8 ms·

"Blasphemy" is one of those things I do not get. Religious criticism seems to unearth the general insecurity that people have about their religion (whatever is

"Blasphemy" is one of those things I do not get. Religious criticism seems to unearth the general insecurity that people have about their religion (whatever is might be). If people would be sufficiently secure about their religious views any criticism would just be ignored and people would go on about their business. (Well, the truth is that people are angry to begin with, and religion is just a nice excuse to vent this anger). The other part that baffles me are "hate crimes". That word makes no sense. What the heck is a "hate crime"? Are there violent non-hate crimes?

RobAtticus 14y ago
Do you think that all murders happen because the murderer hates the victim? I think it's very possible for their to be violent non-hate crimes (e.g., murder for hire, killing witnesses to another crime, etc).
- linuxhansl 14y ago
  No I don't. You are right of course. I just find the term "hate crime" a bit pointless. As if violence against a person is worse if the motive was hatred or that person is ... {pick any of: gay, black, white, atheist, catholic, protestant, American, muslim, ...}
  - maxwin 14y ago
    well, yes. It is worse because it is usually targeted not just one individual but a category of people. Even though the person who commits hate crime (e.g beating a chinese to death because one hates chinese) to only one person, the damage goes beyond one person. All the chinese people would feel the hatred and would be angry by that. The consequences could result in very very nasty back and forth revenge,war,mass murders. We had learned these painful lessons from history.
  - icebraining 14y ago
    Have you ever lived in fear? For your sake or your family? Your children? A crime directed at someone just because they are members of a certain minority causes every other member to feel like a potential target. I think it makes perfect sense for it to be punished more harshly; the damage is much greater. This doesn't mean I support criminalizing hate speech, by the way. Just harder punishment for existing crimes.
tsotha 14y ago
>"Blasphemy" is one of those things I do not get. Religious criticism seems to unearth the general insecurity that people have about their religion (whatever is might be). You don't get it because you're not a devout Muslim of one of the more violent sects, and this is a pretty common problem with people in the West. There's no point in trying to divine motivations in this particular area without understanding the Weltanschauung. It's not about insecurity. They believe God wants them to punish (with death) people who insult Him.
- rglovejoy 14y ago
  It still doesn't make any sense. If God is the all-knowing, all-powerful creator of the Universe, can't He take care of Himself? After all, back in the Bible days, God was taking out His vengeance on people who got on His bad side all the time.
  - tsotha 14y ago
    >It still doesn't make any sense. If God is the all-knowing, all-powerful creator of the Universe, can't He take care of Himself? If you really believe your religious text is the word of God, why would you question His motives? It's not your place. The word "Islam" literally means "submission" in Arabic. The context for your thinking is the European Enlightenment. There was no such thing in Islam.
  - jlgreco 14y ago
    This is hardly the first case of Abrahamic religions not making sense. If you going in expecting self-consistency and logic, you are going to have a bad time... Anyway, I don't think the GP is entirely correct. Sure, perhaps to a certain extent religious people react negatively to the blasphemy of outsiders because it is the dogma of their religion to do so. I think the greater cause however is that all people, even religious people, tend to be rather rational. When people hear others poking fun of their religion they become upset, not because they "know" they are right (and most would say without hesitation that they do), but because somewhere deep down inside a part of them considers the possibility that the blasphemer just might be right. Blasphemy tickles those deep-seated insecurities. As rational as people are, they really don't like being wrong and made to look a fool.
jackpirate 14y ago
Blasphemy is not the same as criticism. On one extreme of criticism, you use reasoned academic arguments to critique specific doctrines you find unappealing. On the other extreme, you can insult people's culture without being productive at all. Blasphemy is much closer to the second than the first.
- ghostDancer 14y ago
  Though i think you're right, usually blasphemy is just insulting, is not always the case, defending the theory of evolution is considered a blasphemy by a lot of people. And don't think that is insulting.
csense 14y ago
The competition between religions for converts is competition among memes. Look at the number of bizarre little cults and would-be prophets among humans today; multiply that by 6,000 years or so of recorded history, and it's no wonder some of them have turned out to be world-shapingly successful. The exact formula for a successful religion is different for different religions, places and times. But it doesn't stretch the imagination to think that violent suppression of expressions of disbelief, doubt, or disrespect might be part of a formula that allows a religion to spread and maintain power. In other words, maybe religions that don't have prohibitions against blasphemy are quickly torn apart by heretics and skeptics -- or at least limited in size and power. This isn't a justification of blasphemy prohibitions; it's merely an explanation of why a successful religion (in terms of number of believers) might have such a rule: because the rule is what causes the success.
- linuxhansl 14y ago
  > it's merely an explanation of why a successful religion (in terms of number of believers) might have such a rule: because the rule is what causes the success. That would be a sad statement for a religion. But it also points directly to the problem. If a religion is successful only as far as it is able to control people, it is not actually very useful. Most religions do have extremely useful core concepts. That is true for Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. If we could just step back to recognize these core concepts all of "this" would just go away...
muuh-gnu 14y ago
> "Blasphemy" is one of those things I do not get. Blashphemy is just another word for criticism and ridicule. You cannot uphold a dictatorship of unsubstantiated claims if everybody is allowed to openly ask questions. This pattern is always the same in every authoritarian structure and is in no way specific to religion, religion only has a special word for it. Blasphemy is what the kid in "The Emperor's New Clothes" did at the end of the tale: publicly questioning authority, which led to authority breaking down. > What the heck is a "hate crime"? For example public calls for Jews to be gassed.
- Volpe 14y ago
  While I agree with your post. Blasphemy is also there to encourage respect of ideas you don't necessarily agree with/believe. It's an overly blunt tool, but I think there is a part that is useful.

RobAtticus 14y ago

Do you think that all murders happen because the murderer hates the victim? I think it's very possible for their to be violent non-hate crimes (e.g., murder for hire, killing witnesses to another crime, etc).

linuxhansl 14y ago
No I don't. You are right of course. I just find the term "hate crime" a bit pointless. As if violence against a person is worse if the motive was hatred or that person is ... {pick any of: gay, black, white, atheist, catholic, protestant, American, muslim, ...}
- maxwin 14y ago
  well, yes. It is worse because it is usually targeted not just one individual but a category of people. Even though the person who commits hate crime (e.g beating a chinese to death because one hates chinese) to only one person, the damage goes beyond one person. All the chinese people would feel the hatred and would be angry by that. The consequences could result in very very nasty back and forth revenge,war,mass murders. We had learned these painful lessons from history.
- icebraining 14y ago
  Have you ever lived in fear? For your sake or your family? Your children? A crime directed at someone just because they are members of a certain minority causes every other member to feel like a potential target. I think it makes perfect sense for it to be punished more harshly; the damage is much greater. This doesn't mean I support criminalizing hate speech, by the way. Just harder punishment for existing crimes.

tsotha 14y ago

>"Blasphemy" is one of those things I do not get. Religious criticism seems to unearth the general insecurity that people have about their religion (whatever is might be). You don't get it because you're not a devout Muslim of one of the more violent sects, and this is a pretty common problem with people in the West. There's no point in trying to divine motivations in this particular area without understanding the Weltanschauung. It's not about insecurity. They believe God wants them to punish (with death) people who insult Him.

rglovejoy 14y ago
It still doesn't make any sense. If God is the all-knowing, all-powerful creator of the Universe, can't He take care of Himself? After all, back in the Bible days, God was taking out His vengeance on people who got on His bad side all the time.
- tsotha 14y ago
  >It still doesn't make any sense. If God is the all-knowing, all-powerful creator of the Universe, can't He take care of Himself? If you really believe your religious text is the word of God, why would you question His motives? It's not your place. The word "Islam" literally means "submission" in Arabic. The context for your thinking is the European Enlightenment. There was no such thing in Islam.
- jlgreco 14y ago
  This is hardly the first case of Abrahamic religions not making sense. If you going in expecting self-consistency and logic, you are going to have a bad time... Anyway, I don't think the GP is entirely correct. Sure, perhaps to a certain extent religious people react negatively to the blasphemy of outsiders because it is the dogma of their religion to do so. I think the greater cause however is that all people, even religious people, tend to be rather rational. When people hear others poking fun of their religion they become upset, not because they "know" they are right (and most would say without hesitation that they do), but because somewhere deep down inside a part of them considers the possibility that the blasphemer just might be right. Blasphemy tickles those deep-seated insecurities. As rational as people are, they really don't like being wrong and made to look a fool.

jackpirate 14y ago

Blasphemy is not the same as criticism. On one extreme of criticism, you use reasoned academic arguments to critique specific doctrines you find unappealing. On the other extreme, you can insult people's culture without being productive at all. Blasphemy is much closer to the second than the first.

ghostDancer 14y ago
Though i think you're right, usually blasphemy is just insulting, is not always the case, defending the theory of evolution is considered a blasphemy by a lot of people. And don't think that is insulting.

csense 14y ago

The competition between religions for converts is competition among memes. Look at the number of bizarre little cults and would-be prophets among humans today; multiply that by 6,000 years or so of recorded history, and it's no wonder some of them have turned out to be world-shapingly successful. The exact formula for a successful religion is different for different religions, places and times. But it doesn't stretch the imagination to think that violent suppression of expressions of disbelief, doubt, or disrespect might be part of a formula that allows a religion to spread and maintain power. In other words, maybe religions that don't have prohibitions against blasphemy are quickly torn apart by heretics and skeptics -- or at least limited in size and power. This isn't a justification of blasphemy prohibitions; it's merely an explanation of why a successful religion (in terms of number of believers) might have such a rule: because the rule is what causes the success.

linuxhansl 14y ago
> it's merely an explanation of why a successful religion (in terms of number of believers) might have such a rule: because the rule is what causes the success. That would be a sad statement for a religion. But it also points directly to the problem. If a religion is successful only as far as it is able to control people, it is not actually very useful. Most religions do have extremely useful core concepts. That is true for Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. If we could just step back to recognize these core concepts all of "this" would just go away...

muuh-gnu 14y ago

> "Blasphemy" is one of those things I do not get. Blashphemy is just another word for criticism and ridicule. You cannot uphold a dictatorship of unsubstantiated claims if everybody is allowed to openly ask questions. This pattern is always the same in every authoritarian structure and is in no way specific to religion, religion only has a special word for it. Blasphemy is what the kid in "The Emperor's New Clothes" did at the end of the tale: publicly questioning authority, which led to authority breaking down. > What the heck is a "hate crime"? For example public calls for Jews to be gassed.

Volpe 14y ago
While I agree with your post. Blasphemy is also there to encourage respect of ideas you don't necessarily agree with/believe. It's an overly blunt tool, but I think there is a part that is useful.