Michael McDowell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

That is fair enough. May I make the following point? If the Minister of State does proceed with his stated intention to repeal the provisions of the Defamation Act he will be saying that nobody, in any circumstances, can ever be prosecuted for publishing anything which deeply offends the religious sensibility of the Christian faith in Ireland no matter how gross the offence is. No matter how gross or how grotesque what is said or done, nobody can be punished. I do not think that most people are aware that the Government proposes not merely to remove from the Constitution the obligation to criminalise blasphemy, but that it also intends to declare it absolutely open season to say or do anything in public which outrages religious sentiment without any sanction of any kind whatsoever. I do not think most people are aware that is his intention and I do not think he has made that clear. I do not think the Government - and I do not mean to personalise it to the Minister of State, Deputy Stanton, in any way - has said that it intends that, as of next week, any citizen will be able to put up on the Internet the grossest attack on religious belief in the most appalling and filthy way and that it will not be possible to do anything about it unless the Internet service provider intervenes to remove such material on the grounds of its own policies.

By all means the Government could take this one word out of the Constitution, but if it goes the second step and says that it feels that a consequence of removing it is the decriminalisation of every form of blasphemy, no matter how gross it may be, and if that is its thinking, it should face up to the consequences. God knows - and I use that phrase loosely - that we have many people here who will choose to go as far as the law permits to offend others and to cause them distress and anger. We know that will happen. We really should consider carefully whether we want to go that second step.

The second point I want to make is that if we do repeal this particular reference to blasphemy in the Constitution it does not follow, either logically or in good sense, that any criminalisation of blasphemy must necessarily fall with it. The right to free speech is subject to public order and morality. It strikes me that there is a limitation written into the Constitution, which will not be affected by the particular amendment, which says that the exercise of freedom of expression is guaranteed subject to public morality. Can the Minister of State say, on behalf of the Government, that anything, not matter how offensive or outrageous, can be published about religion and, at the same time, not involve an infringement of public morality? I do not think he can.

If the Government does table legislation to amend the Defamation Act in order to decriminalise all forms of blasphemy, on the assumption that this particular measure will be passed by the people, that will have to be considered on its merits in those circumstances. This is not just a package to be sold to the people like repealing the eight amendment and outlining the legislative consequences. This is not the same as that. I do not believe that the great majority of people in this country want to have absolute and total open season on causing religious offence by publication. I do not believe that the people would be happy to see every single vestige of protection of religion from premeditated and vicious blasphemy swept away in the name of liberalism - and I speak as a liberal on that. People are entitled to have some basic standards of decency or public morality enshrined in the law with regard to the protection of religion. It is not a great expansion of freedom to tear down every barrier surrounding the sacredness to individuals of their religious beliefs.