Print
Springer opera court fight fails
by BBC News
Thanks to Nigel Sewell for the link.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7128552.stm
A Christian group has lost its High Court battle to prosecute the BBC's director general over the screening of Jerry Springer - The Opera in 2005.
Christian Voice director Stephen Green had hoped to overturn a previous ruling by a judge which forbade him from prosecuting Mark Thompson.
Two judges ruled that broadcasters and theatres staging live productions could not be prosecuted for blasphemy.
The BBC called the ruling an important decision in defence of free speech.
The corporation received a record 63,000 complaints when the musical - a satire based on US TV host Jerry Springer's controversial talk show - was broadcast on BBC Two in January 2005.
It also received many messages of support for screening the musical, which includes scenes set in Hell with Jesus and Satan.
Mr Green had said the show "clearly crossed the blasphemy threshold".
Parody
However, the two senior judges at the High Court said the 1968 Theatres Act prevented any prosecution for blasphemy in relation to public performances of plays.
The 1990 Broadcasting Act, they continued, prevented any prosecution in relation to broadcasts.
They said it was reasonable to conclude Jerry Springer - The Opera "in context" could not be considered as blasphemous, as it was not aimed at Christianity, but was a parody of the chat show genre.
In a statement issued following the ruling, the BBC said it had taken the decision to broadcast Jerry Springer - The Opera after "the most careful consideration".
"We believe the work, taken in its proper context, satirises and attacks exploitative chat shows and not the Christian religion," it said. "The court's judgement today vindicates that decision in full.
"Today's decision addresses the way the law of blasphemy applies to broadcasters, and the Court has found that criminal prosecutions for blasphemy should not be permitted in relation to broadcasts.
"This is an important decision in the defence of free speech. We, of course, believe that broadcasters should continue to exercise great care and sensitivity when dealing with potential religious offence, and that has not changed."
'Protecting the constitution'
Mr Green had hoped to overturn District Judge Caroline Tubbs' refusal at the City of Westminster Magistrates' Court in January to issue a summons against Mr Thompson, who allowed the controversial show to be screened.
Mr Green had also wanted to prosecute the show's producer, Jonathan Thoday, who staged a nationwide tour of the show between October 2003 and July 2006.
Solicitors for Christian Voice urged the two High Court judges to allow the blasphemy prosecution to go ahead.
Speaking in court Michael Gledhill QC, appearing for Mr Green, said: "This is not just about protecting the rights of a section of the Christian population.
"It is about protecting the constitution of the nation which is built on the Christian faith."
David Pannick QC, representing Mr Thompson, said Judge Tubbs had acted within her powers and "made the only decision she could lawfully have made".
While religious beliefs were integral to British society, "so is freedom of expression, especially to matters of social and moral importance," said Mr Pannick.
'Outdated laws'
Mr Green said he would seek to appeal against Wednesday's ruling, which he described as a "carte blanche to blaspheme".
"I hope and pray the House of Lords will uphold the totality of the law against blasphemy and allow the prosecution to proceed."
But the decision was welcomed by human rights pressure group Liberty, who said it had "critically weakened outdated blasphemous libel laws".
"Today's ruling is a blow to bigotry," said the group's legal officer Anna Fairclough. "The obvious next step is to repeal this outdated offence."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7128552.stm
A Christian group has lost its High Court battle to prosecute the BBC's director general over the screening of Jerry Springer - The Opera in 2005.
Christian Voice director Stephen Green had hoped to overturn a previous ruling by a judge which forbade him from prosecuting Mark Thompson.
Two judges ruled that broadcasters and theatres staging live productions could not be prosecuted for blasphemy.
The BBC called the ruling an important decision in defence of free speech.
The corporation received a record 63,000 complaints when the musical - a satire based on US TV host Jerry Springer's controversial talk show - was broadcast on BBC Two in January 2005.
It also received many messages of support for screening the musical, which includes scenes set in Hell with Jesus and Satan.
Mr Green had said the show "clearly crossed the blasphemy threshold".
Parody
However, the two senior judges at the High Court said the 1968 Theatres Act prevented any prosecution for blasphemy in relation to public performances of plays.
The 1990 Broadcasting Act, they continued, prevented any prosecution in relation to broadcasts.
They said it was reasonable to conclude Jerry Springer - The Opera "in context" could not be considered as blasphemous, as it was not aimed at Christianity, but was a parody of the chat show genre.
In a statement issued following the ruling, the BBC said it had taken the decision to broadcast Jerry Springer - The Opera after "the most careful consideration".
"We believe the work, taken in its proper context, satirises and attacks exploitative chat shows and not the Christian religion," it said. "The court's judgement today vindicates that decision in full.
"Today's decision addresses the way the law of blasphemy applies to broadcasters, and the Court has found that criminal prosecutions for blasphemy should not be permitted in relation to broadcasts.
"This is an important decision in the defence of free speech. We, of course, believe that broadcasters should continue to exercise great care and sensitivity when dealing with potential religious offence, and that has not changed."
'Protecting the constitution'
Mr Green had hoped to overturn District Judge Caroline Tubbs' refusal at the City of Westminster Magistrates' Court in January to issue a summons against Mr Thompson, who allowed the controversial show to be screened.
Mr Green had also wanted to prosecute the show's producer, Jonathan Thoday, who staged a nationwide tour of the show between October 2003 and July 2006.
Solicitors for Christian Voice urged the two High Court judges to allow the blasphemy prosecution to go ahead.
Speaking in court Michael Gledhill QC, appearing for Mr Green, said: "This is not just about protecting the rights of a section of the Christian population.
"It is about protecting the constitution of the nation which is built on the Christian faith."
David Pannick QC, representing Mr Thompson, said Judge Tubbs had acted within her powers and "made the only decision she could lawfully have made".
While religious beliefs were integral to British society, "so is freedom of expression, especially to matters of social and moral importance," said Mr Pannick.
'Outdated laws'
Mr Green said he would seek to appeal against Wednesday's ruling, which he described as a "carte blanche to blaspheme".
"I hope and pray the House of Lords will uphold the totality of the law against blasphemy and allow the prosecution to proceed."
But the decision was welcomed by human rights pressure group Liberty, who said it had "critically weakened outdated blasphemous libel laws".
"Today's ruling is a blow to bigotry," said the group's legal officer Anna Fairclough. "The obvious next step is to repeal this outdated offence."
Add to del.icio.us
Posted: Wednesday, December 5, 2007 | PermalinkComments 1 - 34 of 34 |
Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers2. Comment #94330 by Northern Bright on December 5, 2007 at 10:39 am
The blasphemy law should be abolished altogether. If God's offended by something someone's said or written, let him sue on the grounds of slander or libel, like anyone else. Other Comments by Northern Bright
3. Comment #94334 by Ty_Webb on December 5, 2007 at 10:46 am
Indeed, or strike them down as they speak. Surely the omnipotent god that christians blather on about is strong enough to stand up for himself. Or maybe not.Other Comments by Ty_Webb
4. Comment #94336 by Squiddity on December 5, 2007 at 10:59 am
To be honest, I think everyone here knew it would fail before it started, including the prosecution - legally speaking, it didn't have a leg to stand on.This seems to be just an attention grabbing attempt by 'Christian Voice', and it has worked.
Other Comments by Squiddity
5. Comment #94339 by The Threat And Glory on December 5, 2007 at 11:07 am
It's such a shame that a satire of, to be polite, undesirable television shows should be taken to court for blasphemy, yet homeopaths, priests and other charlatans are free from prosecution for telling lies about the universe.Other Comments by The Threat And Glory
6. Comment #94340 by Greg23 on December 5, 2007 at 11:10 am
I saw this musical at the Fringe in 2002. I thought it was quite good. The funny thing was, we in America know that Jerry is a pretty intelligent guy and just does his show as theater and to make a buck (euros would be better). The audience at the Fringe apparently thought he is really serious about what his show is all about. We thought the musical was hilarious but we heard a lot of locals say 'He deserves to burn in hell' on the way out.Other Comments by Greg23
7. Comment #94341 by alexmzk on December 5, 2007 at 11:27 am
Mr Green had said the show "clearly crossed the blasphemy threshold".
i'm getting a hilarious mental image of a Monty-Pythonesque character with a neat little moustache, who won't let the kids have their ball back and takes great care mowing his lawn.
Other Comments by alexmzk
8. Comment #94342 by Northern Bright on December 5, 2007 at 11:36 am
Yet what's the betting that a substantial proportion of these "Christian Voice" people thought the Sudanese response to the teddy-bear-called-Mohammed incident a ludicrous overreaction and were praying like mad for the teacher's early and safe release? Other Comments by Northern Bright
9. Comment #94344 by flying goose on December 5, 2007 at 11:44 am
"The blasphemy law should be abolished altogether. If God's offended by something someone's said or written, let him sue on the grounds of slander or libel, like anyone else."I couldnt agree more.
Other Comments by flying goose
10. Comment #94345 by Friend Giskard on December 5, 2007 at 11:49 am
Actually this is bad news. The National Secular Society was hoping (as was I) for the opposite decision, as their newsletter (23 November 2007) explains:The National Secular Society has been cheering on a Christian activist who is trying to revive Britain's archaic blasphemy laws. The NSS wants Stephen Green to be permitted to bring his case so that the blasphemy law can be tested in court, found wanting and, effectively, abolished.
Keith Porteous Wood, Executive Director of the National Secular Society said:
We hope that leave for this case to proceed will be granted and if it does we predict that it will fail. If it does it would ironically make Stephen Green the person to hammer the final nail into the blasphemy law on which he is so keen, but which the National Secular Society has been fighting to abolish for 140 years. The law has, in the past, resulted in jail terms, sometimes with hard labour, that have shortened the lives of brave secularists, when they published remarks or cartoons which today would be seen as trivial.
So you see, the decision against Green at this stage is not a victory for free speech.
Other Comments by Friend Giskard
11. Comment #94346 by celestialtea on December 5, 2007 at 12:03 pm
Even so, anything that draws more attention to the ridiculous special treatment expected by the religious has got to be good for the cause. The outright dismissal of this case is still a good sign and sends out a clear message. Other Comments by celestialtea
12. Comment #94349 by Northern Bright on December 5, 2007 at 12:16 pm
The outright dismissal of this case is still a good sign and sends out a clear message.
I'm inclined to agree with Friend Giskard and the NSS on this one. Even though this verdict sends out a clear message about the stupidity of the blasphemy law, mightn't it have been better to have a verdict that could ultimately have led to its repeal?
Other Comments by Northern Bright
13. Comment #94356 by Ivan The Not So Bad on December 5, 2007 at 12:51 pm
Friend Giskard is right.I made the point on another thread some weeks ago that on the grounds you should choose your enemies carefully, this attack on the BBC by Christian Voice (the UK's answer to Westboro') was to be welcomed as it would show them up as the vile lunatics they are.
If they suceeded then so much the better as the backlash would have been unstoppable. A real "teddy" moment for the UK. With the Director General of the world's largest news organisation on his way to prison, the government would have had no choice but to repeal the blasphemy laws.
With this in mind, it's no shock that other religious groups were looking at Christian Voice's antics with horror and are no doubt breathing a sigh of relief tonight.
As things stand, we still have a blasphemy law with the result that the BBC had to propose a defence not of free speech but that the programme was a satire of a talk show and therefore not an insult to Christianity.
Furthermore, the ruling was made with reference to the Broadcasting Act and the Theatres Act so now we are in a situation where it would be very difficult to bring a prosecution against a broadcaster or a theatre but still theoretically possible against a newspaper or book.
So it's progress of a sort but we remain in a mess over this silly law which remains a deeply unwelcome spectre watching over us all.
Other Comments by Ivan The Not So Bad
14. Comment #94365 by cerbera on December 5, 2007 at 1:23 pm
I'm glad this article is here, I read it in the Times Online and was slightly frustrated to not be able to leave some comments there.So - another small victory for reason... I wonder if and when the decent thing will be done, and the law itself is indeed ruled irrelevant and repealed.
Other Comments by cerbera
15. Comment #94366 by mmurray on December 5, 2007 at 1:25 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_hlMK7tCks
Fake beard anyone ?
Michael
Other Comments by mmurray
16. Comment #94369 by dariusdeluded on December 5, 2007 at 1:42 pm
The law has, in the past, resulted in jail terms, sometimes with hard labour, that have shortened the lives of brave secularists, when they published remarks or cartoons which today would be seen as trivial.
So where do I sign up to offend these blighters?
I want to blasphamise
DD
Other Comments by dariusdeluded
17. Comment #94383 by paulifa1 on December 5, 2007 at 2:37 pm
Why do these nutters have no sense of humour? When people joke about my quirks or habits, or the fact I don't cut my lawn more than twice a year, I have a good laugh along with them. If they think my lifestyle of beliefs are crazy, great, so what??I've seen this show, it's reasonably funny and I would think some moderate xtians would find it funny too...bloody xtian taliban :((
It almost makes me wish there was a god, when all these nutty born again twats turn up at the pearly gates, he could then give them a good bollocking for being such embarrasing freaks and making him look bad and throw them all into hell (lets face it, you wouldn't need any fire, hanging out with that lot would be the worst type of hell!), just prior to letting an astonished looking Dawkins and Hitchens in with a knowing grin and a wink...
Other Comments by paulifa1
18. Comment #94388 by Linda on December 5, 2007 at 2:45 pm
http://www.jerryspringertheopera.com/ it's out on DVD!Other Comments by Linda
19. Comment #94396 by ChrisMcL on December 5, 2007 at 3:21 pm
You know, as backwards as the U.S. can be in regard to church and state issues - WE DON"T HAVE LAWS AGAINST BLASPHEMY!!!You Brits really need to get rid of the monarchy and the church.
Other Comments by ChrisMcL
20. Comment #94402 by Cartomancer on December 5, 2007 at 3:46 pm
All together now... "Cover him in chocolate, and throw him to the lesbians... this is my Jerry Springer Moooooomeeeeeent!" Other Comments by Cartomancer
21. Comment #94473 by Acleron on December 5, 2007 at 5:54 pm
Christian group has lost its High Court battle to prosecute the BBC's director general over the screening of Jerry Springer - The Opera in 2005.
Thank god for that.
Other Comments by Acleron
22. Comment #94538 by RickM on December 6, 2007 at 12:39 am
How do I go about getting on the BBC so I can say, "Fuck Jesus and the donkey he rode in on". Other Comments by RickM
23. Comment #94555 by Theocrapcy on December 6, 2007 at 1:30 am
At least their name (Xian Voice) is a reflection of their cause. But that might not be doing them much good. I predict a name change - say "The Crusaders". oh, wait,... Other Comments by Theocrapcy
24. Comment #94574 by Tycho the Dog on December 6, 2007 at 2:10 am
ChrisMcL,I agree and one of the hugely disappointing aspects of ten years of Labour government - with an initially huge electoral mandate - is that they have singularly failed to introduce any meaningful constitutional reforms. Instead they've been busy cosying up to faith groups, big business, and pushing a big brother agenda. This is exactly the sort of law that a supposedly socialist goverment should be repealing.
Other Comments by Tycho the Dog
25. Comment #94578 by pizza-gut on December 6, 2007 at 2:15 am
On the Beeb story there is a link to the Christian Voice website. Very unsavoury, there's a section complainning about gay police officers openly marching in uniform at a pride parade. Where do these vile, hate filled, condescending little pr*cks get off?!Other Comments by pizza-gut
26. Comment #94604 by Ilovelucy on December 6, 2007 at 3:35 am
Comment #94342 by Northern Bright on December 5, 2007 at 11:36 am
avatarYet what's the betting that a substantial proportion of these "Christian Voice" people thought the Sudanese response to the teddy-bear-called-Mohammed incident a ludicrous overreaction and were praying like mad for the teacher's early and safe release? ,
I wouldn't be so sure. Jerry Springer the Opera played to little controversy initially, but after Sikh protesters successfully forced the closure of the play Bezhti for offending their religion ( it featured a scene of a rape in a Sikh temple) Christian Voice became inspired to do the same and Springer fitted the bill. So after the Teddy bear named Mohammed saga they're probably glossing over the blasphemy laws to see if they can prosecute any Brazilian naming ceremonies.
Other Comments by Ilovelucy
27. Comment #94626 by Theocrapcy on December 6, 2007 at 5:24 am
I'd like to see the view go all jerry springer:"no, christ predates everything you ##$#%%()& slut. Talk to the hand ^%#$#@! you fat (*&*(^, you don't know squat bout nuttin. I su#$%ed his $^*&%^#$ before you even met him, biyatch. Oh no you diddent!" and then they cat fight.
Other Comments by Theocrapcy
28. Comment #94641 by WhoIsThisGodPerson on December 6, 2007 at 6:29 am
Chris McL: You Brits really need to get rid of the monarchy and the church...
...and replace them with the arrangements you have in the US? No thank you. I like the monarchy and the church exactly where they are - so that we can keep an eye on them.
Other Comments by WhoIsThisGodPerson
29. Comment #94648 by sidfaiwu on December 6, 2007 at 6:44 am
You know, as backwards as the U.S. can be in regard to church and state issues - WE DON"T HAVE LAWS AGAINST BLASPHEMY!!!
Some US States still do. Here's one: http://mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/272-36.htm
Other Comments by sidfaiwu
30. Comment #94658 by Peacebeuponme on December 6, 2007 at 7:16 am
he described as a "carte blanche to blaspheme".That's the point you stupid cunt. Its called freedom of speech.
It just makes me rage that people can think like that.
Very happy to see that we have some sensible laws overriding the archaic blasphemy laws.
Other Comments by Peacebeuponme
31. Comment #94684 by Greg23 on December 6, 2007 at 8:59 am
it's out on DVD!
According to Amazon, only in the U.K. - and it's Region 2 format so we (U.S.) can't get it!
Drat!
Good price though.
Other Comments by Greg23
32. Comment #94863 by soul_biscuit on December 6, 2007 at 9:39 pm
"Some US States still do. Here's one: http://mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/272-36.htm "Those laws are unconstitutional, and if challenged would be overturned in short order. The Constitution's Establishment Clause forbids laws against blasphemy.
Other Comments by soul_biscuit
33. Comment #97086 by sidfaiwu on December 11, 2007 at 11:37 am
"Some US States still do. Here's one: http://mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/272-36.htm "
Those laws are unconstitutional, and if challenged would be overturned in short order. The Constitution's Establishment Clause forbids laws against blasphemy.
Agreed. I was only commenting on their existence in America.
Other Comments by sidfaiwu
34. Comment #97089 by Rtambree on December 11, 2007 at 11:45 am
>19. Comment #94396 by ChrisMcL>You know, as backwards as the U.S. can be in regard to church and state issues - WE DON"T HAVE LAWS AGAINST BLASPHEMY!!!
I know it isn't technically "blasphemy" but the obscenity laws in the USA are much more severe than in Europe - not just examples such as the infamous wardrobe malfunction from Janet Jackson, but the sanitisation of movies, TV shows, radio, etc with nudity and swearing.
Violence seems to be OK, but nudity is repressed (typical Christian hyprocrisy) but an example analogous to blasphemy, where Christians have actually succeeded in influencing the freedom of expression.
Other Comments by Rtambree
Upcoming Events:
About this site
Mailing List Signup: Enter your email
Go to The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science
Richard Dawkins Articles | Comments | Tour Journal
Atheist Resources | Local Groups
Debate Points | Latest Responses
Audio Books
The God Delusion
Read by
Richard Dawkins &
Lalla Ward
The Ancestor's Tale
Read by
Richard Dawkins &
Lalla Ward
On the Origin of Species
Read by
Richard Dawkins
Links:
Quote:
"Leon Lederman, the physicist and Nobel laureate, once half-jokingly remarked that the real goal of physics was to come up with an equation that could explain the universe but still be small enough to fit on a T-shirt. In that spirit, Dawkins offered up his own T-shirt slogan for the ongoing evolution revolution:
Life results from the non-random survival of randomly varying replicators."
Richard Dawkins
Other Recommended Reading
The Moral Animal
Robert Wright
The Blank Slate
Steven Pinker
Irreligion
John Allen Paulos
More Books
Adjust font size: 
"If this book doesn't change the world -- we're all screwed."
-Penn (Penn & Teller)
The God Delusion
by Richard Dawkins
Over 1.5 million copies sold
DVDs
'The Genius of Charles Darwin' DVD (PAL Region 2 ONLY)
'Enemies of Reason' DVD
'Voices of Science' DVD
'The Four Horsemen' DVD
'Root of All Evil? The Original Program' DVD
'Growing Up in the Universe' DVD
'Break the Science Barrier' DVD
Books by Richard Dawkins
The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing
by Richard Dawkins
The Selfish Gene
by Richard Dawkins
The Blind Watchmaker
by Richard Dawkins
The Ancestor's Tale
by Richard Dawkins
Unweaving the Rainbow
by Richard Dawkins
1. Comment #94327 by Matt7895 on December 5, 2007 at 10:22 am
As the BBC say, it's an important victory for free speech.
Other Comments by Matt7895