Editing Blasphemy (section)

==Nations with blasphemy laws==
{{Main|Blasphemy law}}
[[File:Blasphemy laws worldwide.svg|thumb|upright=1.4|right|
{{legend|#37c837|Historic restrictions}}
{{legend|#f9dc36|Local restrictions}} {{legend|#ec8028|Fines and restrictions}} {{legend|#e73e21|Prison sentences}} {{legend|#800000|Death sentences}} {{legend|#b9b9b9ff|None}}]]

In [[Blasphemy law|some countries]] with a [[state religion]], blasphemy is outlawed under the criminal code.

===Purpose of blasphemy laws===

In some states, blasphemy laws are used to impose the religious beliefs of a majority, while in other countries, they are justified as putatively offering protection of the religious beliefs of minorities.<ref name=IceNews/><ref name="Scolnicov2010">{{cite book|last=Scolnicov|first=Anat|title=The Right to Religious Freedom in International Law: Between Group Rights and Individual Rights|date=18 October 2010|publisher=Routledge|language=en|isbn=978-1-136-90705-0|page=261|quote=A different argument for the retention of the offence of blasphemy (and for its extension to the protection of all religions in the UK [the offence protected only the majority religion]) has been offered by Parekh: a majority religion does not need the protection offered by an offence of blasphemy, but minority religions do because of their vulnerability in the face of the majority.}}</ref><ref name="The Copenhagen Post">{{cite news|url=http://cphpost.dk/news14/national-news14/danes-overwhelmingly-support-their-own-blasphemy-law.html|title=Danes overwhelmingly support their own blasphemy law|date=21 September 2012|newspaper=[[The Copenhagen Post]]|language=en|access-date=17 May 2016|quote=Denmark's own blasphemy law makes it an offence to "mock legal religions and faiths in Denmark", and according to a study carried out on behalf of the liberal think-tank CEPOS, 66 per cent of the 1,000 Danes questioned answered that the law should not be repealed.}}</ref> Where blasphemy is banned, it can be either some laws which directly punish religious blasphemy,<ref>See [[Blasphemy law]]</ref> or some laws that allow those who are offended by blasphemy to punish blasphemers. Those laws may condone penalties or retaliation for blasphemy under the labels of [[blasphemous libel]],<ref>{{cite web  | last = Kerr  | first = ine  | title = Libel and blasphemy bill passed by the Dail  |work=The Irish Independent  | date = 9 July 2009  | url = http://www.independent.ie/national-news/libel-and-blasphemy-bill-passed-by-the-dail-1813479.html  | access-date = 17 November 2009}}</ref> expression of opposition, or "vilification," of religion or of some religious practices,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_act/aa1991204/s124a.html |title=Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 – Sect 124A: Vilification on grounds of race, religion, sexuality or gender identity unlawful |publisher=Austlii.edu.au |access-date=10 November 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content.asp?document_id=23370 |title=Victoria Police – Racial and religious vilification |publisher=Police.vic.gov.au |access-date=10 November 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110927090124/http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content.asp?document_id=23370 |archive-date=27 September 2011}}</ref> religious insult,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://merlin.obs.coe.int/redirect.php?id=11512 |title=European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), ''Report on the relationship between freedom of expression and freedom of religion: the issue of regulation and prosecution of blasphemy, religious insult and incitement to religious hatred'', 17–18 October 2008, Doc. No. CDL-AD(2008)026 |publisher=Merlin.obs.coe.int |access-date=10 November 2011 |archive-date=2 October 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111002221825/http://merlin.obs.coe.int/redirect.php?id=11512 }}</ref> or [[hate speech]].<ref>See [[Blasphemy law]] and [[Hate speech]].</ref>

=== Nations with blasphemy laws ===
{{anchor | law }}
As of 2012{{Update inline|date=September 2023}}, 33 countries had some form of anti-blasphemy laws in their legal code.<ref name=pewres/> Of these, 21 were Muslim-majority nations – [[Afghanistan]], [[Algeria]], [[Bahrain]], [[Egypt]], [[Indonesia]], [[Iran]], [[Jordan]], [[Kuwait]], [[Lebanon]], [[Malaysia]], the [[Maldives]], [[Morocco]], [[Oman]], [[Pakistan]], [[Qatar]], [[Saudi Arabia]], [[Somalia]], [[Sudan]], [[Turkey]], the [[UAE]] and [[Western Sahara]]. Blasphemy is treated as a [[capital crime]] (death penalty) in some Muslim nations.<ref name=wsj/> In these nations, such laws have led to the persecution, lynchings, murder or arrest of minorities and dissident members, after flimsy accusations.<ref>[https://www.economist.com/news/asia/21635070-pakistans-blasphemy-laws-legitimise-intolerance-bad-mouthing Bad-mouthing: Pakistan's blasphemy laws legitimise intolerance] The Economist (29 November 2014)</ref><ref>Sources of claims:

* [http://www.religiouswatch.com/rwworld.htm World of Intolerance] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091119105151/http://www.religiouswatch.com/rwworld.htm|date=19 November 2009}} ''Religious Watch''. Retrieved 5 October 2011
<!-- Multiple MALWARE threats 5Oct2011, this URL disabled: h*t*t*p://www.christianpost.com/article/20091113/100-groups-oppose-u-n-defamation-of-religions-proposals/index.html -->
* [http://www.iheu.org/united-nations-will-violate-human-rights-says-new-report-religious-freedoms United Nations will violate Human Rights] ''International Humanist and Ethical Union''. Retrieved 5 October 2011
* {{cite web |date=11 August 2009 |title=Muslim scholar says Scrap blasphemy laws |url=http://www.heraldmalaysia.com/news/Muslim-scholar-says-Scrap-blasphemy-laws-which-bring-shame-on-Islam-and-Pakistan-2058-1-1.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120305213255/http://www.heraldmalaysia.com/news/Muslim-scholar-says-Scrap-blasphemy-laws-which-bring-shame-on-Islam-and-Pakistan-2058-1-1.html |archive-date=5 March 2012 |access-date=5 October 2011 |work=Herald Malaysia Online}}
* [http://www.uscirf.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1414&Itemid=1 Annual Report of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom] May 2009 (Pakistan, etc.). Retrieved 5 October 2011
* [http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/TestFrame/af783bb51170854380256739004faac4?Opendocument A call upon states to work toward abolishing the juvenile death penalty] U.N. January 1999. Retrieved 5 October 2011
* [http://report2009.amnesty.org/en/regions/asia-pacific/indonesia Indonesia – Amnesty International Report 2009] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091121192723/http://report2009.amnesty.org/en/regions/asia-pacific/indonesia|date=21 November 2009}} ''Amnesty International''. Retrieved 5 October 2011
</ref>

The other twelve nations with anti-blasphemy laws in 2012 included [[India]] and [[Singapore]], as well as [[Christian state|Christian majority states]], including [[Denmark]] (abolished in 2017),<ref name="Denmark">[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/02/denmark-scraps-334-year-old-blasphemy-law Denmark scraps 334-year-old blasphemy law] 2 June 2017 the Guardian</ref> [[Finland]], [[Germany]], [[Greece]] (abolished in 2019), [[Ireland]] (abolished in 2020), Italy, [[Malta]] (abolished in 2016), the [[Netherlands]] (abolished in 2014), [[Nigeria]], [[Norway]] (abolished in 2015) and [[Poland]].<ref name=pewres/> [[Spain]]'s "offending religious feelings" law is also, effectively, a prohibition on blasphemy.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://end-blasphemy-laws.org/countries/europe/spain/|title=Spain country profile|work=End Blasphemy Laws|publisher=[[International Humanist and Ethical Union]]|access-date=20 November 2018}}</ref> In Denmark, the former blasphemy law which had support of 66% of its citizens in 2012, made it an offence to "mock legal religions and faiths in Denmark".<ref name="The Copenhagen Post"/> Many Danes saw the "blasphemy law as helping integration because it promotes the acceptance of a multicultural and multi-faith society."<ref name=IceNews>{{cite web|url=http://www.icenews.is/2012/10/02/denmark-still-largely-in-support-of-blasphemy-law/#axzz48tCovTxj|title=Denmark still largely in support of 'blasphemy' law |date=2 October 2012|publisher=IceNews|language=en|access-date=17 May 2016|quote=A recent survey has shown that Danish citizens still largely back the country's 'blasphemy' law. The law, which makes it illegal to "mock legal religions and faiths in Denmark", is supported by around 66 per cent of Danish voters, according to a recent survey conducted by the liberal group CEPOS. Speaking about the report, religious expert Tim Jensen from the University of Southern Denmark said, "Danes may see the blasphemy law as helping integration because it promotes the acceptance of a multicultural and multi-faith society. But it can also be problematic if it reflects a belief that the feelings of religious people have a special status and require special protection," the Berlingske news agency reports.}}</ref>

In the judgment ''[[E.S. v. Austria (2018)|E.S. v. Austria]]'' (2018), the [[European Court of Human Rights]] declined to strike down the blasphemy law in [[Austria]] on [[Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights|Article 10]] (freedom of speech) grounds, saying that criminalisation of blasphemy could be supported within a state's [[margin of appreciation]]. This decision was widely criticised by human rights organisations and commentators both in Europe and [[North America]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://iheu.org/european-court-fails-overturn-blasphemy-conviction-austria/|title=IHEU 'frustrated', as European Court fails to overturn 'blasphemy' conviction in Austria|date=26 October 2018|access-date=15 November 2018|publisher=[[International Humanist and Ethical Union]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://humanism.org.uk/2018/10/29/european-court-of-human-rights-rules-that-austria-can-keep-its-blasphemy-law/|work=Humanists UK|date=29 October 2018|title=European Court of Human Rights rules that Austria can keep its blasphemy law}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/europe-rules-against-free-speech/574369/|title=A Flawed European Ruling on Free Speech|work=[[The Atlantic]]|access-date=15 November 2018|last=Cottee|first=Simon|date=31 October 2018}}</ref>