Skip to content

irelands blasphemy law

Archived

12 replies · 556 views

This is an archived legacy thread. Replies are closed, but the discussion is preserved.

hibster wrote: are we in the 16th century or what then?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/jul/09/ireland-blasphemy-laws

http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/05/01/a-new-blasphemy-law-in-ireland/

Christians are such twats.

Surely if it's a libel law, and I am prosecuted for stating "god is a kiddie toucher, terrorist and criminal mastermind", he has to show up and prove otherwise.

Riiiiiiiiight, I'm off over the border for some fun, if I'm not back in 2 years, fight over my stuff.

0 likes

The Passion of St. Tibulus springs to mind, how stupid are they making themselves look?

0 likes

down with this sort of thing.

0 likes

careful now!

0 likes

I really should (never) read the papers - I miss all this crap! :)

0 likes

The second paper states this is NOT creating a law, as it already exists in the constitution. Rather it is ammending it so that the consequences are lessened drastically to how the law is already written, and that changing the Constitution is too difficult and drawn out and this is the best QUICK solution to the problem....

... people need to read the entire news, not just glance at the title and think they understand it all :nono:

0 likes

EdelBrock wrote: The second paper states this is NOT creating a law, as it already exists in the constitution. Rather it is ammending it so that the consequences are lessened drastically to how the law is already written, and that changing the Constitution is too difficult and drawn out and this is the best QUICK solution to the problem....

... people need to read the entire news, not just glance at the title and think they understand it all :nono:

Law against making fun of non-existent beings=dumb End of Unless the story goes on to mention "being unconditionally repealed" it's still a disgrace

0 likes

Doctor? wrote:

EdelBrock wrote: The second paper states this is NOT creating a law, as it already exists in the constitution. Rather it is ammending it so that the consequences are lessened drastically to how the law is already written, and that changing the Constitution is too difficult and drawn out and this is the best QUICK solution to the problem....

... people need to read the entire news, not just glance at the title and think they understand it all :nono:

Law against making fun of non-existent beings=dumb End of Unless the story goes on to mention "being unconditionally repealed" it's still a disgrace

You know my daughter was mad that she wasn't allowed to go to her friends house today, closed her bedroom door and claimed she never wanted to look at me again....

...thirty minutes later she was out talking away:shades:

0 likes

Not sure I get your point, other than "my wee girl defo didn't inherit any marine DNA" ;)

0 likes

EdelBrock wrote: The second paper states this is NOT creating a law, as it already exists in the constitution. Rather it is ammending it so that the consequences are lessened drastically to how the law is already written, and that changing the Constitution is too difficult and drawn out and this is the best QUICK solution to the problem....

... people need to read the entire news, not just glance at the title and think they understand it all :nono:

speaking of reading the enitre thing, wehere does anyone say this is a new law in any of these posts?

0 likes

I would say that Ahern is an A-hole.

0 likes

You're leaving NewOrderOnline

This link goes to an external website we don't operate, which has its own privacy policy and terms.

Destination:
Continue ↗