It seems that the 'Blasphemy Law' could affect Boards

Zillah

Pretty disappointing that boards rolled over so quickly. You weren't compelled to act, Dav, you chose to act. Opposition to immoral laws can take place at all sorts of levels.

Don't take the safe and easy option and act as if you had a gun to your head.

aloyisious

On the topic of website responsibility for posts (and what they include) on sites, the European Court of Human Rights issued a ruling today (check the Irish Examiner or ECHR online) that websites are responsible for the content of posts on-site and can be sued for same..

This followed from a Latvian site's ECHR appeal of a Latvian Court's ruling holding that the site was responsible and could be sued for what was posted on it. The ECHR ruling stated that the person/s doing the posting/s were also legally responsible. The fact that said poster/s might never be located to be sued is apparently an unfortunate fact of life and law.

SpaceTime

I think we've all forgotten to act to keep the pressure on the Government to remove this daft law.

We're not keeping enough pressure on!
Keep emailing and phoning TDs about this stuff and going on about it in the media or it will not change.

Irish politics likes inertia.

IvySlayer

Can we see that complaint publicly?

PM him back asking his permission to post it.

IvySlayer

SpaceTime wrote: »

I think we've all forgotten to act to keep the pressure on the Government to remove this daft law.

We're not keeping enough pressure on!
Keep emailing and phoning TDs about this stuff and going on about it in the media or it will not change.

Irish politics likes inertia.

Actually yes.

If Enda Kenny wants to ensure his re-election he can hop on this issue, cos I can guarantee you young people will be behind him 100% on this one.

wexie

IvySlayer wrote: »

Can we see that complaint publicly?

PM him back asking his permission to post it.

I got the impression it wasn't so much a complaint as a headsup that there were things happening on AH that could lead to either a complaint or possibly legal action?

SpaceTime

Yeah, I agree. If he wants to seem dynamic and regain popularity he would want to be all over issues like this.

There's a bigger vote out there in the liberal side of Ireland than there is in a very elderly conservative lobby that's shrinking away.

This isn't the USA where there's a big conservative vote.

I think sometimes commentators here forget that and start debating hot topics in America that aren't really hot topics here at all e.g. I don't think there's any demand for creationism in schools here, where as that's a topic in the states, yet I've seen it debated here a few times for no logical reason.

swampgas

36.— (1) A person who publishes or utters blasphemous matter shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable upon conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding €25,000.

(2) For the purposes of this section, a person publishes or utters blasphemous matter if—

(a) he or she publishes or utters matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion, and

(b) he or she intends, by the publication or utterance of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage.

The key point here is how does a court decide on someone's intent? If I post in the A&A forum that God is an idiot, can I assume that no offense will be taken?

It really is a horribly vague.

IvySlayer

wexie wrote: »

I got the impression it wasn't so much a complaint as a headsup that there were things happening on AH that could lead to either a complaint or possibly legal action?

It was an e-mail and if he could ask the guy can he post the e-mail, and we could all see what the fuss is about.

I hate pandering, especially to certain types of people.

I'm bothered by the fact Dav said the posts were illegal.

How many illegal posts have I made I wonder?

Delirium

swampgas wrote: »

The key point here is how does a court decide on someone's intent? If I post in the A&A forum that God is an idiot, can I assume that no offense will be taken?

It really is a horribly vague.

By posting in A&A wouldn't that probably show you didn't intend to cause outrage?

But if you posted the same in the Islam/Christianity forum you might then fall under the "intent to cause outrage" clause.

Pherekydes

swampgas wrote: »

The key point here is how does a court decide on someone's intent? If I post in the A&A forum that God is an idiot, can I assume that no offense will be taken?

It really is a horribly vague.

Cults and organisations are excluded from the definition of religion by the following section (already mentioned earlier in this thread or elsewhere):

(4) In this section “ religion ” does not include an organisation or cult—


(a) the principal object of which is the making of profit, or


(b) that employs oppressive psychological manipulation—


(i) of its followers, or


(ii) for the purpose of gaining new followers.

It can easily be shown that the major religions indeed employ oppressive psychological manipulation of its followers.

If Boards.ie is truly worried it could make certain fora private...

IvySlayer

koth wrote: »

By posting in A&A wouldn't that probably show you didn't intend to cause outrage?

But if you posted the same in the Islam/Christianity forum you might then fall under the "intent to cause outrage" clause.

What about people who get outraged over anything and everything no matter what forum it's posted in? What's the policy on that?

swampgas

koth wrote: »

By posting in A&A wouldn't that probably show you didn't intend to cause outrage?

But if you posted the same in the Islam/Christianity forum you might then fall under the "intent to cause outrage" clause.

Suppose there are 50 people in the Islam/Christianity forum who are outraged, is that enough people?

Suppose I intended to outrage those 50 people but no more, is that okay?

Suppose one of them re-posts my post to another forum and the whole middle east gets upset about it, what then? Am I responsible for the re-post?

Delirium

IvySlayer wrote: »

What about people who get outraged over anything and everything no matter what forum it's posted in? What's the policy on that?

I would think it's the same based on the text swampgas provided. The onus would be on those offended and/or the prosecution to show intent to offend.

Could be totally wrong but that's how I read the text.

Delirium

swampgas wrote: »

Suppose there are 50 people in the Islam/Christianity forum who are outraged, is that enough people?

Suppose I intended to outrage those 50 people but no more, is that okay?

I have no idea tbh.

Suppose one of them re-posts my post to another forum and the whole middle east gets upset about it, what then? Am I responsible for the re-post?

Personally, I would think not. The person that re-posted is the one with the intent to offend in that scenario.l

Pherekydes

I forgot to mention in my previous post that to commit blasphemy, one must cause

...outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion...

What's a substantial number?

As religions transcend national boundaries, we would need to take account of all of the adherents of a religion before we calculate this number.

Sarky

Dav clarified at the end of the thread in AH. No pandering involved, except to the law, and Boards.ie doesn't really have the choice of not pandering to that, no matter how f*cking stupid the law happens to be (and make no mistake, having a blasphemy law is pretty f*cking stupid).

That's all well and good, I suppose, and by all accounts (the ones that matter as opposed to the fite-teh-powar whingebags that always pop up) the right thing was done. I really hope though that it doesn't result in people manufacturing outrage at this forum and notifying the office, which will then HAVE to take action. I know Dav reassured us that it was business as usual with A&A, but I just can't shake that concern...

swampgas

What's "outrage" anyway? Is there a legal definition? A bit of googling seems to suggest that legally, outrage requires "grave injury".

Maybe I could defend myself by saying, "Nah, you're just very offended - there wasn't any grave injury so you're not actually outraged in a legal sense."

SpaceTime

Can everyone posting here please remember to email your TDs too and if possible write to the papers etc etc

Doctor DooM

SpaceTime wrote: »

Can everyone posting here please remember to email your TDs too and if possible write to the papers etc etc

I shall certainly do so.

Akrasia

swampgas wrote: »

The key point here is how does a court decide on someone's intent? If I post in the A&A forum that God is an idiot, can I assume that no offense will be taken?

It really is a horribly vague.

What if I post these words "Muslims should be outraged that their prophet Muhammad ..

better not chance it

Zillah

Sarky wrote: »

No pandering involved, except to the law, and Boards.ie doesn't really have the choice of not pandering to that, no matter how f*cking stupid the law happens to be (and make no mistake, having a blasphemy law is pretty f*cking stupid).

When it comes to a law so vague and inappropriate there is huge scope for reasonable resistance to it, the claim that they were legally compelled to act is nonsense. The law itself requires a significant number (only one email) amongst the adherents of the religion in question (they weren't Muslim) and must cause outrage (they were just being busy-bodies).

Dav made a very conservative decision at the slightest hint of controversy and should stand by that instead of acting as though he was compelled to kowtow to a ridiculous law that deserves to be challenged.

Nodin

Angry yesterday, grimly depressed today......

barney10

Nodin wrote: »

In a moment of fuckwittedness solidarity I backed your offer in AH by offering same.

I have difficulty understanding the jumble that exists in this descending thread.

Turtwig

Thread in feedback's been closed and no real answers were provided. Oh well, I guess we carry on as normal. If A&A does ever disappear all of a sudden it was awesome posting here. Learned so much from some of you guys. And some of the trolls were just adorable too.

Pineapple pizza anyone?

Nodin

barney10 wrote: »

I have difficulty understanding the jumble that exists in this descending thread.

He offered a grand towards any legal costs, meself and another lad matched his offer.

IvySlayer

Zillah wrote: »

Dav made a very conservative decision at the slightest hint of controversy and should stand by that instead of acting as though he was compelled to kowtow to a ridiculous law that deserves to be challenged.

How about a panicky decision before certain people got offended and just deleted the thread instead of dealing with the issue at hand, from a PR point of view it created more problems than solved.

I just hope this law wont be enforced anymore.

Anybody making fun of a certain flying spaghetti monster will feel my wrath, e-mail wise :mad:

Sarky

Jernal wrote: »

If A&A does ever disappear all of a sudden it was awesome posting here.

This forum and its denizens* are almost the only thing keeping me on Boards these days. If that ever happens, boom, I'm done.


*Well, not Jernal, that bastard's always hounding me for links.

barney10

Nodin wrote: »

He offered a grand towards any legal costs, meself and another lad matched his offer.

Likely story

Kiwi in IE

Jernal wrote: »

Thread in feedback's been closed and no real answers were provided. Oh well, I guess we carry on as normal. If A&A does ever disappear all of a sudden it was awesome posting here. Learned so much from some of you guys. And some of the trolls were just adorable too.

Pineapple pizza anyone?

UGH! What is wrong with you? Pineapple on pizza is disgusting.


Very sorry if that is blasphemous to pineapple pizza eaters

ScumLord

The thing you have to remember is that if this went to the high court it's going to cost boards in the region of €100,000 a day! Companies can be bullied around with the threat of legal action but I think if any company could take on this law it would be boards, I'd even be prepared to march in support and I think marching is a complete waste of time but boards has a user base to make it effective.

I wish these things could be discussed in After Hours because discussing these things in any of the religion forums ends up too one sided. Although I think at this stage the Religious have given up on replying in After Hours, at least the ones that can give a good debate.

smacl

Jernal wrote: »

Pineapple pizza anyone?

Blasphemy!!!!

robindch

Jernal wrote: »

Pineapple pizza anyone?

Never!

SpaceTime

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

UGH! What is wrong with you? Pineapple on pizza is disgusting.


Very sorry if that is blasphemous to pineapple pizza eaters

As a proud Pizzaterian I'm afraid I'm going to have to have you both done for that blasphemous mention of Pizza and the dreaded pineapple in the same sentence!

o1s1n

Yeah, wasn't too happy with that response in feedback, will have to carry on here instead.

Oh wait, you all agree.

...

I like pineapple and ham pizza if that counts?

ScumLord

o1s1n wrote: »

I like pineapple and ham pizza if that counts?

Pineapple?! Now that's blasphemy.

Bannasidhe

This whole debacle has depressed me.

Knex*

I would be gutted if anything happened to this forum, in all honesty. Came from quite a religious background and it was only in the last three or four years that I properly started to break away from it.

Forums like this helped in the resurrecting of my child like thirst for the wonders of the world, science, space, and much more. The critical reasoning, logic, and just all round generally well informed, and intellectual posts have been an absolute pleasure to read (coupled with the humerous ones!), and although I don't contribute to the forum very often myself, many a long night has been spent reading these threads until the early hours of the morning.

I would be disgusted, beyond words, if that ridiculous law ever forced this forum to be closed.

robindch

Bannasidhe wrote: »

This whole debacle has depressed me.

Turtwig

Sarky wrote: »

*Well, not Jernal, that bastard's always hounding me for links.

Consider it peer review.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

This whole debacle has depressed me.

Aww here's a hug.

Bannasidhe

robindch wrote: »

Feck it - if A&A goes I'm going out in a sugary fueled blaze of righteous indignation!

Pass the damn hobnobs!

Cienciano

robindch wrote: »

hobnobs pic

Hob nobs without chocolate is blasphemy

o1s1n

ScumLord wrote: »

Pineapple?! Now that's blasphemy.

May the pineapple gods smite thee for uttering such herasy!

PopePalpatine

You know what's nice? Grinding up hobnobs and sprinkling it on ice cream. *drools*

Nodin

barney10 wrote: »

Likely story

Entirely likely. It was a good notion and a line of concrete action.

Wibbs

Sod hobnobs, you Atheist weirdos.

That's how Agnostics roll.


PS if you suggest hobnobs and beer you'll wish there was a god in heaven to save you...

Animord

So the board that was A&A has now become B&B - Biscuits and Blasphemy

PopePalpatine

Wibbs wrote: »

Sod hobnobs, you Atheist weirdos.
[IMG.]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-VQqZQb8X5cA/UYrZ4vQ6cZI/AAAAAAAABgM/1g-f1wNPrxM/s1600/beer-glass.jpg[/IMG]
That's how Agnostics roll.


PS if you suggest hobnobs and beer you'll wish there was a god in heaven to save you...

Never has your avatar been so appropriate.

P_1

Animord wrote: »

So the board that was A&A has now become B&B - Biscuits and Blasphemy

And Beer, B,B&B sounds like a decent way to go, hope someone hasn't already taken that acronym :P

Knex*

Wibbs wrote: »

Sod hobnobs, you Atheist weirdos.

That's how Agnostics roll.


PS if you suggest hobnobs and beer you'll wish there was a god in heaven to save you...

Not even a full pint. Trust ye Agnostics to be half arsed :pac: