Yes to freedom of religion, because everyone has the right to worship whoever and whatever he or she wants, yes, but also, and this is important, yes to criticizing that motherfucking religion, whatever it may be, if you’re not religious. Yes to taking up issue with it if it has aggrieved you. Yes to holding it accountable for things it says that don’t add up.
In other words, if religion is free to preach in favor of itself and against the ways of non-religious lifestyles, fine, go right ahead.
But then, by the same taken, the non-religious among us, or anyone with an opinion concerning religious dogma, causal or critical, are also free to preach and argue publicly against that dogma without being accused of an offense.
See, you can’t have churches and mosques and temples around the world speaking of the ‘ill-reputed’ and ‘false’ ways of the unbelievers (or ‘infidels’) with impunity, while there are still laws in place that punish skeptics for ‘blasphemy.’ If a religious dogma is free to judge and condemn and damn the ways of ‘sinners’ without some law being drafted up against it, then skeptics ought to be free to do the same.
Blasphemy charges! Where the hell are we? When the hell is this? I thought we fought a long, hard battle over the centuries to be rid of this kind of down-your-throat tyranny. I thought we ousted once and for all the people who’d decided that their word was final and beyond reproach, finally bringing their lofty canon down to earth, on par with other belief systems.
Blasphemy charges indeed! Go fuck yourselves!
From your appropriately irreverent and pragmatic Spin Doctor,
Eyes open, mind sharp.
PS – One of the things Stephen Fry said (for which he is being investigated): ‘Because the god who created this universe, if it was created by God, is quite clearly a maniac, an utter maniac, totally selfish. We have to spend our lives on our knees thanking him. What kind of god would do that?’
PS 2 – Having faith is one thing, and very useful and decent on some level, even if it is founded on premises utterly questionable. But imposing your faith on others, drafting up rules by which you deem your beliefs and the canon from which they’re derived above criticism, and then going after the critics for having used contentious language to challenge you, well, what kind of asinine behavior is that? Double standards! You can’t have weekly or even daily sermons or calls to prayer, all the formal religious addresses that cast invective after invective against all those who don’t agree with them, and then scream bloody sacrilege when someone grills you in return. It’s blatant hypocrisy. One could even call this attitude capricious, if not selfish and maniacal.