Updated: 21 May 2008, 23:23

Originally written: 17 February 2006

To assert that religion is anti-human, viciously opposed to reason, and murderous, is probably blasphemous. That makes Capitalism’s Gravediggers blasphemous. That the assertion is factual is probably not relevant in the face of anti-blasphemy laws.

The assertion is not hateful. It does not bring religionists into disrepute. It does not incite violence against religionists. But due to the insecurity of religionists, and their influence upon the state, it is (or may soon be) illegal. It is the religionists themselves and their religions which are hateful, disreputable, and violent.

Capitalism’s Gravediggers is quite willing to face any punishment the gods might deem appropriate, as long as the gods do their own dirty work. It is, however, frightening when religionists take it upon themselves to defend their self styled “peaceful” religions by burning buildings and murdering anyone who disagrees with them. It is frightening when the state takes it upon itself to defend religion by attacking the non-religious. When someone points out the obvious fact that many religionists have absolutely no qualms at all about murdering infidels, the religionists have a new target.

Christians, Muslims, and Hindus account for more than 70 percent of all religionists. They, and most of the others have bloody histories. Religion has been frequently used by ruling classes for their own vile purposes. That religion is so easily used is but another feather in religion’s disreputable hat.

It is frightening to see what appears to be a movement, in countries such as Canada, and in the European Union, toward reinvigourating anti-blasphemy laws. A month ago, even many religionists would have been aghast, but today, the signs are ominous. It is not only Islam which is pushing for teeth in the anti-blasphemy laws. There seems to be a significant number of non-Muslims jumping on this bandwagon.

It is easy to be misled by the numbers of letters to the editor published in newspapers. Newspaper publishers have newspapers to sell, and generating fear sells newspapers. The willingness of newspapers to give voice to anti-blasphemy supporters can perhaps be taken as indicative of a growth in the social acceptability of punishing blasphemers.

Blasphemy and some significant concepts:

Evolution: hurtful and blasphemous. Denies many religious perspectives on the origin of human beings, relegating those religious ideas to the realm of fantasy.

Secular state: hurtful and blasphemous. Denies the supremacy of god or gods. However, many, if not most, states at least assert the existence of god or gods. Canada and the United States, for example, both make this assertion.

Stating the case against religion: hurtful and blasphemous. To rationally lay out an argument disputing the existence of god or gods is most certainly blasphemous.

To be complacent in a world in which more than 90 percent of the population is religious could result in a terrible cleansing of rational thought.

If anti-blasphemy laws are again used against secularists, those who attack the teaching of evolution in the school system will have received an extremely powerful weapon. Evolution is clearly blasphemous. So if evolution is taught in schools, the teacher must blaspheme, and impressionable young minds are exposed to blasphemy. If anti-blasphemy laws are enforced, schools would have to ban the teaching of evolution. How many of us would have the guts to defy the anti-blasphemy laws by publicly stating support for the concept of evolution as opposed to religious fantasies?

How far will the anti-blasphemy movement turn back the clock?

What will be next if the religionists and bleeding-heart liberals succeed?
Home Frequently Asked Questions News Perspective Literature Quotes Contact

Advanced Search