…and this is a 
Blasphemy is always good for a laugh
Category: Humor • Religion
Posted on: January 7, 2008 5:32 PM, by PZ Myers
Here's a fine list of 20 blasphemous events, rated by vulgarity, criminality, religious impact, political impact, and deaths. My favorite has to be number 13.
Rude Buddha
A sculpture of Buddha with a banana and two eggs strategically placed was happily on display at the Royal Academy of Arts this summer, but when it was moved to the sculptors' home city of Norfolk it raised hackles amongst the local police force's hate crime unit. DC Dan Cocks ordered it to be removed from the gallery. The artist said he aimed to show that in a global village everyone can take offence at something.
I know, it's silly, but I felt like ordering Dan Cocks fired for vulgarity, too.
Comments
Buddha would have thought that statue funny, as best we can tell. (I spent plenty of time reading their religious texts and even hearing it from a lecturing monk, but I am still guessing. No, not all that much medieval philosophy and theology as some presume.) Good for him. Not so good for the rioters about cartoons, etc.
BTW, Martin Scorsese's "Last Temptation of Christ" was not listed - amazing, as a commenter there noted. Maybe they mixed it up or conflated it with "Jesus Christ Superstar" which is listed.
Posted by: Neil B. | January 7, 2008 5:48 PM
Boy, deities are awfully thin-skinned. Ain't they ever heard the nursery rhyme about sticks and stones?
I could never figure out why the nuts of the Abrahamic
mythsfaiths get so riled up about blasphemy, anyway. Isn't theirs a loving God who loves to send avant-garde artists to boiling pits of fire?How come God never says to his followers, "Hey, like leave the witches and blasphemers alone. I like totally built hell for a reason"?
(For some reason, I always imagined that God should sound like Snake from The Simpsons.)
Posted by: Brownian, OM | January 7, 2008 5:52 PM
That's why I've said for years that sacred cows make the best hamburger.
Posted by: waldteufel | January 7, 2008 5:54 PM
I want rolls of Qu'ranic toilet paper. Biblical toilet paper too. There's no other way I'd even look at those texts.
Posted by: CrypticLife | January 7, 2008 6:07 PM
Blasphemy is always good for two laughs. One at the blasphemy itself, and a second at the pants-wetting that follows.
Posted by: Rey Fox | January 7, 2008 6:07 PM
Life of Brian gets my vote. Though the "Every Sperm is Sacred" skit from "The Meaning of Life" is a great moment.
Posted by: Moses | January 7, 2008 6:10 PM
Interestingly, just today the National Secular Society in the UK launched another attempt to have blasphemy removed from the criminal statutes in the United Kingdom.
Posted by: Kimpatsu | January 7, 2008 6:16 PM
Interestingly, just today the National Secular Society in the UK launched another attempt to have blasphemy removed from the criminal statutes in the United Kingdom.
My recollection is that it's still illegal here in Massachusetts as well.
Posted by: MAJeff | January 7, 2008 6:20 PM
On the one hand, this kind of thing is puerile. On the other, I inevitably wonder to myself "When will someone finally get around to creating and hosting The Online Museum of Blasphemy?" The choco-Christ. Cigarette butt Jesus. Elephant dung Mary. Mohammed cartoons. The Life of Brian. Gilbert and George's sonofagod. Gay men wearing Mohammed masks.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article3137510.ece
"The Dutch were debating the limits of freedom of expression last week after an artist who photographed gay men wearing masks of the prophet Muhammad was forced into hiding and her work removed from a museum exhibit.
Speaking on the telephone from an unspecified location in the Netherlands last week, the artist, an Iranian exile who goes by the pseudonym of Sooreh Hera, said she had been threatened with "execution". She accused the director of the municipal museum in The Hague of cowardice for caving in to Muslim extremists.
Her story is a reminder of the tensions that have put the Netherlands and other European countries on the front line, sending dozens of people threatened by extremists into hiding since 2004, when a Dutch film-maker was murdered on the street and his collaborator driven into exile.
This leaves Hera, 34, in no doubt that she is in real danger. "They said to me, 'We're going to burn you naked or put a bullet in your mouth'," she said, referring to menacing e-mails.
"They say, 'Now you are locked in your home and you cannot go out any more'."
She said that by photographing gay Iranian exiles in masks of Muhammad, the founder of Islam, and Ali, his son-in-law, she had wanted to expose a "hypocritical" attitude towards homosexuality in countries such as Iran, where men can be hanged for homosexual conduct."
Posted by: Colugo | January 7, 2008 6:23 PM
From the Canadian Criminal Code:
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-46/
So it's only criminal in Canada if you use indecent language or criticise religion in bad faith (ha!).
Posted by: Brownian, OM | January 7, 2008 6:26 PM
I already use Piss Christ, My Sweet Lord, and the Danish cartoons as examples in a lecture I give to incoming design/art students on the power art still holds to impact and provoke. I wasn't aware of the "Rude Buddha". I think I'll be adding it in. Nice!
Posted by: Dahan | January 7, 2008 6:40 PM
I already use Piss Christ, My Sweet Lord, and the Danish cartoons as examples in a lecture I give to incoming design/art students on the power art still holds to impact and provoke. I wasn't aware of the "Rude Buddha". I think I'll be adding it in. Nice!
How about Jesus Christ: The Musical
Posted by: MAJeff | January 7, 2008 6:45 PM
Pedantry alert: Norfolk is a county, not a city.
It's Norfolk and good.
Posted by: VWXYNot? | January 7, 2008 6:55 PM
I imagine, after all this time, that Piss Christ may be getting to be Stinky Christ.
Thats awfully dark urine too, methinks the artist should be upping his water intake.
Posted by: Bride of Shrek | January 7, 2008 6:55 PM
CrypticLife
Hahaha, I hope you mean you'll look at them before you wipe
Posted by: Karl | January 7, 2008 6:58 PM
I've never really understood why something like The Life of Brian is considered so blasphemous but, say, The Book of Mormon is not. (Perhaps it's heretical, but not blasphemous --in which case, there would seem to be a fine line)
But really, if I was a devout mainstream Christian, I'd be a little more worried about a fanatical sect with millions of members making a mockery of my Lord and Savior than the cult of Python... oh, wait.
Posted by: CJO | January 7, 2008 7:04 PM
Please, MASKS OF MO indeed. If the very image of Mo provokes these nutcases, how did they learn to identify this "blasphemy" without a representation/ meme to internalize? Did that Danish cartoon have a "This Is Mo>>>>>>0" indication or what?
Posted by: Skeptic8 | January 7, 2008 7:10 PM
Posted by: SEF | January 7, 2008 7:10 PM
I'm thinking that Mr. and Mrs. Cocks should have named their son "Richard".
Posted by: Calladus | January 7, 2008 7:16 PM
Calladus: I used to know a Richard Ball. Don't know what his parents were thinking!
Posted by: VWXYNot? | January 7, 2008 7:23 PM
isn't it more accurately "profanity", not "vulgarity"?
http://m-w.com/dictionary/vulgar
http://m-w.com/dictionary/profane
I guess they're a little more interchangeable now. what happened to maintaining tradition? Dirty revisionist christians.
Also, does anyone else want to punch a priest when they see the "religion" section in their local paper?
Posted by: garth | January 7, 2008 7:23 PM
Long, long ago, when I was just a lad, the National Lampoon ran a comic it their Funny Pages section called Son 'o God Comix.
Posted by: BaldApe | January 7, 2008 7:28 PM
Just this year, a screening of [Life of Brian] in a church in Newcastle Upon Tyne caused uproar from conservative Christian group Christian Voice.
Good grief. A few years ago, my wife and I showed this, in the church, to the youth group during the Easter sleepover, with nary a protest heard. Who knew we were being so daring? (Of course, this was the United Church of Canada, where just about anything goes.....)
Posted by: Eamon Knight | January 7, 2008 7:35 PM
I like 'Bitchcraft', might use that in future.
Popetown sounds like a hoot, too bad they cancelled it because we often get BBC stuff up here.
I know a guy named Richard Head. No joke.
Thanks for the giggles!
Posted by: Caveat | January 7, 2008 8:08 PM
"Blasphemy is a victimless crime."
So there.
Posted by: GodlessHeathen | January 7, 2008 8:16 PM
Why do I have a nearly irresistible urge to quote Inigo Montoya?
Posted by: noncarborundum | January 7, 2008 8:18 PM
I once got a version of the Nigerian scam e-mail from a person claiming to be a Hong Kong resident named Johnson Wang.
Posted by: noncarborundum | January 7, 2008 8:22 PM
I find stories like that infuriating. Politicians of all stripes in the UK consistently denied Her Majesty's subjects a simple written guarantee of their rights as citizens, and no written constitution means that officious pricks like this Cocks can decide what the rest of us may or may not see in an art gallery. Don't ever let anyone take your constitutional rights away from you because, once gone, you have damn-all chance of getting them back.
Posted by: Ian H Spedding FCD | January 7, 2008 8:23 PM
Is it just me, or is it unbelievably moronic that "a level in an alternate-history war FPS where the earth has been invaded by aliens" ranks so high?
Posted by: jfatz | January 7, 2008 8:23 PM
Who remembers this video: Methodist Coloring Book by the Dead Milkmen
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pj-GIAACClc
Posted by: Colugo | January 7, 2008 8:51 PM
If we're going for music videos, I always fancied XTC's "Dear God".
Posted by: MAJeff | January 7, 2008 9:20 PM
Blasphemy is a blast for me!
Posted by: No More Mr. Nice Guy! | January 7, 2008 9:20 PM
I used to work in a doctor's office. To lessen our work load near the end of the day, the staff would sometimes put in fake appointments who, of course, would not show up. Once we had an appointment for a fellow named "Hung Lo."
Posted by: Stegve | January 7, 2008 9:24 PM
Firing Cocks? Isn't that what the Nixon and Clinton impeachments had in common?
Posted by: EyeNoU | January 7, 2008 9:30 PM
It's a mystery to me why blasphemy even exists. Change its targets and it's just good old fashioned free speech, which is acceptable in the US, most western European countries and most other developed countries of the world. And, if one's religion is true and valid, then why should a negative opinion expressed as art, speech or whatever be taken seriously by its followers? Don't they have faith in their faith?
Posted by: Keanus | January 7, 2008 9:39 PM
Good choice, MAJeff.
Blasphemy sweepstakes: Reality Asylum by Crass. I used to listen to this song in high school. This fan video is more heavy-handed than clever.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_HOYk9ED9Q
Posted by: Colugo | January 7, 2008 10:06 PM
Noncarb@#26,
Mr Shrek was in the British Army with a chap called Richard Partz, and yes, he was a Private.
Posted by: Bride of Shrek | January 7, 2008 10:08 PM
Re #10 (Canadian anti-blasphemy law): I wonder how old that law is, when it was last used, and whether it would survive a Charter challenge (not that I'm volunteering to test it....well, maybe as a retirement hobby ;-).
Posted by: Eamon Knight | January 7, 2008 10:14 PM
Thanks, Colugo. First time I saw that video it freaked me the fuck out, as did the moment when my best friend told me he was an atheist. I was in that religious camp, conservative methodists. Watching it again tonight reminds me that I want to write some of that stuff up...later (tomorrow is the cleaning I didn't get done today so that's for tomorrow).
Posted by: MAJeff | January 7, 2008 10:15 PM
MAJeff: I've always been an atheist or at least agnostic. I have gone undergone a "conversion" in the last couple of decades from strident anti-theistic atheism to more conciliatory atheism. I no longer blame religious belief itself for what I view as universal human failings and malign tendencies, although I understand how dogmas and institutions - theistic or not - have a powerful role in perpetuating bad ideas and practices.
If there is a value in blasphemy, above all it is in reminding us that we inhabit a secular society. Individuals and various groups may choose to view various symbols, doctrines, and personages as sacrosanct, but the state does not - and hence does not punish disbelief and irreverence.
Posted by: Colugo | January 7, 2008 10:28 PM
I no longer blame religious belief itself for what I view as universal human failings and malign tendencies, although I understand how dogmas and institutions - theistic or not - have a powerful role in perpetuating bad ideas and practices.
There are some I do blame specifically on religion. My mother is convinced I'm going to Hell once I die, because I'm an atheist. Her pain is real, but I'm not the source of it. Her religious belief is directly responsible for her pain.
The rest of the stuff is mainly people being people. We're asses, but we also rock. That's humanity, not religion. Religion is its own special problem. Something like the hell stuff does direct harm to people (and not just the terror invoked on children).
Posted by: MAJeff | January 7, 2008 10:33 PM
I once had a sensitive friend tell me I was insensitive on the issue of blasphemy. Groping for an analogy, she asked me "how would you feel if someone insulted Paul Kurtz, or James Randi, or Michael Shermer?"
Um ... like I was at one of their conventions?
It just doesn't translate.
Posted by: Sastra, OM | January 7, 2008 10:39 PM
Calladus wrote...
"I'm thinking that Mr. and Mrs. Cocks should have named their son "Richard"."
We've named our pet rooster Richard Rooster. The perfect name, methinks.
Posted by: Dale | January 7, 2008 10:51 PM
MAJeff: That sucks. What an insidious doctrine. For me, Dante's Inferno was a cool horror-fantasy tale. For others, Hell's existence is as certain as the Grand Canyon's.
I'll admit that sometimes blasphemy can be downright cathartic.
Mighty Sphincter - The Kingdom of Heaven
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J93rkZWw8zA
Posted by: Colugo | January 7, 2008 10:56 PM
In high school we played against a guy named _____ Siemen. We always called him "spurt" during the game to piss him off.
Posted by: MAJeff | January 7, 2008 10:57 PM
Mighty Sphincter - The Kingdom of Heaven
I can agree with this as a statement of principle.
Posted by: MAJeff | January 7, 2008 10:58 PM
MAJeff,
A fine suggestion, and really fun, but I don't thin it'll quite work with my lecture. I mainly teach 3D, even the cartoons are quite a stretch.
Posted by: Dahan | January 7, 2008 11:07 PM
MAJeff,
A fine suggestion, and really fun, but I don't think it'll quite work with my lecture. I mainly teach 3D, even the cartoons are quite a stretch.
Posted by: Dahan | January 7, 2008 11:12 PM
What? No mention of Roller Maidens from Outer Space?
I still love singing "C'mon Jesus" on long car trips.
Posted by: Gregory Kusnick | January 7, 2008 11:23 PM
Whoa. Hell was created by The Flood?
My ex-boyfriend went to school with a guy named Richard "Dick" Hymen (though his closest friends called him "Buster").
A friend of mine has an uncle who, many years ago, brought home a Vietnamese war bride. She'd been a prostitute over in 'Nam. Her name was Kum Soon.
You can't make this stuff up.
Jeff, thanks for posting that XTC video. I've never seen it before, though I know the song pretty well. XTC has to be one of the great 80's bands, no question, but totally underrated. I grew up hearing Skylarking and Oranges and Lemons and Nonesuch, drowning here in summer's cauldron.
Not only that, the distinguished balding gent wearing the tan suit up in the tree looks like my deceased paternal grandfather from Kiev. Weird.
Posted by: Kseniya | January 7, 2008 11:28 PM
And since we're swapping oddly named Richards, I once had a boss named Dick Jack. For real.
Posted by: Gregory Kusnick | January 7, 2008 11:30 PM
A friend of mine has an uncle who, many years ago, brought home a Vietnamese war bride. She'd been a prostitute over in 'Nam. Her name was Kum Soon.
Sedaris's Christmas storry just popped into my head.
Posted by: MAJeff | January 7, 2008 11:42 PM
Egads! Jeff Foxworthy's Christmas story just popped into mine!
Posted by: Kseniya | January 7, 2008 11:49 PM
Interestingly, only items in the list involving blasphemy against Islam are noted for leading to deaths.
Posted by: Stingray | January 7, 2008 11:50 PM
Yeah, Christianity has pretty much grown out of the whole "kill the blasphemer" phase. It's time for Islam to grow the fuck up. D'ya hear me, Mo? GROW THE FUCK UP!
Posted by: Kseniya | January 7, 2008 11:53 PM
55: christianity's grown out of killing blasphemers? I'm sure a whole lotta dead iraqis &etc would have something to say about that. they haven't grown out of it, they've just started using proxies.
tho i do agree completely with your assertion that islam needs to grow the fuck up and quit acting the fool.
Posted by: garth | January 8, 2008 12:33 AM
I'm sure we agree about the futility and illegitimacy of the Iraq war, but it's hardly the same thing as, say, calling for the death of a schoolteacher who allowed her students to name a teddy bear "Mohammed", or any of the other equally inane (yet deadly) manifestations of that particular flavor of insanity.
Posted by: Kseniya | January 8, 2008 12:57 AM
I'm going to start a new religion called - I can't believe it's not Buddha.
Posted by: Steven Carr | January 8, 2008 1:00 AM
LOL!
Well.
That puts a whole new spin on Last Tango in Paris.
Posted by: Kseniya | January 8, 2008 1:03 AM
Here is "Popetown"
http://tinyurl.com/2rk2pn
Its biggest sin is not blasphemy, its that it just isn't funny. Its a waste of a good opportunity for some decent jokes.
Posted by: Sigmund | January 8, 2008 1:35 AM
I don't see Buddhist taking offense at the "Rude Buddha." The Buddha was a guy, not a god. He had all the parts that all normal guys have. Besides, his were functioning parts as he did father a son.
I think it is a common misunderstanding to think that the Buddha was god or even a supernatural being. Indeed, in Buddhism, there is no god (as in the Abrahamic faiths). All attempts at making a god out of the Buddha is met with derision by serious Buddhists. For instance, a well-known Zen story goes thus. The Zen master was asked, "What is the Buddha?" He replied, "The Buddha is a dried shit-stick."
Posted by: Atanu Dey | January 8, 2008 2:05 AM
I feel compelled to ask: what, exactly, is the point of making fun of Buddhism? I'm not against this sort of thing in principle: I see nothing wrong in making fun of a religion if there's something to point a finger at. Islam is often violent and reactionary, and has questionable social values; many Christians are willing to discount tons of scientific evidence for how the world works in favor of some dusty old magic book; Hinduism (my family religion, although I'm agnostic personally) has been responsible for its fair share of violence and atrocities, even beyond its awful caste system. But... Buddhism? Sure, it's a religion, but it's probably one of the most benign ones ever. Its entire philosophy is based on peace and self-improvement: as far as I know, it has no evangelistic component (unlike Christianity or Islam), although my knowledge is admittedly limited.
I'm not questioning the artist's right to express himself: I simply think it's stupid to make fun of something that hasn't actually done anything to deserve it. Naturally, if anybody has historical or factual arguments that disprove my point, I'd be glad to hear them.
Posted by: CarrerCrytharis | January 8, 2008 2:18 AM
The problem isn't that Buddhism did anything to deserve it--it's that it hasn't done anything to deserve special protection from it, either. And the entire point of intentional blasphemy is that nothing is sacred, nor should it be. Not even Buddhism.
Posted by: Mike P | January 8, 2008 2:26 AM
Yeah I'll have to agree with you on that one sigmund, it seems pretty poorly written. Is it aimed at a young audience?
Posted by: Bartlett | January 8, 2008 2:34 AM
"Is it aimed at a young audience?"
I don't know too much about the program but I think its aimed more at the grown-up cartoon watching audience - fans of Family Guy, Futurama type shows.
I think religion can make a good target - look at 'Father Ted' or 'Moral Orel' as an example of how it can be done, but unfortunately Popetown was simply very badly done.
Posted by: Sigmund | January 8, 2008 2:58 AM
CarrerCrytharis asks "what is the point of making fun of Buddhism?"
I think there is a very good point to making fun of things--to test them. I am a great admirer of the Buddha and his insights into the human condition. As a nominal Hindu, I appreciate the refinement that he made to Hindu thought. The Buddha is one of India's most illustrious sons. But I would not hesitate to poke fun at Buddhism because it would help remove the superficial layers and reveal the deeper truths that the Buddha preached: that the universe is impermanent and is always changing, and that there is no abiding soul or self.
I agree with Mike P that there is nothing that is sacred in Buddhism. If what the Buddha taught does not accord with reason and rationality, it is to be discarded. The Buddha himself made it a point to stress that if you cannot experience the truth of something, then it is meaningless and should not be accepted. Even Buddhism, he said, is a means, a device, and once the need for the device is no more, it should be jettisoned.
Posted by: Atanu Dey | January 8, 2008 3:24 AM
Just by the by, one of the more profound Zen Buddhist saying goes that "if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him." That is, destroy the duality that you perceive between the Enlightened one and yourself. Mocking the Buddha should be the first step in the process of "killing" the Buddha.
I should also mention that for all my admiration for the Buddha, he was a mere mortal and did have his faults. He had to be persuaded that he should allow women into the order of Buddhist monks. I find this a very deep flaw in his character--that he was biased against women becoming a monk.
Posted by: Atanu Dey | January 8, 2008 3:32 AM
@Atanu: I see your point. Buddhism (at least the aspects I'm familiar with) stands up to mockery pretty well: I mean, everybody knows the Buddha had a wang. That's not really mockery at all. It's not like all these great teachers and sages didn't all have wangs (unless they were women, in which case it's not like they didn't have tits).
Therefore, my only objection in this case would be to the humor itself: it's not very clever. I suppose when it comes to humor, Buddhism doesn't really give you something to grab onto and tug at, the way other religions do. (Well, not something physical anyway. Heh.)
Then again, you're far more familiar with Buddhism than I am: it's a human creation, and so I imagine it has all the faults of other human creations, and deserves to be mocked to the same degree.
Posted by: CarrerCrytharis | January 8, 2008 3:51 AM
gregory kusnick, I am surprised that someone still remembers the Firesign Theater. I also remember Cheech and Chong did a sketch "Jesus Freak" which was short and to the point.
Posted by: bernarda | January 8, 2008 4:14 AM
To try to restore the non-seriousness of the comments section to potentially embarrassing names, I have one for you: "Peter Bonyhard".
His has been enshrined by google (&c), albeit sparsely. I remember, over a decade ago when working for Apple, when someone pointed this out to me... we nearly died laughing.
Posted by: Uncle Glenny | January 8, 2008 4:17 AM
I had forgotten about the series "Father Ted". Here is Ted protesting blasphemy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Mmge8nfsyg
Posted by: bernarda | January 8, 2008 4:41 AM
CarrerCrytharis, I will respectfully disagree with you when you say "I suppose when it comes to humor, Buddhism doesn't really give you something to grab onto and tug at, the way other religions do."
Buddhism is absolutely perfect for jokes. Here's one. The Buddhist monk hands over a $10 bill and asks the hotdog vendor to make him one with everything. He gets his hotdog and waits for his change. The vendor goes around his business and when the monk asks for change, the vendor says, "Change, my friend, comes only from within."
The best dharma teachers are the one's who are constantly making jokes. Listen to Alan Watts deliver some of his lectures on Buddhism. You cannot but imagine the twinkle in his eye as you listen to his open laughter. You can hear the subtext: "Isn't all of this bloody hilarious? Isn't life just wonderful and joyful? Isn't Buddhism a hoot?"
Allow me to tell you about the great teacher Suzuki. He was explaining the Four Noble Truths. The fourth is called "The Eight-fold Path". He starts off listing the eight. "First, there is the Right View. The second is the Right Concentration. The third ... Oh I don't remember. Just look them up when you have time." :)
That is what I like about Buddhism the most. It does not take it self seriously. It does not therefore have the martyr complex so often found in the semitic faiths.
The "Buddha of the Banana and Two Eggs" is delightful to me as I am a Buddha myself. :)
Posted by: Atanu Dey | January 8, 2008 5:04 AM
Kseniya no 57:
I'm sure we agree about the futility and illegitimacy of the Iraq war, but it's hardly the same thing as, say, calling for the death of a schoolteacher who allowed her students to name a teddy bear "Mohammed", or any of the other equally inane (yet deadly) manifestations of that particular flavor of insanity.
There are plenty of violent fundie Christian terrorists in the US. In recent history, the KKK is only the most famous Christian white supremacist organisation, responsible for thousands of acts from intimidation to murder. Check out the high current statistics for acts of vandalism and serious violence against abortion clinics, too, including stalking, firebombing, assault and in some cases the actual murder of clinic workers.
The fact that this stuff gets prissily reported as "crime" and relegated to the sidebar, rather than getting defined as "terrorism" and put full on the front page, represents merely that American media and society have a pro-Christian bias.
Those who threatened death over a teddy bear's name are indeed bloodthirsty flaming nutjobs, but there is no shortage of bloodthirsty flaming nutjobs anywhere. Some societies are more violent than others, but the most consistent determinant of violence in any society is poverty, not the particular flavour of god they prefer.
Posted by: Catherine Martell | January 8, 2008 5:10 AM
Hah! That's hillarious. As I said, you know a lot more about Buddhism than me. I think most other religions could do with an infusion of humor.
Posted by: CarrerCrytharis | January 8, 2008 5:53 AM
Yeah, the only problem with Popetown is that it sucks.
Father Ted, OTOH, rulez. "It has the body of a spider, but it's actually a baby!"
One of the best bits of blasphemy I've ever seen, BTW, doesn't really survive translation into English. Here it is, for those who can read German. I don't want to put a spoiler here to ruin the fun of the Teutonophones, but those who don't know German will find an explanation at my crib.
Posted by: Mrs Tilton | January 8, 2008 6:10 AM
Well, yeah. But there's not much point trying to blaspheme against the Buddha, as he's not a god. The entire concept of "blasphemy" just doesn't apply. You can no more blaspheme against the Buddha than you can blaspheme against Steven Hawking. You can take the piss, sure - and taking the piss is a time-honoured tradition in certain schools of Buddhism. "Rude Buddha" would be regarded as instructive (if perhaps somewhat trite and unsubtle) by many Buddhists. I don't think any would regard it as blasphemous.
I'm willing to bet money that the idiot of a DC who decided to object does not understand anything at all about Buddhism. The idea that portraying the Buddha with a cock and balls is a "hate crime" is completely ridiculous. I'm guessing that he's just an uptight prude looking for an excuse to exercise his authority.
Posted by: Dunc | January 8, 2008 6:28 AM
Buddhism in Nova Scotia appears to be the realm mostly of the very well off - we had an influx of Boulder and Boston Buddhists in the seventies/eighties, following a Tibetan monk who was certainly into a strange brand of humour - he liked to dress up in a fake military uniform. They proceeded to buy up lots of very nice rural land, including a very beautiful chunk of the Cape Breton Highlands, where they have a monastery.
And frankly, though less prone to violence, I still find most Buddhists - at least the local ones - a very silly lot.
Posted by: Bee | January 8, 2008 7:55 AM
Glad to see Serrano's Piss Christ on the list. The South Eastern Center for Contemporary Art (SECCA) is in my hometown and I was an AP art student in high school at the time of the outrage. My family was seriously involved in SECCA, and let me tell you the chaos that went on around the controversy was quite the experience. You gotta love seeing Jesse Helms get those jowls moving when he gets all flustered.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | January 8, 2008 8:05 AM
I disagree with the idea that Christianity has outgrown killing people. Instead, Western society, having become secular, has outgrown letting religions kill people (except exceptions -- see comment 73).
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | January 8, 2008 8:34 AM
Well, it's not exactly the same thing, sure, but it's not all that different. "This crusade, this war on terrorism is going to take a while." -George W. Bush, Sept. 16, 2001.
Posted by: Cyrus | January 8, 2008 9:44 AM
This is from a UK parliamentary select committee report in 2003, and is relevent to both PZ's story, and the National Secular Society's recent calls.
(It should be noted that Blasphemy laws in the UK only apply to Christianity, and that the Law Commission has been recommending their repeal since 1985, and that the government has been [paying lip service to the idea since at least 2001.)
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200203/ldselect/ldrelof/95/95w51.htm
Posted by: Bernard Bumner | January 8, 2008 9:59 AM
The thing about Buddhism is that all that most of us in the West know about is the kind of philosophical Buddhism preached by D.T. Suzuki and the Dalai Lama. Buddhism is not simply its most esoteric teachings, any more than Christianity is. I see nothing in Buddhism as practiced in historically Buddhist countries to suggest that it is any less full of superstition, ritual, and dogma than any other religion. Just to give the most obvious example, the Japanese Imperial Army and Navy were overwhelmingly Buddhist. (Hmm... "Gautamawin's Law", maybe? "As Internet discussions about Buddhism progress, the probability of someone mentioning The Nanking Massacre, the Bataan Death March, or Unit 731 approaches 1.")
Changing subjects, the most hilarious thing about blasphemous images of Muhammad is that there is no iconography in Islam, so you have to draw a generic bearded Arab in a turban, and then tell people it's supposed to be Muhammad.
Posted by: HP | January 8, 2008 10:02 AM
Is this actually a non-story?
I found this,
http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?in_article_id=68481&in_page_id=2
It seems that officers may actually simply have asked that the sculpture, which was was on prominent display in a window, be turned around so that the front was only visible inside the gallery, because it had attracted a complaint.
There is no mention of the copper's name, either, so that could be an embellishment.
Is this simply another They-tried-to ban... Christmas/Baa-baa Black Sheep/Straight Bananas story?
Posted by: Bernard Bumner | January 8, 2008 10:13 AM
Cyrus: Did I say it was "exactly" the same thing? Jesus Christ, people. I can hardly see the discussion for all the straw flying around.
Catherine (#73) and David (#79) have posted legitimate responses to my post. Offering up the Neocon agenda of toppling the so-called Axis of Evil as being somehow equivalent to large numbers of Muslims (or Christians) organizing to call for or to engineer the deaths of individual blasphemers for their words or works fails to address the topic.
Did Serrano get thrown in jail? Did an angry mob gather around the jailhouse and call for his death? Is he in hiding for fear of his life? Ditto Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, or Cosimo Cavallaro?
We're talking about responses to (perceived) offenses. Cyrus, try approaching this from the other direction: what you're arguing is that the events of 9/11 - and perhaps all other act of Islamic terrorism perpetrated against the west - are "not all that different" from a grade-school teacher allowing her students to name a teddy bear "Mohammed".
I suggest you reread my comment (#55) which was a direct response to comment #54, which was itself a direct comment on the topic of this thread. I'm all for critisizing the neoconservative foreign policy and the execution thereof, but that's a different category of conversation from the one about what happens to people who draw funny pictures of Jesus.
Posted by: Kseniya | January 8, 2008 10:19 AM
> christianity's grown out of killing blasphemers?
> I'm sure a whole lotta dead iraqis &etc would
> have something to say about that.
They were not killed because they were blasphemers.
> Indeed, in Buddhism, there is no god
> (as in the Abrahamic faiths).
Tantric Lamaism - the Buddhist strain most popular in the western world - accepts the existence of gods, although Buddha himself is not one of them. Like several other commenters have pointed out, Buddha was a man, not a god, so it is technically impossible to blaspheme against him. But the same holds true for Mohammed, and see what happened...
> I see nothing in Buddhism as practiced in
> historically Buddhist countries to suggest that
> it is any less full of superstition, ritual,
> and dogma than any other religion.
Remember von Ungern-Sternberg? He made even hardcore Chinese warlords and bolshevik commisars cringe. I have met a person that called herself a Buddhist and claimed that the bloody baron was a deity.
> In recent history, the KKK is only the most famous
> Christian white supremacist organisation,
> responsible for thousands of acts from intimidation
> to murder.
# 73,
can the KKK of today still be called a christian organisation? I guess they have quite a few pagan, satanist or nihilist neo-nazis among them.
> so you have to draw a generic bearded Arab in a
> turban, and then tell people it's supposed to be Muhammad.
# 82,
a generic Ottoman dignitary in a turban - wich would have been an Albanian or slav in real life.
Poste