Blasphemy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents
For other uses, see Blasphemy (disambiguation).

Blasphemy is the use of the name of one or more gods, in a manner which is considered objectionable by a religious authority. It may include using sacred names as stress expletives without intention to pray or speak of sacred matters; it is also sometimes defined as language expressing disapproved beliefs, or disbelief. In some countries, these restrictions have the force of law, and may use the terms blasphemous libel, defamation of religion, vilification of religion, and religious vilification. Some religions believe that to purposefully insult their holy book or prophet is blasphemy.

"Blasphemy" may be used by extension to describe any display of gross irreverence towards any person or thing deemed worthy of exalted esteem. In this broader sense the term is used by Sir Francis Bacon in the Advancement of Learning, when he speaks of "blasphemy against teaching".

Sometimes the word "blasphemy" is used loosely to mean any profane language, for example in "With much hammering and blasphemy, the locomotive's replacement spring was finally fitted.".

The public domain 1913 Webster's Unabridged Dictionary defines blasphemy as:

Blasphemy (Blas"phe*my) n. [L. blasphemia, Gr. : cf. OF. blasphemie.]
  • An indignity offered to God in words, writing, or signs; impiously irreverent words or signs addressed to, or used in reference to, God; speaking evil of God; also, the act of claiming the attributes or prerogatives of deity. When used generally in statutes or at common law, blasphemy is the use of irreverent words or signs in reference to the Supreme Being in such a way as to produce scandal or provoke violence.
  • Figuratively, of things held in high honor: Calumny; abuse; vilification.

[edit] History

The word "blasphemy" came via Middle English blasfemen and Old French blasfemer and Late Latin blasphemare from Greek βλασφημέω, from βλάπτω = "I injure" and φήμη = "reputation". From blasphemare also came Old French blasmer, from which English "blame" came.

Compare "euphemy"[dubious – discuss], which is a little-used word meaning "describing something as better than it is", as in euphemism.

[edit] Blasphemy laws

Main article: Blasphemy laws

Countries use blasphemy laws to victimize non-members of, and dissident members of, the ruling sect or cult. Countries with a state religion are the most punitive users of blasphemy laws. Some countries have a law which substitutes for a blasphemy law or which complements it. Such a law may forbid "religious insult" or "religious vilification" or "hate speech." A blasphemy law contravenes Articles 18 and 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

[edit] Blasphemy in Judaism

In the third book of the Torah, Leviticus 24:16 states that those who speak blasphemy "shall surely be put to death", see also List of capital crimes in the Torah.

[edit] Blasphemy in Christianity

Christian theology condemns blasphemy. One verse from the Holy Bible that directly concerns the sin reads as follows:

“ Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. (Exodus 20:7 KJV) ”

In addition, it is spoken of in the Luke 12:10, where blaspheming the Holy Spirit is spoken of as unforgivable - the eternal sin. However, there is dispute over what form this blasphemy may take and whether it qualifies as blasphemy in the conventional sense.

In the time of Jesus, when Christian ideas relied upon the influence of natural authority against the then secular religious power of the Second Jewish Temple, this admonishment may be interpreted as warning against an actual reaction from the Holy Spirit in the form of a curse that can irreparably harm a person (and thus be unforgivable but not by dictate)[citation needed]. This statement in effect establishes the importance of this aspect of the Godhead, rather than setting an arbitrary law.

The Catholic Encyclopedia has a more extensive article on blasphemy.

[edit] Catholic prayers and reparations for blasphemy

In the Catholic Church, there are specific prayers and devotions as Acts of Reparation for blasphemy.[1] For instance, The Golden Arrow Holy Face Devotion (Prayer) first introduced by Sister Marie of St Peter in 1844 is recited "in a spirit of reparation for blasphemy". This devotion (started by Sister Marie and then promoted by the Venerable Leo Dupont) was approved by Pope Leo XIII in 1885.[2] The Raccolta Catholic prayer book includes a number of such prayers.[3]

The Holy See has specific "Pontifical organizations" for the purpose of the reparation of blasphemy through Acts of Reparation to Jesus Christ, e.g. the Pontifical Congregation of the Benedictine Sisters of the Reparation of the Holy Face.[4]

[edit] Blasphemy in Islam

Main article: Blasphemy in Islam

Blasphemy in Islam constitutes speaking ill of Muhammad or of any other prophet mentioned in the Qur'an, or to claim that there is more than one god or that Jesus Christ (the son of Mary) is the son of God (5.017), or to speak ill of God.

[edit] Blasphemy and the United Nations

 The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (July 2009)
This section may contain unpublished synthesis of published material that conveys ideas not attributable to the original sources. See the talk page for details. (July 2009)

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), approved by the United Nations in 1948, contains articles which militate against the idea that blasphemy is a crime. Article 7 says everyone is equal before the law. Article 21 supports democracy not theocracy nor ochlocracy. Article 18 declares that everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. Article 19 says everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression. By adopting these articles, most nations, it seems, in 1948, accepted the idea that a country did not need to protect its gods, its preachers, and its religious majority from blasphemy.

Although most Islamic states are member states of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which makes binding provisions similar to the mentioned provisions of UDHR, those states had not, it seems, accepted that blasphemy should be abolished because, on 5 August 1990, the member states of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) adopted The Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam (CDHRI). The CDHRI's preamble says that Muslims are the "vicegerent of Allah on Earth" and that Allah made the Islamic community, the Ummah, "the best community." The preamble says the CDHRI is a guide from that community to humanity about "a dignified life" which, it seems, means a life lived in obedience to Sharia. The preamble states that fundamental rights and freedoms "are an integral part of the Islamic religion" and "are binding divine commands." Articles 24 and 25 of the CDHRI make all the rights and freedoms stipulated in it subject to Sharia and only to Sharia.[5]

Sharia is not a code of law but a legal system. Countries and communities differ in their interpretation and application of the laws in that system. Nevertheless, all Islamic countries and communities condemn blasphemy. Countries and communities can find support for their actions against blasphemy and against non-Muslims in the Quran and in the hadiths.[6]

Many commentators[who?] have said that Sharia is dangerous and intolerable. The European Court for Human Rights has declared that Sharia "is incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy." The Court said:

It is difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia, which clearly diverges from [the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms], particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervenes in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts.[7]

In February 1992, Adama Dieng, secretary-general of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), delivered a statement about the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights on behalf of the ICJ and on behalf of the Paris-based International Federation for Human Rights. The statement said of the CDHRI:

1) It gravely threatens the inter-cultural consensus on which the international human rights instruments are based;
2) It introduces, in the name of the defence of human rights, an intolerable discrimination against both non-Muslims and women;
3) It reveals a deliberately restrictive character in regard to certain fundamental rights and freedoms, to the point that certain essential provisions are below the legal standard in effect in a number of Muslim countries;
4) It confirms under cover of the "Islamic Shari'a (Law)" the legitimacy of practices, such as corporal punishment, that attack the integrity and dignity of the human being.[8]

The European Centre for Law and Justice (ECLJ)[9], a Christian legal advocacy group, says some limitation on freedom of speech is necessary to protect religion, but a Sharia-based limitation "is in direct violation of international law concerning the rights to freedom of religion and expression, and ... is incompatible with the universal philosophy of human rights."[10]

In 1997, the High Commissioner for Human Rights rejected the complaints about the CDHRI, and included it in A Compilation of International Instruments (vol. II (1997), pp. 478–84), a collection of documents that promote human rights. Furthermore, on 15 March 2002, Mary Robinson, High Commissioner for Human Rights, declared at an OIC symposium that "no one can deny the acceptance of the universality of human rights by Islamic States."[11]

In 1999, at the instigation of the OIC, Pakistan brought before the Commission on Human Rights a resolution entitled 'Defamation of Islam'. The purpose of the resolution was to have the Commission stand up against what the OIC claimed was a campaign to defame Islam.[12]

Some members of the Human Rights Commission put forward amendments that called for the protection of all religions. Consequently, the Commission adopted a non-binding resolution entitled 'Defamation of Religions'.[13] Each year between 1999 and 2006, the Commission approved very similar resolutions about protecting religions in general and about protecting Islam in particular.[14]

In 2005, Yemen introduced a resolution entitled 'Combating Defamation of Religions' in the General Assembly (60th Session).[15] 101 states voted in favour of the resolution.

In March 2006, the Human Rights Commission, with 47 members, became the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC). The Council approved a resolution entitled 'Combating Defamation of Religions', and submitted it to the General Assembly.[16] In the General Assembly, 58% (111) of the member states of the United Nations (192 states) voted for the Resolution; 28% opposed it; 14% abstained. Russia and China, permanent members of the UN Security Council, voted for the Resolution.[17]

In April 2007 (4th session), the UNHRC adopted a resolution which was entitled 'Combating Defamation of Religions' and which was much like the preceding resolutions on that subject.[18] Russia, Cuba, and China voted with the majority (24 countries), which favoured the resolution.

In August 2007, the Special Rapporteur to the Human Rights Council, Doudou Diène, reported to the General Assembly "on the manifestations of defamation of religions and in particular on the serious implications of Islamophobia on the enjoyment of all rights." Among other recommendations, the Special Rapporteur recommended that the Member States promote dialogue between cultures, civilizations, and religions taking into consideration:

(a) The need to provide equal treatment to the combat of all forms of defamation of religions, thus avoiding hierarchization of forms of discrimination, even though their intensity may vary according to history, geography and culture;
(b) The historical and cultural depth of all forms of defamation of religions, and therefore the need to complement legal strategies with an intellectual and ethical strategy relating to the processes, mechanisms and representations which constitute those manifestations over time;
...
(e) The need to pay particular attention and vigilance to maintain a careful balance between secularism and the respect of freedom of religion. A growing anti-religious culture and rhetoric is a central source of defamation of all religions and discrimination against their believers and practitioners. In this context governments should pay a particular attention to guaranteeing and protecting the places of worship and culture of all religions.[19]

On 18 December 2007, the General Assembly voted on another resolution entitled 'Combating Defamation of Religions'.[20] 108 states voted in favour of the resolution; 51 voted against it; and 25 abstained. The resolution required the Secretary General to report to the sixty-third session of the General Assembly on the implementation of the resolution, and to have regard for “the possible correlation between defamation of religions and the upsurge in incitement, intolerance and hatred in many parts of the world.”

In 2008, the UNHRC passed another resolution about the defamation of religion. 24 members were in favour; 9 were opposed; 14 abstained.[12]

On 27 March 2008, the UNHRC requested that the High Commissioner for Human Rights compile a report on “relevant existing legislations and jurisprudence concerning defamation of and contempt for religions.”[21] The High Commissioner presented the report on 5 September 2008.[22]

On 28 March 2008, the UNHRC asked its Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression to bring to the Council's attention all instances of racism and blasphemy. In the words of the resolution, the Rapporteur is to “report on instances in which the abuse of the right of freedom of expression constitutes an act of racial or religious discrimination ....”[23]

Githu Muigai, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, addressed the UNHRC on 19 September 2008. He delivered the report [24] prepared by Doudou Diène. The report called on Member States to shift the present discussion in international fora from the idea of "defamation of religions" to the legal concept: "incitement to national, racial and religious hatred, hostility or violence," which was grounded on international legal instruments.[25]

On 12 and 13 November 2008, the United Nations convened a special session of the General Assembly to foster support for a global law against blasphemy.[26]

On 24 November 2008, during the Sixty-third Session, the General Assembly's Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian & Cultural) approved a resolution entitled 'Combating defamation of religions'.[27] The resolution requests "the Secretary-General to submit a report on the implementation of the present resolution, including on the possible correlation between defamation of religions and the upsurge in incitement, intolerance and hatred in many parts of the world, to the General Assembly at its sixty-fourth session." 85 states voted in favor of the resolution; 50 states voted against the resolution; 42 states abstained.[28]

On 18 December 2008, the General Assembly adopted the draft resolution on combating defamation of religions (document A/63/430/Add.2) by a recorded vote of 86 in favour, 53 against, and 42 abstentions.[29]

On 26 March 2009, the UNHRC passed a resolution, proposed by Pakistan, which condemned the "defamation of religion" as a human rights violation by a vote of 23-11, with 13 abstentions. The resolution stated that "Defamation of religion is a serious affront to human dignity leading to a restriction on the freedom of their adherents and incitement to religious violence" and that "Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism." Supporters argued that the resolution is necessary to prevent the defamation of Islam while opponents argued that such a resolution would restrict freedom of speech.[30][31]

[edit] Contemporary usage

In contemporary language, the notion of blasphemy is often used ironically, as a form of hyperbole. As an example, one might express that doubting Wikipedia as a good source of information is blasphemous. This usage has garnered some interest among linguists recently, and the word 'blasphemy' is a common case used for illustrative purposes.[32][33]

[edit] See also

Search Wikimedia Commons Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Blasphemy

[edit] References

  1. ^ Act of Reparation for Blasphemies Uttered Against the Holy Name, Righting Wrongs Through Prayer By Scott P. Richert, About.com
  2. ^ * Dorothy Scallan. The Holy Man of Tours. (1990) ISBN 0895553902
  3. ^ Joseph P. Christopher et al., 2003 The Raccolta, St Athanasius Press ISBN 978-0970652669
  4. ^ Letter for 50th anniversary of the Benedictine Sisters of Reparation of the Holy Face, 2000 Vatican archives
  5. ^ Cairo Declaration
  6. ^ Qadi ‘Iyad ibn Musa al-Yahsubi, 'The proof of the necessity of killing anyone who curses the Prophet or finds fault with him' (undated).
  7. ^ Christian Moe, Refah Partisi (The Welfare Party) and Others v. Turkey, International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law 6(1) September 2003.
  8. ^ David G. Littman, "Human Rights and Human Wrongs: Sharia can't be an exception to international human-rights norms" (19 January 2003).
  9. ^ http://www.eclj.org/About/
  10. ^ ECLJ Submits Legal Analysis to the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights on "Defamation of Religions" (26 June 2008).
  11. ^ David G. Littman on Human Rights & United Nations on National Review Online David G. Littman, "Human Rights and Human Wrongs: Sharia can't be an exception to international human-rights norms" (19 January 2003).
  12. ^ a b Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, “Combating Defamation of Religions” 2 June 2008.
  13. ^ Commission on Human Rights Res. 1999/82 (30 April 1999).
  14. ^ Commission on Human Rights Res. 2000/84, 2001/4, 2002/9, 2003/4, 2004/6, and 2005/3; U.N. Documents A/HRC/4/L.12, A/HRC/7/L.15.
  15. ^ G.A. Res. 60/150; U.N. Doc. A/Res/60/150.
  16. ^ G.A. Res. 61/164; U.N. Doc. A/Res/61/164.
  17. ^ Liaquat Ali Khan, 'Combating Defamation of Religions' 1 January 2007.
  18. ^ U. N. doc. A/HRC/RES/4/9 (30 April 2007).
  19. ^ U. N. doc. A/HRC/6/6 (21 August 2007)
  20. ^ G.A. Res. 62/154; U.N. Doc. A/Res/62/154.
  21. ^ U.N. Doc. A/HRC/RES/7/19/item 16.
  22. ^ High Commissioner's report 5 September 2008(A/HRC/9/25).
  23. ^ U.N. Doc. A/HRC/RES/7/19/item 15.
  24. ^ Report by Doudou Diène (A/HRC/9/12). (French)
  25. ^ Press Release by United Nations Human Rights Council on the morning of 19 September 2008.
  26. ^ Special Session of the General Assembly in November 2008.
  27. ^ A/C.3/63/L.22/Rev. 1
  28. ^ Third Committee votes on defamation of religions Item 64(b) 24 November 2008.
  29. ^ General Assembly casts votes on defamation of religions (December 2008).
  30. ^ U.N. rights council passes religious defamation resolution, Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA), March 26, 2009.
  31. ^ UNHRC Resolution 26 March 2009. Retrieved 2009-03-27.
  32. ^ Recanati 1995; Carston 1997, 1999, 2000; Sperber & Wilson 1998; Glucksberg 2001; Wilson & Sperber 2002.
  33. ^ "Relevance and Lexical Pragmatics" (DOC). UCL Dept of Phonetics and Linguistics. http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/deirdre/papers/Relevance%20Theory%20and%20Lexical%20Pragmatics.doc. Retrieved on 2008-05-12. 

[edit] Further reading

[edit] External links

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy"
Personal tools