Daily Archives: January 15, 2015
There is from some quarter the call to institute blasphemy laws to avoid – or so it is thought – the explosion of Muslim fanaticism or just because hey, we are such sensitive sissies and we suffer if the Mohammedans are upset.
In order to understand how wrong this would be we must merely reflect that this legislation is envisaged now, when Muslims complain about what they call blasphemy. You wouldn't hear much of it if French journalists weren't massacred by the dozen. But let us see this in good order.
Would you support a legislation that bans blasphemy and at the same time legalises child rape, because our religion obviously forbids blasphemy? Certainly not. You wouldn't pave the way for such an evil, so that something good may also happen.
The problem is that as things stand now, any anti-blasphemy law that were to be passed would have less chances than a snowball in hell of being something useful to Christianity, but would help to 100% to islamise the legal framework of European societies. In addition, it would put an immense amount of power in the hand of the European governments and judges, both of which would not hesitate to make a very PC, and very deleterious to us, use of it.
“Blasphemy” is, for us, something different than for Muslims. To them, it means an awful lot of things, including every picture of their fracking child-rapist, let alone calling him a fracking child-rapist. If they were to succeed in introducing such measure, we would have a good chunk of Sharia Law introduced in Europe in order to… well, in order not to displease the Muslims. You got to be kidding me.
Now, grievous as it is that the True God be insulted by blasphemers, it is not a duty of Christians to press for blasphemy to be made a criminal offence no matter what the consequences (see the example at the start of this post). Necessarily, every such legislation must be assessed according to what it does for Christianity, including in that the possibly unintended, but very massive consequences.
Apart from this, such a law would present conflicts that would be left to the legislation and judiciary to solve, which is tantamount to playing Russian roulette with our religious freedom (remember: religious freedom is not the best, but it is preferable to persecution). It would be a Pandora's box with no end to the possible devastation.
Countless Saints have said things about the Mohammedans and the fracking child-rapist that orthodox Muslims would certainly consider blasphemous, and that are in print as I speak. Should these books be banned? The Catechism of the Catholic Church denies that Mohammed is a prophet, and Allah a true god. Shall it be banned? What else does Islam consider blasphemous? I don't know exactly. But I am sure it's an awful lot.
The blasphemy game helps only one side: the Muslims. It introduces a good chunk of Sharia Law within our shores. It can be even used for a gruesome persecution of, at the very least, Christian thinking and speaking, if not worshipping (and who knows about that).
We must face reality, and act with the wisdom the Church has often showed in the past. Never in Her long history did the Church ask for the islamisation of Western laws so that atheism might be countered.
You counter atheism with your faith, with your logic, with your prayers, even with your tears. You use the democratic system at our disposal to obtain as much Catholicism as you can. You push for – ideally – Catholicism as State Religion; for blasphemy laws insofar as they only protect the True Faith; for Sunday shop closures, and the like.
But most certainly! You do not give the Mohammedans a Trojan Horse to enter our citadel. If this were to happens, we would seriously run the risk of ending up like Troy.
No, thanks. For as long as no better result can be obtained, leave it to God to deal with blasphemers. His Justice is perfect anyway. But do not help your enemies in pursuit of an ill-advised, extremely counterproductive, and outright dangerous religious zeal.