{"id":4045,"date":"2017-03-07T16:20:30","date_gmt":"2017-03-07T22:20:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/?p=4045"},"modified":"2017-03-08T08:42:11","modified_gmt":"2017-03-08T14:42:11","slug":"4045","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/2017\/03\/07\/4045\/","title":{"rendered":"FFRF Challenges Municipal Code"},"content":{"rendered":"

American cities and states often retain laws on the books long past their sell-by date, such that\u00a0any given layman (read: non-lawyer) cannot easily determine which laws really<\/em> have to be followed and which ones are\u00a0no longer\u00a0enforced or even enforceable. Among those which can no longer\u00a0be enforced are statutes and ordinances which impose content-based restrictions on religious or irreligious speech, such as laws\u00a0penalizing blasphemy. One of these archaic blasphemy laws\u00a0has recently gained the attention of the church\/state separatists at the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF).\u00a0Via Christian Daily<\/a>:<\/p>\n

On Tuesday, the Freedom From Religion Foundation wrote to officials of Edmond City [sic], Oklahoma to request that an ordinance<\/a> outlawing blasphemy against Christianity be scrubbed off the books after a concerned citizen raised the issue. The atheist group says the ordinance is unconstitutional because it gives more protection to Christians than other religious groups and infringes on the First Amendment’s right to freedom of speech, Christian News details.<\/p>\n

According to the ordinance in question, distributing literature or using language that mocks God, Jesus, or Christianity in Edmond is unlawful. These acts reportedly constitute an attack on peace.<\/p>\n

In a letter to Edmond’s attorney, FFRF spoke against the ordinance, which it wants to be taken out of the books. The atheist group said extending the restriction only to language that mocks Christianity is not permissible.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

FFRF’s letter<\/a> (rightly and righteously) points out that\u00a0Edmond’s blasphemy law\u00a0runs afoul of\u00a0the First Amendment in two distinct ways; endorsing one particular religion among many and restricting speech based on the viewpoint of the speaker. The law should undoubtedly be struck from the books, or at least struck down by the courts.<\/p>\n

Bearing all of this in mind, it\u00a0remains difficult for me\u00a0to think of a more toothless law than the one at hand here. Unlike\u00a0the publicly-supported religious imagery sprinkled<\/a> all<\/a> around<\/a> the City\u00a0of Edmond, this public endorsement of the Christian religion is tucked away in an obscure section of our municipal code. Unlike blasphemy laws\u00a0throughout Dar al-Islam<\/a>\u00a0and parts of (nominally secular) Europe, the Edmond\u00a0blasphemy law is both unenforceable and unenforced. I could drive around town with bumper stickers denying the Holy Spirit, demoting Jesus of Nazareth from demigod to peripatetic rabbi, and questioning the reality of any and all deities, and still have nothing to fear from the local constabulary\u2014so long as my brake lights are working.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile in Denmark, an ancient blasphemy law has been\u00a0given new\u00a0life:<\/p>\n

\n

Denmark\u2019s Use of Blasphemy Law Condemned by Center for Inquiry https:\/\/t.co\/E5T1Wuy8bw<\/a> pic.twitter.com\/VX43rOJfOR<\/a><\/p>\n

— Center for Inquiry (@center4inquiry) February 22, 2017<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n