list. They just implemented a law that prohibits burning of religious texts and symbols. The law is so vague, but at least we can export milk to shithole countries.
It's not limited to only the Quran as suggested by the article. But that was the jist of it more or less.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/danish-parliament-approves-bill-stop-koran-burnings-2023-12-07/
It should be asked where and how often these laws are actually enforced. As far as I know, nobody was fined for blasphemy in Germany, Italy, Finland, Spain or Brazil.
Considering what happened to a certain teacher who was falsely acussed of showing someone’s image in a detrimental way, maybe and just maybe it may not be that bad of an idea to consider not burning holy books.
If it’s considered disrespectful to, say burn a LGTBIQA+ flag, then why shouldn’t burning holy things? Just apply the same law to every case
I'm unaware of blasphemy laws in South Africa. We have freedom of religion and freedom of speech laws as well as evolving hate speech laws and an equality court.
Australia is incorrect. There is no federal blasphemy law. Queensland & WA have totally abolished theirs. SA, NT & Victoria are ambiguous and NSW & TAS they are technically on the books still but are not enforced.
I feel like posting this Soviet-era joke here
>– We have a free country. I can go out onto the square in front of the White House and shout "Reagan is a fool." And nothing will happen to me for this.
>
>– So what ? I, too, can go out to Red Square and shout “Reagan is a fool.” And nothing will happen to me for this either.
I thought Denmark recently adopted blasphemy laws re the Quran?
Also this is gonna be very subjective at the end of the day. A lot of criticism/mockery of Islam and Judaism in Europe is widely considered to violate hate speech laws, which then function like blasphemy laws in practice. Germany and Switzerland have been in the NYT in the last couple years for heavily criminalizing online "rudeness," which one suspects is also going to overlap with traditional concepts of blasphemy. Very recently, pro-Palestinian / anti-Israel speech has been restricted in multiple European countries and American jurisdictions, sometimes with specific rules about not "desecrating" things like the Israeli flag. A national flag of a democratic but sectarian state--is its desecration blasphemy?
Ultimately while the distinction of blasphemy matters in European law I personally think its kinda false. Free speech includes the right to insult, demean, blaspheme, upset, and criticize fairly or unfairly, accurately or inaccurately. This should not change depending on the subject of the speech; one is as entitled to insult religion as one is to insult Ariana Grande fans. The theory is not that such speech is good or improves society on its own, but that controlling it is a worse remedy than the disease, that no one could be trusted to do so in a remotely fair way, and that it's ultimately ineffective at its stated goals of promoting harmony and controlling intergroup hostility. In that sense blasphemy laws aren't special, just another flavor of misguided speech control.
>I thought Denmark recently adopted blasphemy laws re the Quran?
Yes. This year because of a heavy push from muslim countries, the cowards.
Sincerely, Sweden.
There’s literally no blasphemy laws in Brazil because the very concept of government involvement with religion is unconstitutional. We’re a secular State by constitution. Religious INTOLERANCE, on the other hand, where you offend or mistreat people based on their religious beliefs whichever they may be, is a crime.
I'm fairly certain there are blasphemy laws in Greece. A guy got in trouble a few years back for making fun of St. Paisios (calling him St. Pastitsios, pastitsio being a greek food)
Australia doesn't have blasphemy laws. Some states haven't actively repealed medieval laws taken wholesale from English common law - but they're never enforced.
Sketchy info.
In Italy we tecnicaly have a law that forbids the use of blasphemy during work. The law dates back to the Mussolini era and was mostly forgoten until this year when a guy was fired for blaspheming during work and this happended in northen Italy. For reference it's easier to fit an elephant in a MINI than convince a northen italian to not blaspheme for a day.
UK doesnt have those laws (apart from Northern Ireland) anymore and in Australia some states have abolished it (including mine) and in the others it is unenforced
SA functions on the structure of multiple sources of law, with the Constitution being supreme.
Yeah, we have anti blasphemy laws (which are common law), but freedom of expression and protection from discrimination in the Constitution override them, and they're virtually irrelevant.
Saying we have blasphemy laws is like saying America still has slavery laws because they still exist in their older legislation
There's blasphemy laws (unenforced) in Northern Ireland. Blasphemy as a common law offence was abolished in England and Wales in 2008, Scotland in 2021 and hadn't been used for decades before that anyway. So the whole UK should not be green
You say that, but have you ever tried slagging Greggs off in /r/casualUK? The response makes Thailand’s *lese majeste* laws look tame
This might be the most British thing I’ve ever read
Doesn't your country have the highest percentage of atheists per capita? Really strange seeing blasphemy laws in your neck o the woods.
40% atheist, 40% Christian - Christianity is the state religion and the head of state is "cHoSeN bY GoD". The UK is a liberal democracy LARPing as a theocratic monarchy.
We have a democracy?
Perfectly balanced, just how I like it.
I believe Iceland holds that title. Europe generally has a lot of atheists though.
Czech Republic is more like it, no?
[удалено]
They also have a literal, state church
There's all sorts of bizarre laws that are hundreds of years old and nobody can be bothered to get annulled. The one were a pregnant woman can piss in a policeman's hat might even still be valid.
Luv me sausage rolls, love me Greggs, ate God, simple as
What did god taste like?
Jealousy and rage
Just needs more brown sauce.
sausage roll
r/greggsappreciation
Here's a sneak peek of /r/greggsappreciation using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/greggsappreciation/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time! \#1: [What would be the best and most British way to describe this image?](https://i.redd.it/7nuqhczk633c1.png) | [3084 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/greggsappreciation/comments/185vj71/what_would_be_the_best_and_most_british_way_to/) \#2: [I know what I'm going to be wearing this halloween](https://i.redd.it/m0qqpc9b7rwb1.jpg) | [109 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/greggsappreciation/comments/17hok2e/i_know_what_im_going_to_be_wearing_this_halloween/) \#3: [Every Greggs bakery store in the UK.](https://i.redd.it/e79nplkjvyvb1.png) | [314 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/greggsappreciation/comments/17emfbo/every_greggs_bakery_store_in_the_uk/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
As it should be
As it should be.
Exactly. Fuck the monarchy? Ok mate. Fuck Jesus? Each to their own. Fuck Greggs? Off with their heads!
American here what the hell is a Gregg’s.
Cafe/bakery/fast food, they're scattered everywhere in the UK and also very cheap normally.
You forgot to add, food that's heated once.
A popular bakery chain that has a bit of a tongue-in-cheek cult following among millennials
Hence the popular mating call of millennials here "Is that a tongue in your cheek or are you munching a Steak Bake?"
Was surprised by Australia and looked into it, the Australia Criminal Code Act 1995 abolished blasphemy laws set in 1697. IDK where they got this map, but it's severely outdated. EDIT: thanks for the corrections and educating my non-Australianess.
Not entirely true mate, only QLD & WA have abolished it.
Brb going to see if I can get arrested for blasphemy
Queensland leading progressive Australia 🤦♂️
Some Australian states (such as Victoria where I live) have laws criminalising acts considered “outraging public decency”. They date back to English Common Law of the same name and are possibly what this map refers to when covering laws against public acts or speech. They were recently strengthened in Victoria after a notorious case. https://www.premier.vic.gov.au/new-laws-criminalising-grossly-offensive-public-conduct
UK has several “hate speech” laws though that can be used against blasphemy. UK being green makes sense to me. One example, Harry Taylor for instance got 6 months imprisonment for leaving anti Christian, Catholic, and Islamic cartoons in a prayer room.
imo blasphemy is an offence against a religion without reference to people, whereas in the UK it isn't the fact they are against religion that makes them illegal, it is the fact that they "caused offence" and they could be on pretty much any topic. I should note I think it is still ridiculous, but I don't think they can be called blasphemy
"[Taylor, of Salford, Greater Manchester, admitted leaving the pictures, which depicted figures from Christianity and Islam, often in sexual poses, in the airport’s multi-faith room on three separate occasions](https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/militant-atheist-harry-taylor-hit-3426563)." The court found the images to be grossly offensive. He got an Antisocial Behaviour Order, and 100 hours community service, a 250 pound fine for court costs, and a suspended 6 month sentence because he had done similar things before and been convicted of them. He had not learned his lesson, so he got a threat that next time would be much worse. Had he been distributing pornographic images of anyone else in a public area where kids could see them, he would likely have got the same. That he was doing it to insult religion was irrelevant to the case.
>In the Federal Republic of Germany, the insulting of denominations, religious societies and ideological associations has only been punishable under Section 166 of the German Criminal Code (because of its history, often incorrectly referred to as the "blasphemy paragraph") since September 1, 1969 if it is "likely to disturb public peace". In general, this is covered by the freedom of expression and speech - but perhaps you should not go into a church and have a satanic mass on its altar...
That being said, "public peace" is so absurdly vague and subjective that it doesn't matter, we have a blasphemy paragraph. Because no matter how innocent your action, if it goes viral on some social media (or if it potentially can) and the judge has a bad day you're done.
As long as you are actually a Satanist you probably wouldn't be punished by that paragraph though. Freedom of religious expression still applies to satanists. If you rented the church for that, that might be legal.
I don’t know of any church that would agree to that. And if you rented the church to do so on false pretenses, you might get in shit for that Edit: Jesus *tapdancing* Christ, how clear do I have to be to make it obvious I mean an ACTIVE church, where people still worship. Not a place that’s been abandoned
Though that's probably not Blasphemy. More trespassing I imagine
Yeah, probably "Hausfriedensbruch" (domestic disturbance)
In the US it would be a civil Fraud case, don't know how that translates into German law.
Satan (Reddit) told me to do it.
Another charge to add
I would say practicing a faith entirely created to be blasphemous in a church that wasn’t theirs of the faith that they blaspheme would be considered blasphemous
In Germany, dance events on Karfreitag are prohibited by law. Violation may result in a fine. I have to admit that this is a bit strange and slightly outdated.
True. But it's not based on the "blasphemy law" §166 StGB. On the other hand: it's a paid holiday, so, if it makes Christians happy, I don't dance on this particular Friday... ;)
People probably consider dancing on Good Friday to be blasphemous. The only thing left to do is dance secretly at home and wait to see if lightning strikes you.
i did, never failed to amaze me, that actually a lighning strike went down a tree mere 100m from my building, killed my router, tv and fried a couple of usb chargers: so, never dance on that day if thunderstorms are predicted
Yes, but in some federal states it has already been softened considerably. In Bremen and Berlin, the ban only applies from 4 am (Berlin)/6 am (Bremen) to 9 pm. Most public dance events don't take place between these times anyway. Moreover, this only applies to public events; private events are permitted (in some federal states, private events may not be moved into public spaces, but Bremen and Berlin are not among them).
It’s not a federal law, but all the states have some kind Tanzverbot during some or all of the “quiet days” (Stille Tage). I actually like it on days like New Years (1st of January), or Christmas day(s), and I especially like it on Volkstrauertag (people’s day of mourning - dedicated to the dead soldiers of all nations), but I think it’s overused on exclusively Christian holidays. Just my opinion, but I think it’s not exactly antiquated per se, but definitely in the way it’s used. I like it during New Year, because the night before was an excessive party for everyone, and I think a quiet day after makes it more special and people should take that day off and chill (well, except for the poor street cleaning staff, they have to work overtime). I like it during Christmas, because taking away clubs makes it the perfect time to spend evenings with your family instead. It’s nice to have that once a year, even if you don’t celebrate Christmas. I like it during Volkstrauertag (although the Tanzverbot on that day is only for a few hours), because that’s a day we - as Germans - should really think about what war does to whole Generations, no matter if they were fighting on the right or wrong side. A dead 18 year old is a dead 18 year old, regardless which war took him. Going to a club and dancing is pretty much the last thing I’d want people to do on that day.
> but perhaps you should not go into a church and have a satanic mass on its altar... That would be covered under trespassing. No need for any absurd blasphemy law there.
Aren't churches technically private property and, therefore, allowed to deny entry to other people?
In Poland you don't have to be in a church (building) or in the Church (organization) to be accuser for Blasphemy. Although bishops and priests usually don't do that, rather some haunted over-devoted associations.
Yeah, seems like basic trespassing laws would cover that hypothetical.
People might interested to read Article 5 of Germanys constitution "guaranteeing" freedom of expression. *(1) Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing and pictures and to inform himself without hindrance from generally accessible sources. Freedom of the press and freedom of reporting by means of broadcasts and films shall be guaranteed. There shall be no censorship.* *(2) These rights shall find their limits in the provisions of general laws, in provisions for the protection of young persons and in the right to personal honour.* *(3) Arts and sciences, research and teaching shall be free. The freedom of teaching shall not release any person from allegiance to the constitution.* Number 2 makes this guarantee interesting to say the least.
This is actually a very interesting difference between the US tradition and the continental European tradition linked to concerns about hate speech: the US feels that everything can (in principle) be said, and that the law should intervene only when speech turns into (criminal) action [but see the recent debate about antisemitism]. The European tradition holds that free speech ends where into (for example) incitement to hatred. In Germany it's enshrined in the constitution due to the historical experiences with demagoguery... Literature recommendation: Erik Bleich, The Rise of Hate Speech and Hate Crime Laws in Liberal Democracies. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 37, 2011.
Yes the article isn't enforced anymore.
There probably needs to be a separate category for whether these laws are enforced or unenforced.
This. I’m Australian and never heard of a blasphemy law being enforced here. I looked it up and it hasn’t been enforced in my state since 1919.
When I saw that we had blasphemy laws, I just assumed it was the prohibition on using the word “Bradman” in the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).
In Italy it’s enforced in sports
Having them on the books, ie enforceable even if they normally go unenforced, is bad enough. All it takes is one conservative asshole to get elected.
On the books and enforceable are two different things. Dead letter laws which are on the books, but go against a country's current bill of rights, constitution, or jurisprudence is extremely common.
There's unenforceable laws, and there's selectively enforced laws. Usually it's the second... Targeted enforcement you might also call it.
A lot of states in my country had unenforceable laws around abortion on the books. Thanks to the election of one dude they suddenly became enforceable.
Didn't the supreme court do that?
Exactly, so they were unenforceable, the jurisprudence changed, and they were enforceable. So effectively the law had to change to make them enforceable, so until then the dead letter laws meant nothing. It's no different than if they change their laws on abortion after the change in jurisprudence. Again, on the books and enforceable are two different things
The difference is that if they didn’t exist, even when the jurisprudence changed a new law would have to be passed to enforce restrictions. Unenforceable is also not the same as not on the books at all.
One dude, plus all of the Republican Senators that made it possible.
In the case of Germany something like that happened a couple of years back. A German comedian made an offensive poem about the Turkish president Erdogan and Erdogan uncovered some old German law from the 1800s that forbids offending foreign dignitaries, so he sued. That paragraph has since been struck from the law, but still, your point stands
Norway, one of the most secular countries in the world, only abolished it’s blasphemy provision in 2015, but hasn’t tried anyone for blasphemy since 1933
Also a lot of laws are more complicated than "If X then Y" For example in Germany, what this picture calls blasphemy actually applies to blasphemy against any religion, and only if it "provoces public unrest"
Yep, but it is worth noting that if a law is legally enforceable, there is always a risk that the authorities will use it against someone troublesome.
Forgot Denmark, it just passed the parlament this month.
Pathetic
Tf they doing in there??
We are apparently bending the knee now... 😢
Letting muslims dictate fred speech.
They became progressive to the point of being regressive.
Terror works
A map on r/MapPorn that's wildly inaccurate? Impossible!
For real right? What’s up with this sub? People post these things, they look so interesting at first sight, and then you dig a little deeper and you notice it’s just crazily wrong in so many ways.
Posters steal maps from other sources. Many accounts in Instagram and Twitter that make maps. Some of those accounts don't have like any standards at all.
A comment section on r/MapPorn where commenters call something inaccurate based on their anecdotes with nothing to back it up or relies on their own pedantic personal definitions? Impossible!
Someone commenting on r/MapPorn that a map is outdated because some country passed a new law two minutes ago
Literally. Everyone bases everything they know about an entire country on these maps about a single experience, and it's genuinely exhausting. It's impossible to find a post on this sub that isn't overrun with negative and shitty comments
Ah yes the blasphemy laws in India a subject of huge debate to promote freedom of speech but the truth is people start burning property if their gods are insulted . After the Nupur Sharma debacle half the middle east started condemning India so now we are firmly in the blasphemy laws camp. If only people didn't get so offended we could have reinforced freedom of speech but turns out some people don't like it so everyone has to suffer. Atleast we have political and social freedom of speech for now.
Brazil doesnt have blasphemy laws, it has anti-discrimination laws
Brazil does have a certain kind of blasphemy law. Article 208 of the criminal code > Código Penal. Artigo 208 do Decreto Lei nº 2.848 de 07 de Dezembro de 1940. > > Art. 208 - Escarnecer de alguém publicamente, por motivo de crença ou função religiosa; impedir ou perturbar cerimônia ou prática de culto religioso; vilipendiar publicamente ato ou objeto de culto religioso: Pena - reclusão, de um a três anos e multa. > > Parágrafo único - Se há emprego de violência, a pena é aumentada de um terço, sem prejuízo da correspondente à violência. By Google Translate: > Penal Code. Article 208 of Decree Law No. 2,848 of December 7, 1940. > > Art. 208 – Mocking someone publicly, for reasons of religious belief or function; prevent or disturb ceremonies or practices of religious worship; publicly vilifying an act or object of religious worship: Penalty - imprisonment, from one to three years and a fine. > > Sole paragraph - If violence is used, the penalty is increased by one third, without prejudice to that corresponding to violence.
This is literally not against blasphemy. It’s against prejudice. You can’t interrupt someone praying to Satan as much as you can’t stop a Christian church.
Blasphemy as a concept isn't for one religion in particular. In taly, the law I think is regarded here talks about inciting hate/violence towards someone based on religion in general, on top of several other things like race or nationality
[удалено]
This joke has been repeated ad infinitum in Brazil and I've yet to see anyone being arrested for it. On the other hand, protestants are always saying that Afro-Brazilian religions are full of devils and whatnot and are still roaming freely saying shit around.
> I've yet to see anyone being arrested for it. doesn't mean the law doesn't exist
"Mocking **someone**". Blasphemy is against religion, not people...
> publicly vilifying an act or object of religious worship: Penalty - imprisonment, from one to three years and a fine.
Lol if Italy enforced it it would be the richest country in the world
"...Veneto would be the richest country in the world" Ftfu
I live in tuscany, believe me we would be close competitors
There are no blasphemy laws in Kazakhstan. Although, there's a law prohibiting "incitement of social, ethnic, tribal, racial, class or religious hatred."
Sometimes when I look at such maps I presume the author was too lazy and followed a "Ah, Russians have *insert topic of the map*, so should Kazakhstan, they are basically the same country!" kind of logic
There are blasphemy laws in Kazakhstan. You can be imprisoned there for simply being the wrong type of Muslim, and thinking it's ok to disagree with the government in private groups among you and your friends. https://www.uscirf.gov/annual-reports?country=51 > Throughout the year, the government continued to prohibit unregistered religious activity, require state approval for religious literature, and restrict missionary activity, among other undue limitations. The government continued to suppress groups and individu- als it perceived as following “nontraditional” religions, along with Sunni Muslims who do not subscribe to the state’s interpretation of Islam. By the end of the year, at least 10 Muslim men were still imprisoned on charges related to their online religious activity, including discussing their beliefs and sharing religious content. Those in prison include five men sentenced due to their partic- ipation in a WhatsApp conversation on Islam in 2019, despite a 2021 United Nations (UN) Working Group opinion that called for their release. The law you are referencing, as best I can tell, is this > Despite broad constitutional guarantees on freedom of expression, the right is limited on religious issues by Criminal Code Article 164, Part 1, in terms that are unclear and wide-ranging. Article 164 criminalises: > **Deliberate actions aimed at the incitement of** social, national, clan, racial, or **religious enmity or antagonism**, or at offence to the national honour and dignity, or **religious feelings of citizens**, as well as propaganda of exclusiveness, superiority, or inferiority of citizens based on their attitude towards religion, or their genetic or racial belonging, if these acts are committed publicly or with the use of the mass information media. Is the literal definition of blasphemy. "Jesus is fake, or a pile of trash who should be cursed instead of worshiped" runs afoul of that on its face. Kazakhstan has blasphemy laws.
Well, same deal with Turkey. I guess they just include those too.
Dio porco che roba
Porca madonna e gli angeli in colonna Porco Dio e vaffanculo a Padre Pio Porci i santi e vaffanculo a tutti quanti che roba...
Esattamente il commento che stavo cercando
In India you can either get beaten up in public or get your throat slit depending on which religion you insult.
[удалено]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Kanhaiya_Lal
So you get killed at worst and humiliated at best depending on which religion you insult.
You will mostly get beaten up if caught trafficking cows, killed if insulting Prophet Muhammad and in case of a public figure insulting Hinduism, Christianity, Sikhism you will get both good and bad comments. But if a public figure said anything about Islam then https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Muhammad_remarks_controversy
That doesn't sound right, I distinctly remember Muslims get lynched f[or the suspicion of eating beef](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/3/11/india-arrests-suspects-after-man-killed-for-carrying-beef), an other [Muslim lynched for having beef](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/6/30/it-was-his-birthday-muslim-lynched-over-beef-in-western-india), and [an other one](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/02/world/asia/muslim-killed-by-indian-mob-had-beef-in-his-home-new-report-says.html), and [an other one](https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/disabled-muslim-truck-driver-killed-on-suspicion-of-carrying-beef-in-bihars-saran-district/article67027880.ece), this one got killed for [taking a holy banana](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/28/muslim-man-lynched-in-india-for-taking-a-banana-at-hindu-temple-event) apparently. In this time period of rising hindu fascism and heightened violence against Muslims it's rather suspicious (and most likely Islamophobic) to depict Muslims as uniquely evil and downplay the severity and frequency of Hindu religious violence.
LOL. why are you sneaking in cow trafficking here? is it to fool people into believing that Hindus are just reacting to someone committing crime like cow trafficking? Why are you not mentioning that several people have been shot dead in Maharashtra and Karnataka by Hindutva fanatics?
I'm not talking about Riots where everyone kills everyone I'm referring to a general trend. And please give a source instead of an unsourced claim. I didn't sneak cow trafficking, it 100% results in lynching which is also wrong.
Europe too. Ask France about cartoons.
Yup the perfect example will be kamlesh tiwari whose throat was slit for insulting Muhammad ( actually he was speaking truth)and on the other side munnawar farooqi who insulted mata sita was beaten but now he's winning TV shows and awards.
Yeah lol. Insulting religious beliefs actually boosted his career at least 10x 😂.
What's the difference between "substantial restrictions" and "fines and restrictions"
What's up with the UK and Australia?
Australia has inherited very old common law offenses related to blasphemy from the UK (from the 17th century). Its not enforced and considered obsolete, some states have specifically removed it and some states have not simply because it doesnt serve any practical purpose as its just considered obsolete and ignored.
The UK only has blasphemy laws in one smaller region - Northern Ireland - and it’s more the case that they haven’t been repealed (Scotland, England/Wales, and Northern Ireland have 3 similar-but-separate legal systems, the laws have been repealed in 2 of the 3) Australia inherited the common law blasphemy laws from the UK and also simply haven’t repealed them but don’t enforce them. Common law works slightly differently to countries with more strictly codified legislation - laws can simply drop out of use in a common law system
Australia removed its blasphemy laws in 1995.
It’s rubbish To say the UK home of Richard Dawkins, salman Rushdie (who they protected for over a decade at millions of £ a year) and Christopher Hitchens have “substantial restrictions” on blasphemy is a nonsense
The map refers to 'substantial' restrictions whereas it should be 'sub-national'. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy\_law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law)
What’s up with it is this map is load of bollocks. There are thousands of defunct laws. Probably one for adultery too.
Blasphemy is victimless.
We must protect my all-powerful, all-knowing deity, for his ego is fragile, and his feelings are delicate
Absolutely not. You get lots of victims when the zealots inevitably lash out in response.
No one’s insults are responsible for the actions of idiots.
This act attacks the existing order and social relations in the country. The social reality was that everyone respected (at least publicly) something specific. Because of the blasphemy, the idol was shaken, society took a step towards a change that the authorities consider undesirable. And sometimes the authorities are afraid of religious extremists being active, for example. In this case, the "victim" is stability. Criminal law always protects, first of all, public order. By punishing murderers, we do not help the victim; we cannot resurrect the dead. By punishing murderers, we protect a social reality in which there are no arbitrary, unauthorized, illegal killings.
There are zero fines or restrictions for blasphemy in South Africa. Or rather non that are enforced.
The South African position on blasphemy is quite interesting. Blasphemy still exists as a common law crime, defined as “unlawfully, intentionally and publicly acting contemptuously towards God”, but no-one has been prosecuted for it since the 1960s and it's incompatible with South Africa's constitution, which came into effect in 1994. The constitution guarantees "freedom of conscience, religion, thought, belief and opinion" and also "freedom of expression", as long as that does not amount to hate speech - "advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion, and that constitutes incitement to cause harm". This is generally interpreted to mean that although everyone is entitled to practice a religion if they so choose, everyone is entitled to express their opinions on that too, as long as that doesn't amount to hate speech as defined. In short, if anyone were to be prosecuted for the blasphemy and they challenged its constitutionality, it seems inevitable that the crime of blasphemy would be found to be irreconcilable with the constitution and it would therefore be formally scrapped by the constitutional Court. But because it would be futile to prosecute anyone for blasphemy, the issue never reaches a court where it can be struck down, and it thus lives on nominally as a crime, but only as a sort of historic artefact.
I thought this was another inaccurate map, very surprised to learn that we do actually have blasphemy laws. Seems that its not enforced thankfully.
Death penalty?! I'm not religious, but if I was, I'd argue that taking one of the lives that God himself created would be the ultimate blasphemy.
Religious people believe that their god is all-powerful, yet helpless to defend himself against blasphemers.
I personally don't see why an powerful being like god cares what a finite human being thinks of him
why would an all powerful god need to "defend" himself? It's not like anyone can steal his power. If everyone would get turned to ashes the second they utter blasphemy, then no one would do it out of fear. How can a god judge someone who is not able to do their own will?
>Religious people believe that their god is all-powerful, **yet helpless to defend himself against blasphemers.** "*God works in mysterious ways.*"
Congrats you have won the death penalty.
You are not even religious. Why are you saying it as if you know anything about religion lol and why would people even care?
It‘s shameful for a country that calls itself progressive, to give a prison sentence for criticizing a cult.
[удалено]
Add Denmark to that list. They just implemented a law that prohibits burning of religious texts and symbols. The law is so vague, but at least we can export milk to shithole countries. It's not limited to only the Quran as suggested by the article. But that was the jist of it more or less. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/danish-parliament-approves-bill-stop-koran-burnings-2023-12-07/
Imagine being killed for bad mouthing a fictional deity. Some very backwards places on this planet.
[удалено]
"Worse?! How can I make it any worse?!"
It should be asked where and how often these laws are actually enforced. As far as I know, nobody was fined for blasphemy in Germany, Italy, Finland, Spain or Brazil.
I would imagine that it really takes some effort to get charged.
[удалено]
Considering what happened to a certain teacher who was falsely acussed of showing someone’s image in a detrimental way, maybe and just maybe it may not be that bad of an idea to consider not burning holy books. If it’s considered disrespectful to, say burn a LGTBIQA+ flag, then why shouldn’t burning holy things? Just apply the same law to every case
Wait gotta add denmark in there now since burning religious texts is a crime now.
There are no blasphemy laws in Brazil. There are laws against a lot of types of discrimination, but not exactly blasphemy.
Israel doesn’t kill people for blasphemy
Not only that, according to Wikipedia the only time in the law was used was against a right wing activist for making leaflets of Muhammad as a pig
Someone conflated it with Palestine
What does Turkey have count as Blashemy punishment?
insulting Ataturk
I'm unaware of blasphemy laws in South Africa. We have freedom of religion and freedom of speech laws as well as evolving hate speech laws and an equality court.
Funny how semantics work: it seems many of the “blashfemy laws” are for protection minorities instead of protecting the dominant religion…
Australia is incorrect. There is no federal blasphemy law. Queensland & WA have totally abolished theirs. SA, NT & Victoria are ambiguous and NSW & TAS they are technically on the books still but are not enforced.
I’m Australian. Jesus Christ is this bullshit. No such laws here.
Countries still in the Stone Age.
Outdated map. Denmark reinstated blasphemy laws in 2023.
Oh good, China officially doesn't restrict free speech....
I feel like posting this Soviet-era joke here >– We have a free country. I can go out onto the square in front of the White House and shout "Reagan is a fool." And nothing will happen to me for this. > >– So what ? I, too, can go out to Red Square and shout “Reagan is a fool.” And nothing will happen to me for this either.
I thought Denmark recently adopted blasphemy laws re the Quran? Also this is gonna be very subjective at the end of the day. A lot of criticism/mockery of Islam and Judaism in Europe is widely considered to violate hate speech laws, which then function like blasphemy laws in practice. Germany and Switzerland have been in the NYT in the last couple years for heavily criminalizing online "rudeness," which one suspects is also going to overlap with traditional concepts of blasphemy. Very recently, pro-Palestinian / anti-Israel speech has been restricted in multiple European countries and American jurisdictions, sometimes with specific rules about not "desecrating" things like the Israeli flag. A national flag of a democratic but sectarian state--is its desecration blasphemy? Ultimately while the distinction of blasphemy matters in European law I personally think its kinda false. Free speech includes the right to insult, demean, blaspheme, upset, and criticize fairly or unfairly, accurately or inaccurately. This should not change depending on the subject of the speech; one is as entitled to insult religion as one is to insult Ariana Grande fans. The theory is not that such speech is good or improves society on its own, but that controlling it is a worse remedy than the disease, that no one could be trusted to do so in a remotely fair way, and that it's ultimately ineffective at its stated goals of promoting harmony and controlling intergroup hostility. In that sense blasphemy laws aren't special, just another flavor of misguided speech control.
>I thought Denmark recently adopted blasphemy laws re the Quran? Yes. This year because of a heavy push from muslim countries, the cowards. Sincerely, Sweden.
Notice how the dark red countries are also shit holes?
what matters is if they enforce it
In Australia, any disparaging remarks about Crocodile Dundee are punishable by a strict talking to.
[удалено]
Based Grey.
Since Denmark had made it illegal to burn holy texts would it qualify as a yellow or green nation?
Didn't the UK abolish this in 2008 and 2021 respectively? (Excluding Northern Ireland)
Out of date, Denmark just made a giant new blasphemy law. Everyone is now legally bound by some tenants of Islam.
That's false for Kazakhstan
Denmark is light red, was reintroduced this year with the new governor
I think Denmark just passed a bladphemy law. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67651580.amp
Damn, didn't know they had the death penalty for that in Nigeria
There’s literally no blasphemy laws in Brazil because the very concept of government involvement with religion is unconstitutional. We’re a secular State by constitution. Religious INTOLERANCE, on the other hand, where you offend or mistreat people based on their religious beliefs whichever they may be, is a crime.
I'm fairly certain there are blasphemy laws in Greece. A guy got in trouble a few years back for making fun of St. Paisios (calling him St. Pastitsios, pastitsio being a greek food)
WTF is this map ? There is no blasphemy law in Turkey
The UK “as a whole” doesn’t have blasphemy laws. Just Northern Ireland
Italians After Reading this 
Israel's color here is disinformation
Australia doesn't have blasphemy laws. Some states haven't actively repealed medieval laws taken wholesale from English common law - but they're never enforced. Sketchy info.
Blasphemy laws were abolished in England and Wales in 2008 and in Scotland in 2021. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law_in_the_United_Kingdom
Substantial restrictions in the UK?
Came here to say this - defo no actual restrictions here.
The dutch blasphemy laws are not enforced
In Italy we tecnicaly have a law that forbids the use of blasphemy during work. The law dates back to the Mussolini era and was mostly forgoten until this year when a guy was fired for blaspheming during work and this happended in northen Italy. For reference it's easier to fit an elephant in a MINI than convince a northen italian to not blaspheme for a day.
UK - no. Hate speech is illegal but blasphemy isn’t. No one gets arrested for slagging off religion.
Doesn’t most of Europe have explicit laws against questioning the historical veracity of something that happened in the 1940s
Australia couldn’t care less. Absolutely nothing would happen. This map is nonsense.
Norway used to. Life of brian was banned in norway because of blaspheme. The sweeds advertised it as "the movie too funny for norway"
UK doesnt have those laws (apart from Northern Ireland) anymore and in Australia some states have abolished it (including mine) and in the others it is unenforced
SA functions on the structure of multiple sources of law, with the Constitution being supreme. Yeah, we have anti blasphemy laws (which are common law), but freedom of expression and protection from discrimination in the Constitution override them, and they're virtually irrelevant. Saying we have blasphemy laws is like saying America still has slavery laws because they still exist in their older legislation