Offensive to God? Or just to you? |
The
show host, Gay Byrne, asked Fry what he might say to God at the gates
of Heaven, to which he replied "How dare you create a world in
which there is such misery? It's not our fault? It's not right. It's
utterly, utterly evil. Why should I respect a capricious,
mean-minded, stupid god who creates a world which is so full of
injustice and pain?"
Speaking
of the Greek Gods (Stephen Fry is also a classical scholar), Fry
added that they did not "present themselves as being all seeing,
all wise, all beneficent... ...the god who created this universe, if
it was created by god, is quite clearly a maniac, an utter maniac,
totally selfish".
The
Irish Independent reported that a member of the public made a
complaint to police in Ennis the same month the programme was
broadcast, which he claimed breached the Irish Defamation Act. He
has more recently been contacted by the Garda to say they are now
investigating his complaint. It is claimed that the complainant says
he was not personally offended by the comments, but felt that Stephen
Fry's comments qualified as Blasphemy under the 2009 law.
The
Defamation Act entered Irish statute books in 2009. It was
introduced to extend existing blasphemy laws in Ireland to all
faiths, as the Irish Constitution of 1937 only gave Christians and
the Christian faith protection under law. Breach of the Defamation
Act carries a 25,000 Euro (UK £22,000) fine.
Stephen
Fry in 2015 pointed out that he had not singled out any one religion
in his comments.
Scotland
also has a Blasphemy Law still on the statute books of Scots Law,
although it was last enforced in 1843, when Edinburgh bookseller
Thomas Paterson was jailed for 15 months for selling "blasphemous
literature".
So,
under risk of prosecution, if the Bible were to be believed, let me
tell readers exactly what I think of the God of
Judeo/Christian/Islamic tradition.
By
the very admission of the Bible, this is a petty-minded, childish,
cruel god, with all the loving kindness of a sadistic psychopath.
From
the very beginning, our "loving father" placed the first
humans in the Garden of Eden, and forbade them eat from the Tree of
Knowledge of Good and Evil. But hold on, if they did not know what
good and evil were, then it therefore logically follows they had
never been taught right from wrong. Therefore, when they did eat
from the tree, they were wholly innocent in their actions, not
knowing any better.
That's
the same actions of the arsehole who puts paint thinner in a milk
bottle and leaves it within reach of a toddler. Our 'loving father'
is one helluva shitty parent it seems
It
was inevitable that Adam and Eve would eat from the tree, for it is
human nature to be curious. That's why in 2010: Odyssey Two, Arthur
C Clarke had the aliens tell humanity "All these worlds are
yours to explore except Europa. Attempt no landings there.";
because they knew the temptation would be too great for mankind to
resist. It
is also why you get kids climbing over walls and fences into
'forbidden' areas, and even why if you put up a "Wet Paint"
sign, some daft bugger will inevitably always touch the paint to
check.
So,
with Adam and Eve innocently breaching God's rules, which he never
explained fully why, what was God's reaction? Not only did he punish
the first humans but he condemned all mankind to come for all time to
be punished for all eternity, for a minor infraction by the first two
who could not have known any better.
This
is a god who in a fit of pique, wiped out every species of flora and
fauna on the face of the planet, save for a few on a ruddy great
boat, because mankind had become "wicked".
A
god who commanded his "chosen people" to kill every man,
woman and boy child, right down to babies, but that they could keep
all the young unmarried virgin girls for themselves. Thereby
sanctioning not only mass murder but also rape and sexual slavery.
A
god who loved his chosen people so much that he deliberately hardened
the heart of Pharaoh, ensuring he would not accede to the pleas of
Moses to let his people go. A god who then proceeded to rain down hail, affecting everyone, poison the
water, affecting everyone, spread disease and lice, affecting everyone,
destroy the crops, affecting everyone, and kill the cattle, affecting
everyone. A god who rounded off this particularly nasty set of
parlour tricks by killing every first born son of every Egyptian,
right down to the babies.
A
god who laid down his book of rules, in which he freely admits to
being jealous, and goes on to tell his people to kill adulterers, gay
men and women - whom he allegedly created yet calls them an
"abomination", and even unruly and cheeky children.
A
god who was so angered by the sexual licentiousness of two cities
that he destroyed them, leaving only one man and his two daughters
surviving. Yet when the daughters got their father drunk and had sex
with him (because obviously there was loads of wine lying around in a
cave, and Lot somehow magically did not suffer from 'brewer's
droop'), the same god who frowned so much on the sexual practises of
Sodom and Gomorrah apparently had no problem with their incest.
A
god who laid down rules for slaves, telling them to be loyal and
faithful to their masters.
A
god who punished some children who were cheeky to a bald man by
having a bear tear them to shreds.
A
god who is allegedly omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, yet somehow
had to impregnate a woman with himself, then have himself sacrificed
and brought back to life, to 'save' mankind from the eternal
punishment which only the same god alone could have created.
A
god who told his followers to leave their families and follow him
only.
If
any human being told you that they watched your every move, they knew
everything you do, everywhere you go, everyone you met and what you
did with them, and that same person told you that you had better love
them and them alone above all others, or they would punish you in the
cruellest ways without mercy, you would be more than a little
alarmed. You may seek an exclusion order against that person. You
would more than likely contact the police, and if their investigation
proved that the said person had indeed said all of the above, they
would be charged, convicted, and imprisoned for your safety and that
of the public in general.
Yet
that is exactly what the Christian faith is based upon; that an
all-seeing God is following you all the time, and if you don't accept
him, love him above all others, and do his bidding, then you will be
thrown into Hell and punished mercilessly for all eternity.
The
'love' of God is no love at all; it has all the love of the
dangerously obsessed psychopathic stalker who needs locked up for
their own good as well as that of society.
If
the God of the Bible was proven to exist, then I would have no reason
but to accept that, but there is no way I could ever bring myself to
follow the evil fuck. And what would I say? I would tell him to his
face all of the above and condemn him that if anyone truly deserved
to be burning in Hell, it would be him.
If
anyone is offended by all I have written above, as I said, Scotland
has blasphemy laws, so go ahead, make my day – bring a complaint
against me. I would relish my day in court, I would plead Not
Guilty, and for my testimony I would use no other documents than the
King James Bible. Referring to it, I would prove that not one word I
say in any way blasphemes the Christian faith. Indeed, much of it
actually is central to the faith and thereby upholds it.
I
would call God as a witness, but I think he may unavailable to
comment.
Moreover
I would make the point as I do not believe in the
Judeo/Christian/Islamic God, or any other gods for that matter, then
I cannot possibly be guilty of blaspheming the Christian faith, or
any other faith.
When
Sir William Wallace was dragged before King Edward I of England for
his show-trial in 1305, he admitted many charges. But when the
charge of Treason was read out he defiantly cried out that he could
not be guilty of Treason, as he had never sworn allegiance to King
Edward. It did him no good, but it was a sound legal point.
Similarly, neither the God of Abraham nor Jesus are my kings; I don't
believe in the former and the jury is still out on the very existence
of the latter. Therefore, I am no more guilty of blasphemy against
the Judeo/Christian God than I am of blasphemy against the Elfin
Queen, unicorns, Father Christmas, the Green Man, or the Loch Ness
Monster.
And
exactly the same can be said of Stephen Fry. Indeed, more so for
Fry, as unlike me, he did not single out any particular religion.
Many
would find a great deal of what I have said above offensive, but it
is by no means blasphemous. If it is offending, then it is not my
belief that it is offending God, because I don't believe
he/she/it/they exist. So just who then is being offended? Only the
believers, and herein lies the problem.
The
brilliant You Tube atheist cartoonist who goes under the name
DarkMatter2525 once posted an absolutely brilliant video, "The
Real God; An Epiphany", in which he argued that when theists are
offended by atheists, it is not because the atheist is rejecting God,
but rather it is the believer who feels rejected. Likening belief to
an attraction to another person, he pointed out that when someone
approaches another, only to find their attraction is not
reciprocated, that person has their feelings hurt, they feel
rejected, and may lash out in anger as a result. DarkMatter2525 went
on to claim that this is because that the 'relationship' that
believers feel with their god is in fact a deep relationship with
their own ego. The god they 'worship' will often share their own
views on social, moral, and even political issues, and that is
because the 'relationship with god' is in fact a deeply-set
relationship with the subconscious self. In reality, the believer IS
the very god they claim to worship.
And
of course, among all this, there actually has been no rejection at
all. If any one of us is approached by another who is attracted to
us, but are not interested, we may let them down lightly, we may
agree to be friends but not more than friends, but are we rejecting
them? No, we are not. We may already be married or in a
relationship, we may be of a different sexual persuasion, the time
may not be right for us, or we may simply not be interested. There
are hundreds of reasons why we do not enter into relationships with
others, none of which can be defined as rejection. So it is if we do
not believe in the existence of god(s), and/or we consider the
writings of 'holy' books to be nothing more than mythology, we are
not rejecting those beliefs. If you think that we are, then consider
whether you likewise have rejected Maebh, Queen of Faerie.
Yet
the believer will react angrily, often even violently, to the
non-believer for this 'rejection'. History is replete with instances
of atrocities carried out in the name of religion, where countless
millions, possibly billions, have been killed for "blasphemy",
"heresy" and "apostasy". Here in Edinburgh
alone, we have the Witches Well; a memorial on the site where
hundreds of innocents, mostly women and girls, were once burned at
the stake for Witchcraft (over 500 alone during the reign of King
James VI, who was paranoid about witches, and whose youngest victim
was a little girl of 4 years old). The Holy Inquisitions killed
thousands, all based on idle superstition and dogma which has since
been proven to be wholly mistaken.
We
have all seen or heard about the atrocities committed by Daesh, and
there are Islamic countries where questioning or denying the Qur'an
can earn sentences ranging from fines, to imprisonment, to lashes, or
even to hanging or beheading. Saudi Arabia has recently passed laws
which define atheism as terrorist activity.
But
do not be too quick to point the finger at the dark ages ideas of
fundamentalist Islamic states, Christians, because although you may
claim that Christian atrocities are part of a sad and mistaken
history, your faith does not have clean hands to this day. In Kenya
it is not uncommon for fanatical Christian mobs to hunt down, attack,
and even massacre people they suspect of witchcraft. In Uganda
faith-based laws see gay men arrested, beaten up in cells, and even
'disappeared' in some cases. Nor can you put this down to the idle
superstition of some uneducated African peoples. Chechnya is quite
openly rounding up gay men and placing them in concentration camps,
with full sanction of the Islamic authorities, and the Orthodox
Church. And of course the homophobic views of Russian President
Vladimir Putin are more than well known, and gay men in Russia are
often arrested and/or beaten up, which the authorities either turn a
blind eye to, or are actually involved in. This again again has the
sanction of the Orthodox church.
Believers
reacting to what they perceive as blasphemy, be it through law, by
violence, or both, actually suggests a distinct shallowness of faith.
For surely if you believe your god is omnipotent, that is
all-powerful, then it is down to that god and that god alone to deal
with the blasphemer. Or do you believe your god to be so weak and
powerless that he needs his earthly minions to do his fighting for
him?
This
is actually a very important message for the Christian faith, which
indeed tells believers not to be judge, unless they too should be
judged. In Deuteronomy 32:35, God allegedly states "To me
belongeth vengeance and recompence; their foot shall slide in due
time: for the day of their calamity is at hand, and the things that
shall come upon them make haste." This is repeated in Romans
12:19 "Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give
place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay,
saith the Lord." In other words, by the very rules laid out in
the Bible, it is not the place of Christians to seek revenge for
imagined slights, but they are actually meant to leave it to God to
deal with the 'sinner'.
Gandhi,
although not a Christian, was a very devout man who believed there
was truth in all faiths and who greatly admired the story of Jesus.
He once stated "Violence implies atheism", again working on
this idea that if you turn to violence, then you are denying the
power of your god.
If
any believers are offended by my writings, they therefore have to ask
themselves just who have I offended? Have I really offended their
god? No, because I don't believe their god exists, and if they did,
then it is that god's place to deal with me, not the believers.
Have
I offended the believer? No, I have severely questioned the
Judeo/Christian faith, which I consider to be utter nonsense, and the
Bible - already proven to be unreliable and inaccurate - to be little
more than a bunch of Bronze Age goatherders campfire tales.
Believers, whichever faith they follow, really need to get over the
idea that their 'holy books' are somehow not open to scrutiny. If
they do not, then they are little different from the Taliban. As
Maajid Nawaz, a former Islamist fundamentalist who now campaigns
against Islamist indoctrination says "No idea is beyond
questioning. No human being is beyond dignity."
Have
I as much as suggested suppressing the right to freedom of religion?
Not by the slightest iota. I am in fact extremely passionate about
human rights, including the right of freedom of religion, thought and
conscience. I may consider religion to be absolutely barmy, but if
anyone chooses to believe, then not only is it their right to do so,
but I would be the first to defend that right. I may not be a
parent, but I believe every child has the right to a good education.
You do not have to be part of something to defend it. I only wish
that more theists would likewise defend my right NOT to believe in
god(s); freedom of religion also means freedom from religion.
So,
believer, if you are indeed offended by my writings, and think they
are blasphemous, here is my open invitation; go ahead, bring a
complaint against me. I do believe that the statute in Scots Law
against Blasphemous Libel would cover it. I think I have already
clearly illustrated however that I am innocent of any such charges,
and I will more than happily stand up and repeat those arguments in a
court of law.
Then
before you bring any such action, consider that if you do so, not
only would you be trying to do your God's work for him, but in doing
so you would also be bearing false witness against me.
Would
both of these actions not in fact be, ermm, blasphemy?
No comments:
Post a Comment