Friday, December 18, 2009

New Zealand Billboard of Mary and Joseph

One item of news that received a lot of internet discussion lately is the billboard a New Zealand church put up, of Joseph and the Virgin Mary lying in bed and Mary saying God was a hard act to follow. I refuse to put up a picture of this billboard, even though I’ve seen it on at least different articles so far. If you really want to see what I’m talking about, do a Google search and I’m sure you’ll find it. One man disliked the billboard so much that he attached it with a can on brown spray paint. I can’t say I blame him!

The billboard was placed outside St Matthew in the City. The Vicar, Glenn Cardy, apparently wants people to discuss God. Now I’m all for people discussing God. And I don’t limit that to discussions that I find acceptable. I’m quite comfortable when people say bizarre things about, or even show a complete lack of respect for God. Not that I don’t think God should be respected. I believe he should. But considering the lack of respect the world has for anything, it’s pretty understandable that some people believe God doesn’t deserve our respect either.

But when that disrespect comes from a church, I find that deplorable.

As I said, our world is not very respectful. We’ve lost the respect for authority figures we once had. And we regularly make fun of people, like the Prime Minister, in television shows and newspapers, for example. But imagine this. What if the people in the Labor Party started making fun of the Prime Minister? What if they started drawing pictures of him that drew attention to real or make believe flaws? Wouldn’t you kind of say – hold on. It’s okay for us to make fun of him. But you’re on his side.

There are quite enough people making fun of God without the Church coming in on the act. And why on earth should other people respect God – or at the very least, respect our beliefs – if we make fun of God ourselves?

That’s not to say that we can’t have a joke. I enjoy a fair bit of religious humour. I particular like humour that pokes fun at Christians. And I will say the odd joke or two that involves God or Jesus. But in all my humour, there is still respect. I like to tell jokes that involve God, when I think he’d laugh along with me. I prefer to laugh with God rather than at God.

And perhaps the point could be argued that this Church thought they were laughing along with God. Maybe they thought God got a good old chuckle out of it. I don’t think His sense of humour is that warped myself.

And despite all our disrespect and our desire to laugh at anything at anybody, surely there must be boundaries that should not be crossed. There must be something in our world that we hold sacred, that deserves not only our respect, but our reverence and awe. And Christmas is a time when we should be filled with awe. For God came down to earth in human form. Now Santa Claus coming through the chimney when you live in the middle of a high rise apartment building might be impressive. But God taking on human form, God entering earth as a human baby, that beats Santa Claus’ chimney sliding act hands down.

According to Glenn Cardy, most Christians do not believe that Mary was impregnated by God. I’d like to know what Christians he talks to. Most of the ones I know have a pretty solid belief in the incarnation. And they’re not the kind of Christians who believe it is the sort of thing that should be made fun of.

This idea of generating discussion about God is a good one. But at what cost? Sometimes it seems that it’s our excuse for everything. Well, we’re just trying to get people to talk about God. But we should make sure that when people are discussing God, that they’re not influenced by a whole lot of warped ideas and bad jokes. And we should also make sure that what initiates discussion amongst non-believers doesn’t cause some Christians to doubt their faith.

What if the people who do have faith start thinking losing their sense of God’s holiness? What if they start thinking he doesn’t deserve our awe and respect? What if Christians start thinking of God as just another figure of fun? And why bother following a God like that?

In these days of political correctness, Christmas has belong the holiday of nothing special at all. Instead celebrating the most event that ever happened, we have stripped it of all meaning. We think about presents, instead of the Incarnation. We look forward to when Santa will come to our houses, instead of thinking back to when God came to earth. We’re not allowed to mention Jesus or Christ or even Christmas, in case it happens to offend somebody. And yet billboards that poke fun of Mary and Joseph are quite okay. I guess it’s okay to mention religion – and offend a whole lot of people – just as long as you’re not respectful. And it’s okay to offend people, just so long as they’re the one group of people to whom Christmas actually still means something important.


  1. Hi David,

    Thanks for visiting my blog. It was a nice surprise to receive a comment from you.

    I know a few Anglicans and I think most of them would be just as appalled by this as I am. But there seems to be lots of different beliefs in the Anglican church, from those who believe in a very literalist reading of the bible to those who don't even think Jesus rose from the dead. I can't imagine the Anglican church I used to attend ever putting up a billboard like that.

    The church has now removed the billboard after it was attacked with a knife by, according to Glenn Cardy, 'a knife wielding Christian fanatic.'


  2. Hi Liz,

    I drafted a much longer comment but it got lost in the blogosphere.

    I decided to take out a blogspot, blog. Simili Modo. The link should be below. If it's not, it's:

    The intro blog explains everything.

    I feel sorry for Vicar Cardy. He doesn't seem to realise that blashphemy in any form is a grievous sin, and hardly the Christian way of getting people to engage in talk about Christmas, albeit he's achieved his aim - people are talking about the billboard. The problem is, it's like showing a porno film on Sunday in Church to illustrate how wrong it is.

    But, we're all sinners, and I guess if we want our own forgiven, we have to forgive others. Rather than condemn him (albeit I think mentioning the gravity of the sin is a duty), I'll pray that God's grace enlightens him, and he finds a better way of engaging people in religious discussions.

    You make some interesting points in your post regarding the respect due to God. The Anglican Church was founded on disrespect (disrespect of Christ's vicar on earth - the Pope - or bishop of Rome. Not just disrepect but a protest against his authority, and removal of him from their sect). It is not surprising that certain Anglicans (including Vicars) would manifest such blatant and overt disrespect for God himself and the Incarnation, when the heretical sect itself is founded upon such principles.

    My main concern is that his actions are offensive to the Blessed Virgin Mary. As you're aware, I lean towards the Catholic spirituality of St Louis de Montfort, and I'd rather offend God directly than offend His Mother. Well, I'd rather offend neither, but I would fear more for my salvation if I was openly attacking her virginity, than if I happened to attack God directly without reference to her.

    I know that non-Catholics have a problem with Catholic devotion to Mary, but our devotion is founded upon God's attitude towards her. Even in the early chapter of Genesis, God is talking about the woman who will crush Satan. He's not saying, I'll deal with that pest directly. He's saying, He will use a woman to deal with him.

    I'm certain such a theological stance won't make a lot of sense to people of other faiths or creeds, but it makes sense to me, in that Satan's humiliation is multiplied when he is defeated by a woman - especially 'the woman'. Take a look at the proud men on this planet. What is one of their greatest fears? Surely, it's defeat by a woman.

    Which brings me to my main point. I'm staying single and celibate.

  3. Hi Samaritan,

    This whole issue intrigues me. Personally, I found the billboard quite clever and was pleasantly surprised to see a Church with a sense of humour that extends to poking fun of themselves.

    What I don't understand is why people are so outraged about it. Why is religion happy to believe and preach that God impregnated Mary but balk at any references to the actual physicality of that belief?

    In order for Mary to have God's baby, God must have touched her in some way. Does that thought make you angry? Or is it just having it pointed out to you that upsets you so?

  4. Hi Ruby,

    Another surprise. I didn't think you would be reading this blog at all.

    The Church wasn't actually poking fun of itself, because the people in that church do not believe in immaculate conception. It was poking fun at the Virgin Mary and at Christians with beliefs that differ to their own. It was also disrespectful of God. If they had put up a billboard poking fun of some other religion, no doubt they would have received some very harsh criticism.

    As for how God impregnated Mary, it is a miracle and a mystery. If we try to explain it in a way we can understand, we will completely miss the point.

  5. Hi David,

    I think there is a definite lack of respect for God amongst many Christians. But then there's a lack of respect missing in the world, in my opinion. And I think maybe the church often stresses the friendship and the relationship side of God, and downplays the respect side.

    The billboard has got people talking. But it's a very divisive conversation. At Christmas, when we should be focused on Christ's love and the spiritual meaning of Christmas, we're talking about whether a billboard was appropriate or not and arguing over beliefs.

    Hopefully he does find better ways of generating discussion about Christianity. At least now, after all the publicity with this billboard, people may take notice of the next thing he does.

  6. Well, I admit I was curious as to whether or not you would convert to Catholicism like I thought you would. Not surprised to see I was right.

    But to the point, they might not believe in Mary's Immaculate Conception, but Anglicans still believe that God is Jesus's father and Mary his mother, therefore the billboard is still referencing the Church's own beliefs. It's not really the maker of the billboards fault that some Christians take exception to the thought that Mary would have had sex with her own husband occassionally. And you can't really expect people not to express their own beliefs because you are sensitive about yours.

    It's all part of living in a pluaralist society.
    I completely respect your right to your beliefs. But that does not mean that I have respect your beliefs.

    Besides, the latest surveys show that 68% of Australians believe in God or a Universal Spirit (whatever that is), so this whole, 'on no Christians are been persecuted' stance that modern Christianity is taking is pretty tiresome.

    Christians are not only the majority, they are the ruling majority.

  7. There’s a wide variety of beliefs in the Anglican church. In the Anglican church I attended, most of the people would have believed in immaculate conception.

    The church that put up this billboard is a progressive church. Progressive Christians tend to take a very symbolic reading of the bible, and reject such things as Jesus rising from the dead. Their website says that Progressive Christians believe the Christmas stories are fictitious accounts.

    The website also says that the purpose of the billboard was to ‘lampoon literalism’. So they are making fun of those who believe the Christmas stories are literally true – a belief that they don’t share.

  8. Well I guess that's what happens when you have so many religions claiming to be the right religion- in order to attract followers they have to put down and attempt to 'prove' other religions wrong. Remember, it was a relgious group, not secularists or atheists who were resonsible.

    And before you get too angry over it, try to keep in mind that it's the same rights that allow that Church to post such a billboard that allows you to practice your faith freely. Would you want to be forced to give up your faith or practice it in secret? So why would you wish to take away freedom of speech and religious freedom from others?

    I'm very wary of anyone who seems to claim that religious beleifs should be exept from any sort of criticism or ridicule. First they came for my neighbour and all that...

    At the end of the day, the billboard wasn't inciting hatred, it wasn't violating any defamation laws, it wasn't racist or sexist or bigoted in any way. All it, and the website was saying, is that that particular Church thinks that it is silly to read the bible literally.

    And if that is what they believe, why shouldn't they be allowed to say so?

  9. Hi Ruby,

    I actually criticise Christians a lot more than I criticise atheists and secularists, so I'm not sure what point there was in reminding me it was a religious group.

    Secondly, I never said I was angry. I never said they shouldn't have the right to put up that billboard. I never said that Christianity should be exempt from criticism. And I certainly never said that I would ever want to take away freedom of speech and religious freedom from others. Nor is that something that I am ever likely to say. I believe very strongly in religious freedom - for everyone.

    I don't have a problem with people saying we shouldn't take the bible literally. I don't have a problem with people putting up billboards to advertise beliefs that are different to mine. I don't even have a problem with atheists putting signs on buses.

    But I do believe that people should be respectful of the beliefs of others, and particularly respectful of what they hold to be sacred. And I don't think that just applies to Christians either.

    This billboard was not respectful. It deliberately made fun of the beliefs of others and showed a lack of respect for what they hold to be sacred. And although they certainly have the right to do that, I don't believe it is the right thing to do.

    But I don't know why I'm saying all this. Because it almost seems, from reading your comments, that you've placed me in a box marked stereotypical Christian and decided you know exactly what it is that I am thinking and feeling.


  10. I'm not pretending to know everything that you are thinking. I am just responding to what you have written in your posts. When you complain about "political correctness" and claim that you "are not allowed to mention Jesus or even Christmas" you sound like those conservative christians in America who whine incessantly about christianity being under attack despite the fact that close to 90% of Americans call themselves christians.

    And what do you base this claim on, "not allowed to mention jesus or christmas"? Since when? did i miss the passing of that new law?

    No one is saying you can't celebrate christmas or love jesus or believe that mary never had sex despite the fact that the bible clearly mentions that jesus had siblings. but you can't expect other people not to voice their opinions about such a major issue in our society. some of us think religion is not only silly but dangerous. and we have just as much right to publicly state this as you do to put up a blog on the internet that says things like "abortion is not a right" which is a statement that flies in the face of MY beliefs that reproductive freedom is a fundamental human right.

    And my beliefs are not any less valid just because i don't get them from 'god'.

  11. Just because I sound like a conservative Christian in some regards does not mean my views are identical to conservative Christianity. There are many occasions when I strongly disagree with conservative Christians and sound much more like a liberal Christian. The truth is I have always thought like both – or either one depending on the issue being discussed.

    At the risk of repeating myself, I do think that the beliefs of others can (and perhaps should be) challenged and criticized. But I do not think they should be mocked and ridiculed. Opinions can be voiced in a way that respects other people’s beliefs. And I do believe that some things are and should be kept sacred.

  12. Ok, but now I will repeat myself when I say that it is not necessary to respect other people's beliefs. How can I respect beliefs based on a book that claims I am inferior and the cause of man's demise simply because I am a woman?

    The Bible has always exerted (and continues to exert) a huge influence on society. It's contents affect me because so many of our laws and societal restrictions had their basis in its pages ie abortion, gay marriage etc. That is why it belongs to all of us, whether we believe in its contents or not.

    You choose to venerate it as is your right. I choose to criticise and yes, mock, it. As is MY right. This is not an offence committed against you but against the writers of the Bible all of whom are long dead. That you choose to take it personally is your own choice. You could always just turn the other cheek.

  13. Okay, Ruby. You don't think beliefs should be respected. I do. We're never going to reach agreement on it, so it seems pointless to debate the issue.

    I don't recall ever feeling personally offended by the billboard. I have never thought 'They are criticising MY beliefs'. I do believe they are mocking something that truly is sacred, but it's not sacred just because I think it is.

    But I do believe respect should be shown to everyone's beliefs (not just mine). If this billboard mocked the beliefs of other people, I would also be annoyed - though, to be fair, not quite so much.

    Also, if this billboard did not come from a church, I would not have been as annoyed either. I want the church to be Christlike and I get annoyed when it seems to be failing to live up to what it should be. In fact, I got more annoyed with the Jesus, all about life campaign, which did not attack my beliefs at all.

    You keep talking about rights. I'm not that interested in rights. I'm interested in the Church being Christlike. That's where I'm coming from.

    But if you do want to talk about rights, sure, the church has a right to put up that billboard. And I have a right to criticise it.

  14. no, it's not that i think beliefs SHOULD not be respected, it's that i don't think they HAVE to be. that's a big difference there meaning that you are free to express yourself the way you wish and i am free to do likewise.

    go ahead and criticise the billboard, i didn't say you couldn't. but don't try and say that it shouldn't have been allowed to be put up and don't act as though christians are the only ones been mocked because that is not true. humour is often the best way to get a point across, hence some of the world's best comedians were/are those with political material. and sometimes, when it comes to the bible, the best way to highlight its inconsistencies is to laugh at it. now you don't have to laugh at it but don't try and tell me that i can't just because you happen to agree with it.

    what you seem to be advocating is some sort of gag order when it comes to religion and that dangerous territory indeed.

    but about the church being christlike- i wonder what jesus would think of the modern catholic church, with its scandals and opulence and cover ups. can you honestly look at the excess that is the vatican and believe that it is 'christlike'?

    i'm not expecting you to answer that. just some food for thought.

  15. Ruby,

    Where did I say they shouldn't have been allowed to put the billboard up? Where did I try and tell you that you can't laugh at it?

    And where exactly did you get the idea that I'm advocating some sort of gag order?


  16. From this:

    "i do not think they should be mocked or ridiculed".

    and this:

    "i think beliefs should be respected."

    and this:

    "surely there are some boundaries that should not be crossed. there must be some things in our world that we hold sacred, and that deserves not only our respect but our reverence and awe".

  17. Ruby, you said yourself that there is a different between saying beliefs SHOULD be respected and that they HAVE to be respected.

    Yes, I believe beliefs should be respected and that they should not be mocked or ridiculed.

    But that is very different from saying they should not have been allowed to put the billboard up or that you cannot laugh at it or proposing some sort of gag order, where religion is preventing from being criticised or ridiculed.

  18. I also think we should spend less at Christmas, respect people more, watch less television and get out and appreciate nature more. It may surprise you to learn that I'm not proposing laws to enforce any of those issues.

    Why don't you respond to what I'm actually saying, instead of what you think I mean by what I'm saying? Because it's become very clear that there is a big difference between the two.

  19. To be honest, I don't think you know what you are saying anymore. When you say that some things shoud be kept sacred and there are boundaries that must not be crossed, are you or are you not advocating the idea that people should not say or do anything which mocks religious beliefs? Because that's what it reads like. And if that is the case, then you very clearly are saying that the billboard should never have been put up.

    You say we should be in awe of god and deplore the billbaord in question, yet you never actually say what it is about the billboard you dislike so much. The fact it uses humour to make its point? But what is its point? Do you disagree with its point or just the fact that it existed?

    You didn't discuss any of this. All you said was it was disrespectful. But so what if it was? Is there any harm in that?

  20. Ruby, I understand exactly what I am saying and have done from the beginning.

    And by the way, I said 'boundaries that should not be crossed', not 'must not be crossed'. Just as there is a difference between SHOULD NOT and HAVE NOT, there is also a difference between SHOULD NOT and MUST NOT.

    I don't think the billboard should have been put up. I am very clear about that. I believe the church did the wrong thing in putting up this billboard. However, I have never suggested that it should not have been allowed to be put up. There is a difference between the two. And yet you said to me 'but don't try and say that it shouldn't have been allowed to be put up' and telling me that I am proposing some sort of gag order.

    I do not like the billboard because it is disrespectful. And yes, I think that is a bad thing. In my post, I also pointed that generating discussion should not be an excuse to get people discussing a warped idea of God. And I said that it may cause some Christians to doubt their faith, because the God they are shown is not one worth following. This was all in my original post.

    As an extra point, I also believe that the billboard caused division amongst Christians, right when the Church should be reminding people of love and joy and peace.


  21. Right, so your problem with the billboard is that it may get Christians to question their beliefs and their faith by considering an alternative point of view. In other words, you would prefer to keep Christians in the dark about their own religion.

    You may think the billboard has a 'warped' view of god but I'm sure it doesn't come as a surprise to you to realise that that is precisley the view that so many other people actually hold. Who is to say that your view is the correct view? You have to understand and accept that many people do not share your view of god and many of those do not believe in god at all. The fact that our beliefs are offensive to you is not really our burden but your own. It's not you we are attacking but a concept, an idea. It's your choice whether or not you get offended by it.

    Ireland has just passed a blasphemy law that states that people can't say anything that may offend any one of any religion. A group of Muslim countries is petitioning the UN to make blasphemey a crime everywhere. SO you are not alone in your thinking that anyone who doesn't respect God should just keep it to themselves. But laws should be in place to protect people not ideas. And that billboard was attacking an idea, not a person, yet you still find it offensive even though it is not actually causing harm to anyone.

    When you say people should be respectful of god and not mock other's beleiefs you are in fact promoting a gag order of sorts- by claiming that anyone who thinks religion is absurd should just keep it to themselves. But what you are not taking into account that it is the very fact that we WANT people to question the Bible and to question their beleiefs and consider other points of view that makes us speak up. What is wrong with people doubting their faith? And shouldn't they have all the available information before they decide whether they have faith or not?

    And you still haven't actually refuted anything the billboard actually had to say. all you have done is tried to deflect it by saying it is offensive. at least TRY to justify your beliefs. why is the billboard promtoing a warped view of god? the Bible says that Mary was married to Joseph. it also says that Mary was impregnated by god. therefore, logically the billboard makes sense by comparing Joseph to God. Why is that offensive? Was Mary not married to Joseph? Do married people not share a bed? Or did Mary not get impregnated by God after all?

  22. I do not think religion should be free from criticism or ridicule. And I do not think Christians should be kept in the dark about their own religion. I believe Christians should be free to voice their opinions and doubts. But there is a big difference between discussing something and putting up a billboard that mocks what is sacred (or as you would have it, what some people consider to be sacred). For a start, people can’t question a billboard. So it’s not actually a good way of raising questions anyway.

    And I have been at fault in this too. A while back, I went to Tidbinbilla with a group of friends. We were having a good conversation beforehand about how old the earth was. I disagreed with them all. But it was done very respectfully. When we got there, there was a timeline of the earth’s history. I took a picture of them close to the 6000 years ago mark, because that was when they thought the earth was created. I believe that that was where I crossed the line. I was, in fact, mocking their beliefs. And I shouldn’t have done it – not because I think the earth really is 6000 years old, but because it showed a lack of respect for what they believed in.

    And remember, my main concern with this billboard is that it came from a church. You may not have a problem with people doubting their faith. That’s fine. I don’t expect you to. But from a church’s perspective, surely they should be concerned if their billboards cause people to lose faith in the very thing they are centred on. As I mentioned before, if this billboard had not come from a church, I would not have been as annoyed with it.

    I know about the blasphemy laws in Ireland and I do not agree with them. I have not ever suggested any kind of gag order. Anymore than someone who says we should spend less at Christmas is proposing a destruction of credit cards.

    And I have already mentioned that God’s impregnation of Mary was a miracle. It was not done in the normal way. And even people who do think Mary had sex with Joseph find this offensive. I know my grandmother and grandfather had sex. Otherwise I wouldn’t be here. But that doesn’t mean I want to see a billboard up of them in bed. That would show a complete lack of respect for my grandparents and cause me harm as well, because of the anguish I would feel at seeing the people I have loved treated in such a way. And you may say that’s different because it’s attacking a person, whereas the billboard is attacking an idea. Well Mary was a person. And to some people, she is just as real and just as close and just as loved as if she were still alive.

    And I can’t explain the anguish that a person feels when what they consider to be sacred is being attacked. But it is there. And it is unexplainable. And it is not something they just choose to be offended about. I am far less likely to feel any kind of mental anguish when someone says something offensive about me than I am when people say something offensive about God. And people have died to avoid blaspheming against God. Their choice? Maybe. But not many people choose to die in order to avoid some kind of personal attack.

  23. See the thing is I just cannot take anyone in the developed world seriously who actually thinks the world is 6000 years old. There is no reason for that but willful ignorance. And I'm not about to encourage people to remain ignorant by respecting or (even pretending to), their beliefs.

    I think the main thing about that particular church is they wanted to seem trendy and self depreciating to attract younger and less traditional chruch going folk. It's marketing, that's all it is.

    I know you don't consciously suppport forcing people not to speak their minds about religion but you are encouraging an atmosphere whereby they are severly discouraged from doing so. And that's only a hop, skip and a jump from forcing them to shut up. It is essential, for freedom of religion to be maintained that the non religious are not discluded from the discussion. Otherwise, you are looking at a theocracy. And I don't think you would support that.

    No, I really don't understand why people are so offended when others make fun of God. Apart from anything else, I think God as you and thers describe is capable of handle a few heathens and doesn't really need earthlings to defend his honour. And I just don't get the mentality. I was pretty committed to the Bible for two years in my late teens (17-19) and my brother and sister teased me merciliessly and made fun of the Bible and Jesus, called me a loser and everything thing else. I honestly did not get upset of offended over their mocking and ridicule. Though I do remember feeling upset because they were going to die at Armageddon, unlike me who was going to survive the end days and live forever in paradise on earth. Ha! see, I can even laugh at myself because I am sorry but that is just a ridiculous belief.

    And finally, your last sentence, many people may not die to avoid a personal attack, but many people do die at the hands of others in hate crimes. That's why i support laws that protect people from racial, sexual and religious discrimination ie, singling out particular PEOPLE for derision and attack, thus making them susceptible to violence. But mocking God or the 'virgin' Mary isn't putting anyone's life in danger (at least not in the western world). It's not targeted at people. At least not any that have any traceable descendents.

    We cannot censor ourselves to just avoid offending people's sensabilities. That's nothing but a nail in the coffin of freedom of speech.

  24. My friends who believe in a young earth do not do so because they are wilfully ignorant. Some have simply been brought up to believe that and see no reason to question it. Others have spent a lot of time thinking about it and reading what both secular and Christian scientists have to say and come to the conclusion that the earth really is young. There are some scientists who believe the earth is young - though these are few and far between.

    And to refuse to respect beliefs because they are ignorant sounds almost like some missionaries who refused to respect the beliefs and cultures of the people they were evangelising. Because they saw those beliefs as primitive and ignorant.

    And from a Christian perspective, I believe that some of those beliefs were wrong and needed to be changed. Yet I also think that the missionaries who did best were those who respected those beliefs, even as they were seeking to convert them to Christianity. Gregory the Great said that missionaries should adapt themselves to other cultures with open-mindedness and discretion.

    I know that probably seems off track. But that to me is the attitude that I would like people to have. Because I think it actually encourages discussion rather than shutting it down. When people feel their beliefs and culture are respected, they are more likely to listen to what others have to say.

    I'll grant you that it not likely that anybody would be physically harmed from the billboard. But I would add that encouraging respect for people's beliefs is not likely to shut down discussion about religion or exclude non-religious people from the conversation in the western world.

    Even if it's made illegal, non-religious people will not let themselves be excluded from the conversation. Atheist Ireland has already put a list of blasphemous quotes on their website, in defiance of the new blasphemy laws.



Bookmark and Share

Blog Patrol