[talk.religion.misc] Blasphemy still illegal in Massachesetts?

mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz) (09/22/86)

According to today's Boston Globe:

"Chapter 272, Section 36, of the Massachusetts General Laws sets a fine
of $300 or 1 year in prison for 'whoever wilfully blasphemes the holy name
of god by denying, cursing, or contumeliously reproaching God, his creation,
government, or final judging of the world, or by cursing or contumeliously
reproaching Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost, or by cursing or contumeliously
reproaching or exposing to contempt or ridicule the holy word of God
contained in the Holy scriptures.'

If this law is indeed still in effect, then I encourage one and all to
openly violate this unconstitutional and unenforceable law until Christians
are embarassed enough to have it repealed.
--

"To save the world requires faith and courage: faith in reason, and courage
to proclaim what reason shows to be true."
	Bertrand Russell in "The Prospects of Industrial Civilization".
-- 

Mike Huybensz		...decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh

pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M Koloc) (09/23/86)

In article <1157@cybvax0.UUCP> mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz) writes:
>According to today's Boston Globe:
>
>"Chapter 272, Section 36, of the Massachusetts General Laws sets a fine
>of $300 or 1 year in prison for 'whoever wilfully blasphemes the holy name
>of god by denying, cursing, or contumeliously reproaching God, his creation,
>government, or final judging of the world, or by cursing or contumeliously
>reproaching Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost, or by cursing or contumeliously
>reproaching or exposing to contempt or ridicule the holy word of God
>contained in the Holy scriptures.'
>
>If this law is indeed still in effect, then I encourage one and all to
>openly violate this unconstitutional and unenforceable law until Christians
>are embarassed enough to have it repealed.

Well, I'm not for the death penalty but I think that such fines are
not out of order for protecting the values of ethnic cultures of a
vast array in this country.  The bad side to Mike's suggestion is 
that it gets others sidetracked from more important and productive 
things, and what's even worse is that JDL and the HOLY JIHAD will 
fire bomb Mike's car and stone him to death instead of chasing each 
other around.  

The good side is that then the law will be expanded to include other
forms, cults and cultures, and provisions for state taking over the 
property used in the commission of the crime will be added.  Of 
course, Mike won't have to worry since his car will have been already
fire bombed, and his organs will have been donated to his favorite
charity --   4H transplants  -- Savapig INC.         :-)

This has been all in good fun but there is a point:  "Let sleeping
dogs lie".  Yap now and you'll have a pack of wolves at your throat.

Wait a few decades Mike, you've got time.
+---------------------------------------------------------+--------+
| Paul M. Koloc, President: (301) 445-1075                | FUSION |
| Prometheus II, Ltd.; College Park, MD 20740-0222        |  this  |
| {umcp-cs | seismo}!prometheus!pmk; pmk@prometheus.UUCP  | decade |
+---------------------------------------------------------+--------+

barry@mit-eddie.MIT.EDU (Mikki Barry) (09/24/86)

In article <259@prometheus.UUCP> pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M Koloc) writes:
>In article <1157@cybvax0.UUCP> mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz) writes:
>>According to today's Boston Globe:

>>"Chapter 272, Section 36, of the Massachusetts General Laws sets a fine
>>of $300 or 1 year in prison for 'whoever wilfully blasphemes the holy name
>>of god by denying, cursing, or contumeliously reproaching God, his creation,
>>government, or final judging of the world, or by cursing or contumeliously
>>reproaching Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost, or by cursing or contumeliously
>>reproaching or exposing to contempt or ridicule the holy word of God
>>contained in the Holy scriptures.'

>Well, I'm not for the death penalty but I think that such fines are
>not out of order for protecting the values of ethnic cultures of a
>vast array in this country.  The bad side to Mike's suggestion is 
>that it gets others sidetracked from more important and productive 
>things, and what's even worse is that JDL and the HOLY JIHAD will 
>fire bomb Mike's car and stone him to death instead of chasing each 
>other around.  

Gee, you have just reproached one of god's creations!  Pay your $300 fine
to HASA, c/o Mikki Barry@mit-eddie.  Thank you.  Or would you prefer the
1 year in prison?

>This has been all in good fun but there is a point:  "Let sleeping
>dogs lie".  Yap now and you'll have a pack of wolves at your throat.

But are you referring to the christians as wolves if the non christians
"yap" (i.e. disturb the status quo?  I just thought they were sheep in
wolves clothing. :-?

EEK!  Run for the asbestos!

Mikki Barry
HASA (S for "sheep" division)
-----------------------------------------
"Trouble is, sheep are very dim, and once they get an idear into their
 'eads, there's no shiftin' it"

sxnahm@ubvax.UUCP (Stephen Nahm) (09/24/86)

Expires:



Sender:

Distribution:

Keywords:


In article <259@prometheus.UUCP> pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M Koloc) writes:
>
>Well, I'm not for the death penalty but I think that such fines are
>not out of order for protecting the values of ethnic cultures of a
>vast array in this country.

In your response, you chose to ignore the point of Mr. Huybensz's posting:
the U.S. Consitution states that the government shall not establish a
religion.  A law which gives legal protection to a religion has the effect
of establishing it as "authorized".

>The good side is that then the law will be expanded to include other
>forms, cults and cultures, and provisions for state taking over the
>property used in the commission of the crime will be added.

What do you suggest be done when two cultures are fundamentally opposed?
Cult A asserts that all non-A cultists are Heathen and must be converted or
destroyed.  Cult B states that, in particular, Clut A members are Evil and
must be destroyed and then converted.  Are you suggesting that a law be
passed that protects the right of both cults to destroy each other?

The law in question forbade even the suggestion that there is not a God (and
within the context of a particular God, the Christian God).  Shouldn't those
culture which disagree with the idea of the particular Christian God and
those which hold that no God exists also be protected?

Better to take the course the Founding Fathers took: support no particular
cult and let the market place of ideas prevail.
-- 
Steve Nahm                  UUCP route:       {amd|cae780}!ubvax!sxnahm
sxnahm@ubvax.UUCP           Internet address: amd!ubvax!sxnahm@decwrl.DEC.COM

mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz) (09/25/86)

Why Paul, I had no idea you were Ken Arndt's twin brother!

In article <259@prometheus.UUCP> pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M Koloc) writes:
> Well, I'm not for the death penalty but I think that such fines are
> not out of order for protecting the values of ethnic cultures of a
> vast array in this country.  The bad side to Mike's suggestion is 
> that it gets others sidetracked from more important and productive 
> things, and what's even worse is that JDL and the HOLY JIHAD will 
> fire bomb Mike's car and stone him to death instead of chasing each 
> other around.  

You're next, with your satanic company name.  But that's easy for you to
say when you're sitting snug in your bedroom 600 miles away from
Massachusetts, where the action is.  You're probably trying to persuade
Congress to provide grants to the states for enforcement of these laws.
I can spot a right-wing fundamentaloid lobbyist a thousand miles away!

> The good side is that then the law will be expanded to include other
> forms, cults and cultures, and provisions for state taking over the 
> property used in the commission of the crime will be added.  Of 
> course, Mike won't have to worry since his car will have been already
> fire bombed, and his organs will have been donated to his favorite
> charity --   4H transplants  -- Savapig INC.         :-)

Now I understand why your last name is different from your twin bother
Ken's.  Your mother could only fit one of you in her pouch, so she put
you out for adoption.  :-)

> This has been all in good fun but there is a point:  "Let sleeping
> dogs lie".  Yap now and you'll have a pack of wolves at your throat.
> 
> Wait a few decades Mike, you've got time.

If I get the sleeping dog's leashed, then I won't have to tiptoe.
Massachusetts is essentially violating the Constitutional leash law for
religions.  Why wait?  Public humiliation will do far more to solve the
problem than tolerance of unconstitutional law will.
--

A tongue in cheek prevents foot in mouth.
-- 

Mike Huybensz		...decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh

pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M Koloc) (09/27/86)

In article <1162@cybvax0.UUCP> mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz) writes:
>Why Paul, I had no idea you were Ken Arndt's twin brother!
>You're next, with your satanic company name.  But that's easy for you to
>say when you're sitting snug in your bedroom 600 miles away from
>Massachusetts, where the action is.  You're probably trying to persuade
>Congress to provide grants to the states for enforcement of these laws.
>Now I understand why your last name is different from your twin bother
>Ken's.  Your mother could only fit one of you in her pouch, so she put

>Massachusetts is essentially violating the Constitutional leash law for
>religions.  

Mass of two what?    :-)      
Seriously, Mike, sweetie, what's all this "ad hominum" comment?

>If I get the sleeping dog's leashed, then I won't have to tiptoe.

I still think you're attacking tumbleweeds, but who knows maybe society
is better off homogenized.   Increase society's entropy anybody?

>{prometheus and satan}  [inference -- Carnal knowledge]

Ahhh,  Michael, do you read the Bible with only current day word
meanings in mind.  The knowledge imparted by prometheus (I) was
technology of fire, navigation, ship building, etc.  now taught
at MIT.  

I think you've got that kind of knowledge mixed up with the carnal
stuff that satan is reputed to foster.  Boston has both but you'll 
have to leave MIT and go to the "Combat Zone", or whatever they call 
it there, to find satan's realm. 

But I always say 'better CONfusion than ANTIfusion'.  
+---------------------------------------------------------+--------+
| Paul M. Koloc, President: (301) 445-1075                | FUSION |
| Prometheus II, Ltd.; College Park, MD 20740-0222        |  this  |
| {umcp-cs | seismo}!prometheus!pmk; pmk@prometheus.UUCP  | decade |
+---------------------------------------------------------+--------+

sc@frog.UUCP (STella Calvert) (10/03/86)

In article <259@prometheus.UUCP> pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M Koloc) writes:
>This has been all in good fun but there is a point:  "Let sleeping
>dogs lie".  Yap now and you'll have a pack of wolves at your throat.

Paul, those of us who have the good fortune NOT to be members of that
conglomerate of wolves in sheeps' clothing have had them at our
throats for two millenia.  So what _else_ is new?  Is the wolfpack
going to stop trying to force their ideas down the throats of
unbelievers?

Show me!  By their fruits ye shall know them....

				STella Calvert

			Love is the law, love under will!

Guest Account: {cybvax0!decvax}!frog!sc
HASA Affiliation: S Division

daveb@pogo.UUCP (10/11/86)

I've held off sending this reply for over a week, and toned it down a
couple of times, but after rereading it one more time, I still feel
strongly about sending it.

In article <1157@cybvax0.UUCP> mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz) writes:
>According to today's Boston Globe:
>
>"Chapter 272, Section 36, of the Massachusetts General Laws sets a fine
>of $300 or 1 year in prison for 'whoever wilfully blasphemes the holy name
>of god by denying, cursing, or contumeliously reproaching God, his creation,
>government, or final judging of the world, or by cursing or contumeliously
>reproaching Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost, or by cursing or contumeliously
>reproaching or exposing to contempt or ridicule the holy word of God
>contained in the Holy scriptures.'
>
>If this law is indeed still in effect, then I encourage one and all to
>openly violate this unconstitutional and unenforceable law until Christians
>are embarrassed enough to have it repealed.
Ie: everyone who is non-Christian, should openly state that they don't 
believe in the Christian god (that's sufficient to break the law).

And then Paul M Koloc answers back in article <1157@cybvax0.UUCP>:
[To be brief I'll summerize the article]
Yammer, Yammer, Threat, Yammer, Yammer, Threat!

I think the most representative 2 statements Paul made were:
> Well, I'm not for the death penalty but I think that such fines are
> not out of order for protecting the values of ethnic cultures of a
> vast array in this country.
and
> This has been all in good fun but there is a point:  "Let sleeping
> dogs lie".  Yap now and you'll have a pack of wolves at your throat.
> Wait a few decades Mike, you've got time.
or to paraphrase:
I and a lot of other people like the law and the intent of the law Mike.
We may not be able to stop the atheist and "others" from living around  us, 
but at least we can punish them for vocally denying the existence of our 
God, and I like the idea that we can have someone arrested for saying 
"No, I don't believe in GOD". So keep your mouth shut Mike, or I and 
a bunch of friends will be all over you like white on rice. Put off your 
satan spawned plans for a few more decades Mike, after all, whats 30 or 40 
more years without freedom of speech when compared to the greater glory of 
God. Remember, we'll be keeping an eye on you.

    Well Paul, I guess that I'm a little sensitive when someone starts 
using veiled threats and I react badly to them. I don't know how things
are back east, but out on the west coast we get a little paranoid when 
someone starts making threats. Right now there are several groups on the 
west coast (and especially in the Northwest) that have been making and 
fulfilling threats. Most of these people *claim* to be "Christian". 
There's the "Identity" Christian group that just set four bombs in 
Coure de Lane,(sp?) Idaho. There's the people that have been sending bombs to 
Portland, Ore. abortion clinics. There's the "Identity" Christian (Nazi) 
group in Orriville, Ca., that executed a highschool boy, because he knew too 
much and didn't want to join. There's the La Rouch candidates that ran in the 
Oregon primaries (they all lost). In the voters pamphlet only one mentioned 
La Rouch, but they all claimed to be good fundamentalists and that they only 
wanted to put Gays in isolation for their own good. There are the people that 
block, grab and swear at the women that go to the abortion clinics. Are these 
people really Christian? No, at least not according to my Christian friends, 
and I'm inclined to agree with them. But these people do *claim* to be 
Christian and they do make threats on other peoples lives and lifestyles, and 
then try to fulfill those threats. 

So Paul, when you make threats, I have to decide whether to think of you as 
just a Christian who has to blow off steam, or as one of those intolerant
crazies that just call themselves a Christian, and has no qualms about 
enforcing their craziness. If there were a lot of invisible :-)'s in your 
article and I missed them, then I sorry about coming down so hard. If you 
were serious, then please stay on the east coast, we don't need more like 
you (and good luck to you Mike Huybensz, with guys like that around, you're 
going to need it).

				Feeling Better For Having Written,

				Dave Butler


    Remember: Silly is a state of Mind, Stupid is a way of Life.