Don't Blaspheme!!!

[Slytovhand]

Hey.

I just thought I'd throw this one into the ring and see how it fares...

At work a month or 2 ago, someone made a comment, which was overheard by on of the more obvious christians. She responded with "Don't take the lord's name in vain - it's blasphemy".

The alleged blasphemer replied by saying that they weren't christian, so it's not 'my lord' to take in vain, so there is no blasphemy, go stick it (perhaps not an exact quote..)


So - here's my thoughts/question....

Can it be blasphemy, and if it continued, would it be a form of religious vilification or discrimination (or something similar). What if the person (or others) continue to 'blaspheme') and is overheard?

Now - I want to compare and contrast, which is why the point is being made.

Hinduism holds that cows are a sacred animal, and thus are not allowed to be harmed in anyway - particularly killed. If the above is a form of blasphemy, then surely eating a roast beef sandwich in front of a Hindu is just as blasphemous, and thus should merit the same sort of official response (remembering - this is at work). The reply might be - that is being seen... so what about the emails sent out from the canteen with today's dishes... Beef Stroganof anyone?

One of our staff members (maybe more..??) is a Jainist.. so the harming of all animals is right out - all life is sacred. Do their beliefs just have to be squashed, and they have to just tolerate it, because basically - it's inconvenient?


Thoughts anyone?


Slyt

(oh - in case it's not enough of a 'fratch' because it doesn't directly involve me, as a pagan, my beliefs get walked over often enough that I bring this up. Halloween?? A mockery of a high holy day...)

[Rapscallion]

Much of this can depend on the person being offended. I would imagine that a Jainist who protested that you were spraying insects out of your garden would get pretty short shrift. It's pretty hard to live with those aphids (unless you are me and close your curtains...), but it's worthy to note that if you say a certain word is offensive then it's far less of a bind to avoid it.

There's also the critical mass involved. If one or two people share a belief, then it won't impact on others so much. However, if a region has a large percentage of their population of the same faith, then laws are enacted - witchcraft laws in the UK, for example. The UK blasphemy laws were only there to protect the christian faith and not the jewish or muslim religions. I know there was a brouhaha about it a little while back, but I don't remember the outcome.

In the above example, if the person isn't a christian, why are they invoking the name of the christian deity? I'd put that down to social conditioning.

Rapscallion

[Amethyst Hunter]

Not blasphemous, but maybe just inconsiderate?

[anriana]

None of those examples would be discrimination. Rude, possibly harassment if it was ongoing, yes, but not discrimination.


As for the xtian example, I highly doubt the offensive person said "Oh my Yahweh!"

[Jaden]

Speaking as a Christian, I hold to 1 Corinthians 5:12-13, which basically says (as a summary) "You can't judge people outside of the church." So I wouldn't be offended if a non-Christian blasphemed around me.

[Norton]

Very nice, Jaden! Even as a non-believer, I know the Bible has some very good advice in it. I wish more Christians would take that scripture to heart.

[Sylvia727]

In the above example, if the person isn't a christian, why are they invoking the name of the christian deity? I'd put that down to social conditioning.

I believe the person said "oh my lord" which might not have any religious connotations at all. Even if they said "oh my god" or "goddammit," that might not be religious at all. Christians use the word god as the name of their god, but that doesn't make God the only god. For all the overzealous coworker knows, when I say "goddammit" I'm praying to Zeus to smite someone with a lightning bolt.

Saying "god" doesn't mean anything in modern culture. Everyone says it, and it is completely divorced from any religious meaning. That said, some of the sayings I hear can be pretty offensive - "Jesus fuck" being the most common, but also crude variations on the sexuality of Jesus Christ and the Virgin Mary. That's unacceptable. They're obviously just running their mouths off for the shock value. It's "lewd, rude, and crude" to quote one of my teachers, and it should be rewarded by walking away and refusing to deal with the offender anymore than absolutely necessary.

Can it be blasphemy, and if it continued, would it be a form of religious vilification or discrimination (or something similar). What if the person (or others) continue to 'blaspheme') and is overheard?

The dictionary definition of blasphemy is "an impious utterance against sacred things". So if I don't hold it sacred, how can I blaspheme against it? This isn't (or shouldn't be) a religious issue, but a social issue. It's rude for one to say disrespectful things about another's personal beliefs. Your coworker should have said "Excuse me, but I feel that the Lord's name is sacred. I understand that you might feel this way, but I would really appreciate it if you tried not to use it in a casual manner." If the other coworker argued or got defensive, she could say, "I'm not blaming you, I just feel that you might not understand my religion."

Myself, I like to take the Antichrist's name in vain. As in, "Son of the motherfucking Antichrist!" or "Blood of the Antichrist!" or "Bastard offspring of a diseased whore and the Antichrist!" Most Christians laugh or roll their eyes, and the ones that find it offensive generally find me offensive anyway, so I don't take it personally.

(oh - in case it's not enough of a 'fratch' because it doesn't directly involve me, as a pagan, my beliefs get walked over often enough that I bring this up. Halloween?? A mockery of a high holy day...)

Christmas and Easter? The same. Thanksgiving? Symbol of oppression. Valentine's Day? Commercial exploitation of religious festival.

I'm sure your beliefs are belittled and ignored frequently, but Halloween is not the best example. Halloween, or All Hallows Eve, was believed to be the day the evil spirits came out. So the villagers carved scary faces in turnips to frighten them away. They gave treats to the village children in a ritual meant to placate the spirits. It's the same customs, even if the gestures are empty.

I know that All Hallows Eve lines up with Samhain, and I seriously doubt that it was unintentional. Most or all religions have stolen from other religions. But no one is trying to oppress pagans by following semi-pagan, semi-Christian traditions.

[Pedersen]

I know that All Hallows Eve lines up with Samhain, and I seriously doubt that it was unintentional. Most or all religions have stolen from other religions. But no one is trying to oppress pagans by following semi-pagan, semi-Christian traditions.

Okay, fun time.

Not planning on citing sources for this post, too many of them to be found for all of what I have to say, and it would take hours to type this post.

Christmas: December 25. Birthday of Jesus. Wait, maybe not Some scholars believe he was born in 4BC. Others are not at all certain of the time of year. So, all in all, why was this date chosen? Historically, the pagans celebrated the winter solstice, which occurs around Dec 20 to Dec 23. The Catholic Church wanted to convert pagans, but that meant allowing them some way of keeping their holidays, including winter solstice. So, Dec 25 was chosen.

Easter: the first Sunday after the first fourteenth day of the moon (the Paschal Full Moon) that is on or after the ecclesiastical vernal equinox. Yeah, that's a firm date. Christ was definitely resurrected on that day. Celebration in fairly short order after the vernal equinox, another special day for the pagans. Noticing a pattern here?

And, if you want something truly fascinating, look up Mithra, and Saul of Tarsus. You would know Saul of Tarsus as St. Paul, converted on the road to Damascus. Saul came from an area of Turkey which was a strong Mithraic base. It is very likely that Saul himself was a follower of Mithra.

Mithraic belief systems held that the bull was sacred, and would be consumed in a specific ceremony. This ceremony included strong focus on the consumption of the body and blood of the bull as a representation of Mithra himself. Sound familiar at all?

Now, for even more fun: Read the New Testament. Lots of messages about "love thy brother", "turn the other cheek", etc. Then you toss in the testament of St. Paul, and suddenly you find the basis for various atrocities committed by the church over the centuries, including the Inquisition.

And that's just a small smidgin.

Even though modern day Christians might not be trying to oppress pagans, there is strong evidence that several Christian holidays were begun specifically to oppress and subvert pagan theologies.

[Sylvia727]

I just reread this post, and I think it could be read as abrasive and argumentative. Since I can't figure out another way to phrase what I'm trying to say, please take it with a grain of salt. I'm trying to have a philosophical discussion, not a flame war. If it seems otherwise, ask for clarification and I will try to elaborate.

---

Pederson, I knew all of that. It doesn't make a difference to me.

Early Christians shamelessly stole from pagan religions. They stole festivals, myths, traditions, and everything that wasn't nailed down. And they made it their own.

To use an example that someone on this board used a long while ago:
Early Xian: "Hey, neighbor pagan, wanna come to our Yuletide party?"
Pagan: "Why sure, that sounds like fun!"
Early Xian: "Psych! It's really a Christmas party. Ha ha, you're a Christian now."
Pagan: "Dammit! Now I have to go to church on the sabbath and wear uncomfortable clothing."

Is Christmas any less of a religious experience because some of its original practitioners called it by a different name? Is Easter less of a holiday because it was originally a celebration of the spring goddess Eostre? Am I supposed to stop having fun on Halloween because someone else believes that the spirits of the dead really do come out on this day?

The Christians stole from the pagans. The Romans stole from the Greeks. If you go back far enough, every religion had a small following that was later combined with other religious traditions. No one loses their religion if another person follows a different version of it. Remember, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. The early semi-pagan-semi-Christians believed in their holy days, under whatever name you want to give them. That belief later evolved into modern Christianity, but it doesn't change the fact that the early pagan 'converts' didn't really convert to Christianity, they just adjusted their vocabulary.

(This is not aimed at anyone on this board. I know this person in real life, I just think it's applicable here.)
If my holiday threatens your holy day, then your faith isn't strong enough. I'm not oppressing you by following a "bastardized" version of your traditions. Religions evolve just like any other organization. It's not a corruption of your purity.

[Amethyst Hunter]

Myself, I like to take the Antichrist's name in vain. As in, "Son of the motherfucking Antichrist!" or "Blood of the Antichrist!" or "Bastard offspring of a diseased whore and the Antichrist!"

That is awesome.

(Yes, I do love to discover new ways to swear, heh heh)

[Pedersen]

Pederson, I knew all of that. It doesn't make a difference to me.

That's a surprise. Most people don't know about the shared symbolism of the Last Supper and Mithra.

Is Christmas any less of a religious experience because some of its original practitioners called it by a different name? Is Easter less of a holiday because it was originally a celebration of the spring goddess Eostre? Am I supposed to stop having fun on Halloween because someone else believes that the spirits of the dead really do come out on this day?

Are African Americans any more oppressed when people put on black face and bad accents while eating chicken and watermelon? Are Christians any more oppressed when people say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas"? Are Native Americans any more oppressed when people offer them fire water while saying "How"?

No one loses their religion if another person follows a different version of it.

Right. The modern day followers of Mithra can vouch for that, too.

If my holiday threatens your holy day, then your faith isn't strong enough. I'm not oppressing you by following a "bastardized" version of your traditions. Religions evolve just like any other organization. It's not a corruption of your purity.

My reply to said person: My faith isn't in question. Keep in mind that, at this time, you have no idea what my faith is. And I'm not discussing it here. For all you know, I could be a druid, or a Christian, or a Buddhist, or an ancestor worshipper. You have no idea what religious traditions I follow.

You're not corrupting my purity. You're ridiculing it. You're making very light of my religious beliefs. With your actions, you are telling the world that I do not matter, and that I can be laughed at without consequence.

As for whether or not others are being oppressed when you do these things, look at my questions above, and consider the following:

<note: All below is edited to add in from original post>

Christians celebrate Easter as the day that Christ was resurrected. What if the tradition were to become for non-Christians to, on Easter Sunday, wear a toga, put fake wounds on their hands and feet, and go visit their family and friends saying "Yo! I'm back!"? What if that tradition were to become practiced by a majority of the population? Would Christian oppression be occurring then?

Be careful to say that no oppression is occurring. Ridicule is a very powerful form of oppression (in fact, it might be the most powerful form of non-physical oppression).

[Sylvia727]

That's a surprise. Most people don't know about the shared symbolism of the Last Supper and Mithra.

Anthropology geek. Reading dusty textbooks about people's beliefs 2000 years ago is my idea of a good time.

Right. The modern day followers of Mithra can vouch for that, too.

I would argue that Christians are the modern day followers of Mithra. But then again, I don't see anything inherently different between Mithra and Christ, or between the Virgin Mary and Isis, so someone with a different religious perspective than me might agree with you.

Be careful to say that no oppression is occurring. Ridicule is a very powerful form of oppression (in fact, it might be the most powerful form of non-physical oppression).

Oh, absolutely. But I'm not ridiculing anyone else's traditions when I celebrate my own. I didn't attend a pagan festival and think "Oh hey, I should plagerize that." Christmas, Easter, and Halloween rituals have been in my family for centuries. I'm not certain when Christianity stole pagan beliefs - about 1200 or 1500 years ago, maybe? A really long time. So for 1200 years my ancestors have been celebrating a religion in a certain way.

This is my family's religion. It has over a millenium of belief stamped on it. At the beginning it might have been a mockery, but after all this time it can't be anymore. It's been consecrated, if you will. The shape of the thing became the substance of the thing. My Halloween has been completely divorced from someone else's Samhain.

And yeah, Halloween is a religious festival in my household. It's the day before All Hallow's. If I go out in a scary costume and get candy after my prayers, the same thing my ancestors did to scare away the spirits, that's not a mockery of anyone. It's a ritual my family has been doing for centuries. I enjoy it, of course, but then again I don't subscribe to the "religion must be shameful and painful" school of thought.

You're not corrupting my purity. You're ridiculing it. You're making very light of my religious beliefs. With your actions, you are telling the world that I do not matter, and that I can be laughed at without consequence.

Nope. I'm celebrating my own religious beliefs. Or even if it's not particularly religious anymore, I'm celebrating my family's beliefs and traditions. Once upon a time some very bad people who called themselves Christian set up Halloween as a bastardized Samhain. Why they did it is irrelevant to my traditions, though of course it's very relevant to a discussion of historical pagan oppression. What matters is why the people celebrated it. No one can tell me that my peasant ancestors in some wet Welsh village were carving vegetables into jack-o'-lanterns in order to mock or hurt their pagan neighbors. They were doing it because they believed evil spirits would get them if they didn't. And that's what I'm celebrating: my family's traditions.

Christians celebrate Easter as the day that Christ was resurrected. What if the tradition were to become for non-Christians to, on Easter Sunday, wear a toga, put fake wounds on their hands and feet, and go visit their family and friends saying "Yo! I'm back!"? What if that tradition were to become practiced by a majority of the population? Would Christian oppression be occurring then?

At the time this little scene got started? Yes, almost certainly the Xians would be oppressed. Because I cannot think of a single reason to do that without intending to hurtful or shocking. Centuries and generations later? No, because it wouldn't be the Xians' god they were mocking anymore. It would be its own tradition with its completely different meanings. No one would connect the two anymore. (Except for scholars and history geeks, of course.)

I think a huge part of the communication gap is what we mean when we say worship, belief, religion, etc. For my part, I don't see how genuine belief or a celebration of family traditions can be an oppression of someone else. If you would care to explain, clarify, or correct?

[Slytovhand]

Ok - firstly - Pedersen...get out of my head ...

Christians celebrate Easter as the day that Christ was resurrected. What if the tradition were to become for non-Christians to, on Easter Sunday, wear a toga, put fake wounds on their hands and feet, and go visit their family and friends saying "Yo! I'm back!"? What if that tradition were to become practiced by a majority of the population? Would Christian oppression be occurring then?

That's my line....

Secondus...

Anthropology geek. Reading dusty textbooks about people's beliefs 2000 years ago is my idea of a good time.

That's 3 of us ... although, I prefer mine a bit older (and sometimes younger...Sumerian, Hittite, Egyptian, but also Celtic and Native American. Don't mind a bit of Mayan and Olmec as well).

As to the origins of Samhain, that have become a mockery since ... no - it's not actually about

They were doing it because they believed evil spirits would get them if they didn't. And that's what I'm celebrating: my family's traditions.

It's actually about honouring those who have 'crossed over' in times gone past. It is about remembering them, and giving them the same respect they would deserve if they were here now. That's why, when you go to the various countries that celebrate 'The Day of the Dead', they are all jumping up and down and having a carnivale atmosphere, not one of fear. The ritual and significance was bastardized some time ago to become 'keep away the evil spirits'.

It has over a millenium of belief stamped on it. At the beginning it might have been a mockery, but after all this time it can't be anymore. It's been consecrated, if you will. The shape of the thing became the substance of the thing. My Halloween has been completely divorced from someone else's Samhain.

'Consecrated'? Why, because one religion has put it's stamp all over something that was sacred to someone else, that makes it ok? And no, Samhain is still alive and well, and it pretty obvious that Halloween is a take off of it. So it isn't as 'completely divorced' as suggested.

All Saint's Day or All Hallow's Eve was a time for a vigil. It was a time for the veneration of saints - so that the whole idea of trick or treat is nowhere to be seen - it would be completely out of place. (Also as per Day of the Dead). And this 'Halloween' thing, as we have it now, is quite a recent event, historically speaking, and has no religious significance.


Ok - getting away from history, and into the here and now, and also a bit more closer to the topic raised... If I'm at work, and it's October (or earlier), and work is deciding to put on a halloween theme, what if I object on the basis of the above argument - that it is a mockery of my beliefs? After all - there are the whole 'ghosts and spirits and stuff' that comes associated with it (not unlike togas, thorns and stigmata of a mocked Easter...). If I object, is it therefore 'fair' for management to use the historical line Sylvia used above as a way for them to ignore my issue?


Slyt

[DesignFox]

I think a lot of what we need to remember is a person's intent when they do something.

I think people would look askance at you Slyt, if you objected to Halloween as a mockery of faith, because they don't see it that way. No one is intentionally mocking the Pagan religion. They're celebrating the secular Halloween.

I think that makes a world of difference.

I also tend to think that the "new" religions in the beginning, adopted the same traditions as the "old" religions to make converting people easier...I don't see that by adopting those holidays they were intentially mocking anybody...they just wanted to make people feel comfortable with some of the new beliefs by easing them into the new system.

Eventually, things got violent. But the churches wouldn't have had as many converts if things started out that way.

It was gradual, at first.

Some people have looked into the history and prefer to follow the old traditions...but just because traditions have changed, doesn't make them a mockery...not in today's context. Most people don't even know where some of the traditions came from, so I hardly see them as being callous in their actions.

You can't really say I'm making fun of you if I don't even know what to make fun of.

I would think, too, if someone told you what they were doing and what they believed, that people on your side would respect their right to hold those beliefs...as much as the other people respect your right to hold yours.

[Slytovhand]

Ooh...I dunno Fox..

Let's just say that this year (as against the other times I've mentioned it), work decides once again to do a Halloween theme - 'ghosts', bats, skeletons, etc,... all the usual.

I go to my manager and make an objection, based on as I've said. She will look askance at me (well... she does anyways... I'm weird ).

So - she can either say 'yep, I understand', or 'nope - I don't accept that, it will go ahead'. Given the latter, what would I be thinking? And, is ignorance any excuse at that stage? (but that's just a hypthetical - until it happens).

As for your second bit... yeah - true. But that's sort of what started the OP...