Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Blasphemy Laws

206 replies

User37482 · 27/11/2024 17:58

Tahir Ali (Labour) got up in parliament and asked Starmer

'to prohibit the desecration of all religious texts and the prophets of the Abrahamic religions'.

Just the Abrahamic religions of course no mention of the Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains, Taoism etc etc

AIBU to think most people absolutely do not want want blasphemy laws in the UK and would like to retain the right to say what they would like about any religion.

I don’t even know what a desecration of a prophet is? i’m going to assume it’s taking the piss out of one.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
pointythings · 21/02/2025 09:23

scorpiogirly · 20/02/2025 22:27

Yeah but people are STILL posting on it, so as it's a free country, I thought I would too. I know it hasn't been announced. I'm calling the bloke a cheeky twat.

Show quote history

Based on what?

LillyPJ · 21/02/2025 08:35

Sorry! I must have misread it several times. I get it now!

ByMerryKoala · 21/02/2025 07:45

Thanks @OneLemonDog. 😁

OneLemonDog · 21/02/2025 04:16

LillyPJ · 21/02/2025 04:03

I don't understand how blasphemy laws can be considered 'necessary'. Obviously, truth is much more valuable than religious faith. I'm genuinely puzzled. What did they mean? Were they trying to say that religious faith was a valuable thing?!

Show quote history

The poster said blasphemy is essential, not that (anti) blasphemy laws are.

LillyPJ · 21/02/2025 04:03

OneLemonDog · 21/02/2025 03:57

I feel like you've taken the directly opposite meaning from what the post actually says.

Show quote history

I don't understand how blasphemy laws can be considered 'necessary'. Obviously, truth is much more valuable than religious faith. I'm genuinely puzzled. What did they mean? Were they trying to say that religious faith was a valuable thing?!

OneLemonDog · 21/02/2025 03:57

LillyPJ · 21/02/2025 03:18

What?! Surely that's a typo and you meant 'unnecessary'? I'd say it's not only unnecessary to have blasphemy laws, but also ridiculous and dangerous.

Show quote history

I feel like you've taken the directly opposite meaning from what the post actually says.

Oodiks · 21/02/2025 03:53

TomPinch · 21/02/2025 03:42

Meaning "yes that's the very best I can do" I suspect.

But I'm happy to leave this here.

Show quote history

No, meaning, "I don't owe you a debate and I have no interest in your argument."

If you were happy to leave it there you should have.

I'm not going to smile either.

TomPinch · 21/02/2025 03:47

LillyPJ · 21/02/2025 03:33

How is any religious text not fiction? Prove to me that someone came back from the dead, parted the sea or that there was a worldwide flood. It's hardly fact!

Show quote history

Well it's not within the dictionary definition....

But I can't see what's at all offensive about referring to religious texts as fiction. It's rhetoric to make a point. I can't think of any belief or ethic, whether religious or not, that should be above mockery. Just about anything is capable of being taken too seriously.

TomPinch · 21/02/2025 03:42

Oodiks · 21/02/2025 03:15

I don't owe you a debate.

Show quote history

Meaning "yes that's the very best I can do" I suspect.

But I'm happy to leave this here.

LillyPJ · 21/02/2025 03:33

ParkBench5 · 28/11/2024 14:35

@OswaldCobblepot

Deliberately damaging the Quran or any other religious text or calling it ‘fiction’ in my view is deliberately provocative and offensive and should be covered by any new law aimed at preventing racial hatred.

How is any religious text not fiction? Prove to me that someone came back from the dead, parted the sea or that there was a worldwide flood. It's hardly fact!

LillyPJ · 21/02/2025 03:18

ByMerryKoala · 27/11/2024 18:30

Blasphemy is an incredibly necessary tool in a society that values truth over faith.

What?! Surely that's a typo and you meant 'unnecessary'? I'd say it's not only unnecessary to have blasphemy laws, but also ridiculous and dangerous.

Oodiks · 21/02/2025 03:15

TomPinch · 21/02/2025 03:06

That's the best you can do?

Show quote history

I don't owe you a debate.

LillyPJ · 21/02/2025 03:09

I do not want any goddamn blasphemy laws here - or anywhere for that matter. The sooner we grow up and grow out of religion, the better.

TomPinch · 21/02/2025 03:06

Oodiks · 21/02/2025 01:35

Cool story.

Show quote history

That's the best you can do?

Oodiks · 21/02/2025 01:35

TomPinch · 21/02/2025 01:33

You could say the same of some families. Are you going to say all families are a form of control and extortion too?

Same with any form of human community.

Show quote history

Cool story.

TomPinch · 21/02/2025 01:33

Oodiks · 21/02/2025 01:20

Depends on your religious community, doesn't it? Some communities don't like people to leave and become violent. In some places the local religious authority is also the only way to seek any support outside of your family. In some communities, disobeying the religious authority will make you an outcast.

Show quote history

You could say the same of some families. Are you going to say all families are a form of control and extortion too?

Same with any form of human community.

Oodiks · 21/02/2025 01:20

TomPinch · 21/02/2025 01:15

As does any individual in any religious group. If you don't like the leadership you can just not do what they say, or leave. Much easier than leaving a country.

Show quote history

Depends on your religious community, doesn't it? Some communities don't like people to leave and become violent. In some places the local religious authority is also the only way to seek any support outside of your family. In some communities, disobeying the religious authority will make you an outcast.

TomPinch · 21/02/2025 01:15

Oodiks · 20/02/2025 23:04

Well, no, in a democracy we have some say over who governs us.

Show quote history

As does any individual in any religious group. If you don't like the leadership you can just not do what they say, or leave. Much easier than leaving a country.

Oodiks · 20/02/2025 23:04

TomPinch · 20/02/2025 22:44

So is government then.

The only difference is that one is to your taste and the other isn't.

Show quote history

Well, no, in a democracy we have some say over who governs us.

OneLemonDog · 20/02/2025 23:00

scorpiogirly · 20/02/2025 22:22

The cheek of him. And of course, it would be Labour

"Of course it would be Labour"

Odd thing to say given it was the last Labour government who abolished blasphemy laws in England and Wales (iirc, while the majority of Conservatives supported the repeal, most of those who voted against abolition were Tories).

TomPinch · 20/02/2025 22:44

Pussycat22 · 20/02/2025 22:24

You're right, religion is a form of control and extortion.

Show quote history

So is government then.

The only difference is that one is to your taste and the other isn't.

scorpiogirly · 20/02/2025 22:27

pointythings · 20/02/2025 22:24

Seriously? This thread is ages old. Nothing has been announced. Lose the paranoia.

Show quote history

Yeah but people are STILL posting on it, so as it's a free country, I thought I would too. I know it hasn't been announced. I'm calling the bloke a cheeky twat.

Pussycat22 · 20/02/2025 22:24

NeelyOHara1 · 27/11/2024 18:40

Religious leaders are scared of ridicule as it weakens their hold over people.

You're right, religion is a form of control and extortion.

pointythings · 20/02/2025 22:24

scorpiogirly · 20/02/2025 22:22

The cheek of him. And of course, it would be Labour

Seriously? This thread is ages old. Nothing has been announced. Lose the paranoia.

scorpiogirly · 20/02/2025 22:22

The cheek of him. And of course, it would be Labour