The writers of the French enlightenment had deliberately used blasphemy as a weapon, refusing to accept the power of the Church to set limiting points on thought.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
One man's blasphemy doesn't override other people's free-speech rights, their freedom to publish, freedom of thought.
There is nothing in my work that can be taken as blasphemy.
When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know, the end result is tyranny and oppression no matter how holy the motives.
To say that you can kill in the name of God is blasphemy.
It is plain to me that our prelates, in granting indulgences, do commonly blaspheme the wisdom of God.
It was under a solemn consciousness of the dangers from ecclesiastical ambition, the bigotry of spiritual pride, and the intolerance of sects... that is was deemed advisable to exclude from the national government all power to act upon the subject.
Is it not a species of blasphemy to call the New Testament revealed religion, when we see in it such contradictions and absurdities.
Men blaspheme what they do not know.
Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous.
I suppose I should say that I treasure blasphemy, as a faith of the highest order.