Head over to our T
Blasphemy as a Surrogate Argument
Read more about: Comment, Feature Gallery, Fianna Fail, Law 
I was waiting to cross at the Four Courts’ pedestrian lights when a thought occurred to me about Dermot Ahern and the Blasphemy section of the Defamation Bill. It was prompted by the bright red posters on the lamposts, advertising a ‘Rally For Life’. Since the small print suggested it was being organised by the previously unknown Rally for Life organisation, but they clearly had buckets of cash to spend, I presumed this was Youth Defence’s latest guise.
The thing that occurred to me was that there is a constituency for God-Bothering in Ireland. They are organised, vocal and live mostly in Fianna Fail. But above all other things, the issue they obsess over isn’t Blasphemy, but Abortion.
And then a little light went off inside my head.
The new law on Blasphemy is a phoney war. It is intended to demonstrate to this constituency that Dermot Aherne is a Minister, and eventual Party Leader Candidate, who has proven that he will promote the causes dear to the God-Bothering voter, in the teeth of derision, resistance and objection.
The message is clear- Dermot Ahern is advertising himself as the Leadership Candidate most likely to deliver on Abortion. When the time comes, that impression is likely to translate into a healthy dollop of organised and well-funded support being brought to bear on backbenchers.
Pat Rabbitte described the blaphemy legislation as daft. If the inside of everyone’s head was as bleak as mine, it wouldn’t look daft. If my traffic light thought is right, perhaps what the Minister would like most of all is a loud, red-faced and ultimately pointless argument. He has the votes. He will get this through. But he’s looking for the noise. If you’re of a secular persuasion it might be better to stay quiet and wait in the long grass if you didn’t want to face Taoiseach Ahern’s next big idea in a year’s time.
Same goes for the Lisbon II abortion “guarantee”. It’s more about the loonies within FF and some of the loonies that vote FF than popular reasons for rejecting Lisbon I
‘If you’re of a secular persuasion it might be better to stay quiet and wait in the long grass if you didn’t want to face Taoiseach Ahern’s next big idea in a year’s time.’
Bad advice. Fearing he might be an even bigger idiot in a year’s time is no reason not to complain because he is an idiot now. It’s never a good idea to roll over just because something worse might happen if you do.
And I wouldn’t be so sure that the Great Protector is securing YD support. Remember, he is also the minister introducing gay marriage. That may not be how gay groups see his half-hearted proposals, but it is how the god botherers will interpret them.
Pat Rabbitte described the blaphemy legislation as daft.
Yes because Labour were so vocal against the idea of a blaphemy law and didn’t introduce their own that simply had a smaller fine.
I think the term is a dog whistle issue. And it is obvious that there is a constituency for this out there, and it cross all income and educational divides witness Ronan Mullen’s election to the Seanad by way of the NUI panel. And they’re not confined to FF either though there is a greater preponderance of them there than in FG. Garrett spooked some of them and the newbies gravitated towards FF as they were in power.
gay marriage too
meanwhile this is the ‘future taoiseach’ with hundreds of lawyers begging him not to break the constitution on criminal law
Why Simon? You think he’s going to come for us once we’ve identified ourselves as dissenters?
My suggestion that quiet might be more useful than noisy is based on the fact that
a) The matter is now going to be passed into legislation. At this point, it will not be altered for the better in any significant manner. The earlier complaints probably resulted in the fine being dropped to E25,000 and were therefore of some use.
b) If we pretend I’m correct for a second about the Minister’s intentions, and we should remember that I have no insight more than that granted to people waiting at traffic lights, then the more noise generated at this stage in the process the better he likes it. I’d prefer not to give him the satisfaction.
In relation to a) above, I’d also point out that the original justification for the E100,000 fine was to ensure that the matter would be a High Court jurisdiction matter. I can’t remember if the Circuit Court, whose civil jurisdiction is all matters up to E38,000 is now the likely home for any future prosecutions. If so, it rather undermines one of the Minister’s invisable elves’ justifications for his decision to put any fine of significance in place. Why E25,000? Why not E7,000 or E1?