What actually constitutes blasphemy?

Once again, we are completely in agreement, Micelf. Whilst not sharing their beliefs, I would, figuratively, defend to the death anybody's right to worship in any way they choose, always with the proviso that their right does not infringe somebody else's rights (including women and children).

The need for something to believe in seems to have survived under Communist rule - I think many Catholic churches in England are now attended primarily by Poles and they have had to recruit Polish priests.

Blasphemy :Any contemptuous or profane act or utterance .

I suppose it comes down to definition. Who decides if something is profane? As I don't believe in any god, I don't see how I can show contempt.

At one time it was common not to pile any other books on top of a bible - that was insulting to it.

www.666man.net/Blasphemy_Bible_Definitions_of.html

I've never considered the question of what actually constitues blasphemy before either, but I thought this article was quite interesting.

It seems to be saying that the Bible definition of blasphemy is rather more specific than the usual dictionary one and that there are three main criteria - to claim to be God, to claim to have the powers of God and to stubbornly refuse to repent of one's sins.

Taking the Lord's name in vain etc. or defiling a church would therefore presumably not be considered blasphemous.

Oh, I am in the clear then!

As are most of us, I'd imagine...