RESEARCH STARTER
Blasphemy
Blasphemy refers to contemptuous or irreverent expressions about God or matters deemed sacred by a dominant religion. Historically, blasphemy laws in the United States were enforced during the early 19th century, despite the constitutional protection of freedom of speech and religion. Notably, individuals like Abner Kneeland faced prosecution for religious skepticism, highlighting a tension between state laws and individual liberties. The U.S. Supreme Court has never directly reviewed a blasphemy case, but it did rule against blasphemy laws in the 1952 case Burstyn v. Wilson, asserting that they violate First Amendment rights. While some states still have blasphemy laws on the books, they are largely considered unconstitutional and are not enforced. Globally, blasphemy laws persist in over eighty countries, with varying levels of enforcement, often leading to human rights concerns, particularly for religious minorities. However, many Western nations have abolished such laws in favor of protecting freedom of expression and religion. The topic of blasphemy continues to evoke discussions about the balance between religious sensitivity and the rights of individuals to express dissenting beliefs.
Authored By: Lewis, Thomas T. 1 of 4
Published In: 2022 2 of 4
- Related Topics:
3 of 4
- Related Articles:Critical Study Of Rejection Of Blasphemy Prohibition In Criminal Code Related To Ideals Indonesian Law.;Is Blasphemy Illiberal? Salman Rushdie's thoroughly modern controversies.;The Matter of Personae in Medieval Italy.;Turkey Cracks Down on Magazine Over Alleged Prophet Cartoon.;Waning Crescent: The Rise and Fall of Global Islam.
4 of 4
Full Article
- Relevant amendment: First
Description: Contemptuous or irreverent expressions about God or matters held sacred in the dominant religion.
Significance: During the first half of the nineteenth century, state prosecutions of blasphemy occurred even when state Bills of Rights guaranteed freedom of speech and religion. Such prosecutions gradually ended because of the growth of secular and libertarian ideas. Under the Massachusetts blasphemy statute of 1782, “denying God” or “reproaching Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost” were criminal acts. The state prosecuted and convicted a significant number of persons under the blasphemy laws for about fifty years. In 1838, Abner Kneeland was sentenced to six months in the Suffolk County jail for his strong assertions of religious skepticism. The state’s supreme court upheld both the law and Kneeland’s conviction.
In New York, blasphemy was occasionally prosecuted as a crime at common law. The crime was defined as “maliciously reviling God or religion.” In 1811, a defendant was fined five hundred dollars and imprisoned for three months for “wickedly, maliciously, and blasphemously” saying in the presence of “good and Christian people” that “Jesus Christ was a bastard and his mother must be a whore.” When upholding the conviction in People v. Ruggles (1811), the state’s Chief Judge James Kent wrote that such language was “a gross violation of decency and good order.” Allowing blasphemy to go unpunished, he asserted, would do great harm to the “tender morals of the young,” eventually producing a culture in which oaths on the Bible would not be trustworthy.
The United States (US) Supreme Court never had to review a prosecution for blasphemy because the First Amendment was not made applicable to the states until about a century after such prosecutions ended. However, the Court did rule that blasphemy laws were unconstitutional in the case of Burstyn v. Wilson (1952). In this case, the Court overturned a New York law that had authorized the censorship of “sacrilegious” movies.
Although blasphemy laws may remain in some US states, they are not enforced and are considered unconstitutional due to their violation of First Amendment rights. Globally, blasphemy laws exist in over eighty countries, although their degree of enforcement varies drastically. In the late 2010s and early 2020s, several Western countries formally repealed longstanding blasphemy laws, reinforcing a broader shift toward protecting freedom of expression. Notably, Ireland abolished its constitutional offense of blasphemy in 2020, following a national referendum held in 2018. During the same period, international human rights bodies, including the United Nations Human Rights Council, continued to criticize blasphemy laws as incompatible with international standards on free speech and religious freedom. In contrast, in parts of South Asia and the Middle East, blasphemy laws remained in force and were actively enforced, with countries such as Pakistan continuing to impose severe penalties, including lengthy imprisonment, and to face international scrutiny over their use against religious minorities.
Bibliography
"Global Blasphemy Laws." US Commission on International Religious Freedom, 7 Dec. 2020, www.uscirf.gov/news-room/uscirf-spotlight/global-blasphemy-laws. Accessed 24 Aug. 2024.
Goldman, Pearl. "Ireland’s Vote to Remove Blasphemy from its Constitution and the Case of Asia Bibi." Jurist News, 10 Dec. 2018, www.jurist.org/commentary/2018/12/pearl-goldman-irish-blasphemy. Accessed 15 Dec. 2025.
"Pakistan: Blasphemy Laws Exploited for Blackmail, Profit." Human Rights Watch, 8 June 2025, www.hrw.org/news/2025/06/08/pakistan-blasphemy-laws-exploited-blackmail-profit. Accessed 15 Dec. 2025.
"Text - H.Res.512 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Calling for the Global Repeal of Blasphemy, Heresy, and Apostasy Laws." Congress.gov, 7 Dec. 2020, www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/512/text. Accessed 24 Aug. 2024.
Vile, John R. "Blasphemy - The First Amendment Encyclopedia." Free Speech Center, 8 Aug. 2023, firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/blasphemy. Accessed 24 Aug. 2024.
Full Article
- Relevant amendment: First
Description: Contemptuous or irreverent expressions about God or matters held sacred in the dominant religion.
Significance: During the first half of the nineteenth century, state prosecutions of blasphemy occurred even when state Bills of Rights guaranteed freedom of speech and religion. Such prosecutions gradually ended because of the growth of secular and libertarian ideas. Under the Massachusetts blasphemy statute of 1782, “denying God” or “reproaching Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost” were criminal acts. The state prosecuted and convicted a significant number of persons under the blasphemy laws for about fifty years. In 1838, Abner Kneeland was sentenced to six months in the Suffolk County jail for his strong assertions of religious skepticism. The state’s supreme court upheld both the law and Kneeland’s conviction.
In New York, blasphemy was occasionally prosecuted as a crime at common law. The crime was defined as “maliciously reviling God or religion.” In 1811, a defendant was fined five hundred dollars and imprisoned for three months for “wickedly, maliciously, and blasphemously” saying in the presence of “good and Christian people” that “Jesus Christ was a bastard and his mother must be a whore.” When upholding the conviction in People v. Ruggles (1811), the state’s Chief Judge James Kent wrote that such language was “a gross violation of decency and good order.” Allowing blasphemy to go unpunished, he asserted, would do great harm to the “tender morals of the young,” eventually producing a culture in which oaths on the Bible would not be trustworthy.
The United States (US) Supreme Court never had to review a prosecution for blasphemy because the First Amendment was not made applicable to the states until about a century after such prosecutions ended. However, the Court did rule that blasphemy laws were unconstitutional in the case of Burstyn v. Wilson (1952). In this case, the Court overturned a New York law that had authorized the censorship of “sacrilegious” movies.
Although blasphemy laws may remain in some US states, they are not enforced and are considered unconstitutional due to their violation of First Amendment rights. Globally, blasphemy laws exist in over eighty countries, although their degree of enforcement varies drastically. In the late 2010s and early 2020s, several Western countries formally repealed longstanding blasphemy laws, reinforcing a broader shift toward protecting freedom of expression. Notably, Ireland abolished its constitutional offense of blasphemy in 2020, following a national referendum held in 2018. During the same period, international human rights bodies, including the United Nations Human Rights Council, continued to criticize blasphemy laws as incompatible with international standards on free speech and religious freedom. In contrast, in parts of South Asia and the Middle East, blasphemy laws remained in force and were actively enforced, with countries such as Pakistan continuing to impose severe penalties, including lengthy imprisonment, and to face international scrutiny over their use against religious minorities.
Bibliography
"Global Blasphemy Laws." US Commission on International Religious Freedom, 7 Dec. 2020, www.uscirf.gov/news-room/uscirf-spotlight/global-blasphemy-laws. Accessed 24 Aug. 2024.
Goldman, Pearl. "Ireland’s Vote to Remove Blasphemy from its Constitution and the Case of Asia Bibi." Jurist News, 10 Dec. 2018, www.jurist.org/commentary/2018/12/pearl-goldman-irish-blasphemy. Accessed 15 Dec. 2025.
"Pakistan: Blasphemy Laws Exploited for Blackmail, Profit." Human Rights Watch, 8 June 2025, www.hrw.org/news/2025/06/08/pakistan-blasphemy-laws-exploited-blackmail-profit. Accessed 15 Dec. 2025.
"Text - H.Res.512 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Calling for the Global Repeal of Blasphemy, Heresy, and Apostasy Laws." Congress.gov, 7 Dec. 2020, www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/512/text. Accessed 24 Aug. 2024.
Vile, John R. "Blasphemy - The First Amendment Encyclopedia." Free Speech Center, 8 Aug. 2023, firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/blasphemy. Accessed 24 Aug. 2024.
More Like ThisRelated Articles
Related Articles (5)
Related Articles (5)
- Critical Study Of Rejection Of Blasphemy Prohibition In Criminal Code Related To Ideals Indonesian Law.Published In: Al-Adl Journal, 2024, v. 17, n. 2. P. 201Authored By: Aswandi; Abunawas; Ismawati, Sri; Hasyim Azizurrahman, Sy.; HermansyahPublication Type: Academic Journal
- Is Blasphemy Illiberal? Salman Rushdie's thoroughly modern controversies.Published In: Yale Review, 2024, v. 112, n. 3. P. 167Authored By: Gutkin, LenPublication Type: Academic Journal
- The Matter of Personae in Medieval Italy.Published In: American Journal of Legal History, 2023, v. 63, n. 2. P. 131Authored By: Vise, MelissaPublication Type: Academic Journal
- Turkey Cracks Down on Magazine Over Alleged Prophet Cartoon.Published In: Bloomberg.com, 2025. P. N.PAGAuthored By: Yilmaz, UgurPublication Type: Periodical
- Waning Crescent: The Rise and Fall of Global Islam.Published In: Foreign Affairs, 2026, v. 105, n. 1. P. 189Authored By: MEHTA, PRATAP BHANUPublication Type: Periodical