Re: [OT] Britain poised to enact blasphemy laws?

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

Thu, 28 Nov 2024 18:36:24 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:

You're not hearing me.

Desecration CANNOT be criminalized in a liberal society without
religious establishment. CANNOT

In a liberal society, the aspects of desecration MUST BE ignored because
the state cannot define them without establishing religion. Adherents to
the religion CANNOT define them on behalf of the state.

The criminal code can define crimes against property and crimes against
persons, but only in a religiously neutral manner and without
considering desecration at all.

Actually I hear you but don't agree. The US and Canada do not have
'established churches' while Britain does.

In the United States, a law defining and criminalizing desecration would
be an act of establishment, which is unconstitutional. I have no idea if
Canada has an anti-establishment clause in its constitution.

I've seen plenty of attacks on synagogues in Canada (and other religious
buildings but especially theirs) and while Canada previously DID have
a state church that was dis-established 100+ years ago.

ANY act regulating religious conduct in the United States would be
unconstitutional, either as an establishment or a prohibition on free
exercise. The constitutional provisions do a whole lot more than just
prohibit a state church.

That said, I have no use for adherents who resort to violence when
they feel their faith has been insulted in some way or another. And I
will repeat my claim that one faith is more sensitive on these matters
than others - and that that is bad for society at large.

If you favor a law in which a religious adherant, or the state itself,
defines desecration, then you would allow those who would impose
religion upon society an illiberal advantage. I don't understand why you
don't get this.