vakras foetus unbowed atheist head

reason the enemy of belief

Unbowed Atheist first appeared as a Demetrios Vakras blog when 10 articles were published on 15 June 2013. These articles can still be found at



[gelded - re-edited, later]


Australian states have blasphemy laws on the statutes. These laws are rarely, if ever, utilised.

However, it is not a secret that the laws and the values on which the laws of the state are based are religious.

In Australia blasphemy laws may rarely, if ever, be utilised, but blasphemy is still prosecuted by stealth.

Australian states prosecute blasphemy cases by pretending that blasphemy actions undertaken are for the prosecution of something other, not blasphemy. And instead of prosecuting a criminal case on behalf of the state, the prosecuting is done as a civil matter on behalf of an individual.

It is a deliberate political strategy, which seems to be a result of the state wishing to prosecute blasphemy cases, but without transgressing obligations to international protocols to which Australia is signatory; obligations that include the freedom to hold ideas and impart them.

The state drafts and puts in place laws and statutes for protecting the right to freedom of religious belief, with laws designed to protect the religious ideas of Christians or Muslims - who object to their religious doctrines being analysed and criticsed. And, in protecting religions from being criticsed the state can enforce penalties for blasphemy while claiming it is protecting the rights of people to hold a religion.

International obligations make it necessary for the state to employ creative measures to keep religion from being injured but without making it obvious that government (and the apparatus of state such as the Supreme Court of Victoria) are protecting religion.

austrlia international obligation to uphold human rights

Successive governments and the apparatus of government (HREOC CONTENT REMOVED) have taken actions, supported actions, or have acted in, the prevention of blasphemy. These actions are claimed to be done in order to protect individuals from being hurt because the religious ideas that they hold are claimed to define their identity which means they are caused injury when their religion is criticised.


One of the means by which blasphemy can be enforced is the "moral obligation" to protect society. Criticism of Islam for instance, is claimed to incite Muslim reaction, causing Muslims to commit terrorist acts.

Australian political leaders such as Malcolm Turnbull propound the claim that criticism of Islam incites terrorism. Thus an atheist criticising Islam is doing the work of the terrorist, according to Turnbull.

Although Islamic doctrine calls for the very acts that are defined as "terrorist", political leaders such as Turnbull claim that it is not the doctrines calling for precisely the kind of actions that causes terrorism, but that these doctrines are criticised. (Turnbull is supported by the opposition.)


Malcolm Turnbull on critics of Islam : “they want to get the community to demonise the whole Muslim community. They want - Those people who want to attack Muslims in general, attack Islam in general, are doing the terrorists’ work because the strategy of the terrorist is to enrage the broader community, get the broader community to then demonise, in this case, the Muslim community, which will cause more Muslims to support the extremists”

The objective of prohibiting criticism of religion is an ongoing one. It includes the attempt to introduce "defamation of religion" laws into Australia.

Australia's own "Human Rights" body (the HREOC) attempted, on the behalf of Pakistan which was acting for the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in the UN, to introduce legislation to limit Human Rights, with "Defamation of Religion" laws.

This application made to the UN was rejected in 2011 by the "Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights", Geneva.

48 ABOUT "defamation of religion":

"48. Prohibitions of displays of lack of respect for a religion or other belief system, including blasphemy laws, are incompatible with the Covenant, except in the specific circumstances envisaged in article 20, paragraph 2, of the Covenant. Such prohibitions must also comply with the strict requirements of article 19, paragraph 3, as well as such articles as 2, 5, 17, 18 and 26. Thus, for instance, it would be impermissible for any such laws to discriminate in favour of or against one or certain religions or belief systems, or their adherents over another, or religious believers over non-believers. Nor would it be permissible for such prohibitions to be used to prevent or punish criticism of religious leaders or commentary on religious doctrine and tenets of faith."

(more info? Wikipedia:
"Defamation of religion and the United Nations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
this idea was initited by Pakistan on behalf of the OIC (Organisation of Islamic Cooperation)" Organisation of Islamic Cooperation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

It is not unusual then that an atheist, this author, was penalised because his criticism of religious doctrines, the Old and New Testaments, the Koran, and the religions of Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Zoroastrianism were criticised.



In Australia the various apparatus of state, the government, judges, the courts and "statutory bodies" advocate for the enforcing of penalties for blasphemy.

The state government of Victoria advocates for the suppression of criticism of religious ideas (below). Criticism is described as "hatred" and "animosity".


The Islamic Council of Victoria - that has been seeking to prevent criticism of Islam - also propounds the values of "tolerance", "positive understanding" and "respect" that are promoted by Kyrou et al, and the ICV also partakes in "interfaith dialogues" that promote the same.
Islamic council of victoria - jihad is an act of good - only the intolerant would criticise it
The ICV represents (the Australian state of) Victoria's Muslims and seeks tolerance and respect for the acts called for in the Koran such as perpetual jihad and beheadings.


Despite having failed in the United Nations, the idea promoted by the OIC is still the desired-for objective of the state. This objective manifests itself in the objectives of  interfaithers/multifaithers and in the decisions and outcomes of judges.

Australian law is bsaed on reliogion and religious values. Australian law is abused in order that the values of religious doctrines are not criticised.

george patton OZ jurist religion is basis of laws and values  book cover
A Textbook of Jurisprudence, January 25, 1973 by George Whitecross Paton

*George Whitecross Paton writes that religious values underpin Australian (English) law.

Paton is cited by British-Pakistai "moderate" Mufti, Muhammad Taqi Usmani who writes that only in religion can the values of right and wrong, be found:

"... secular intellect has totally failed to define the good and the bad. Hence there is no solution to the problem except that the man should seek guidance from God and follow the revealed doctrines."

He quotes Paton (though this might be a translation from the English to Arabic, and then from Arabic back to English):

"The famous author of jurisprudence, George Paton has written: 'What interests should the real legal system protect? This is a question of values in which legal philosophy plays its part ... But however Much we desire the help of philosophy, it is difficult to obtain. No agreed scale of values has ever been reached indeed. It is only in religion that we can find a basis, and the truth of religion Must be accepted by faith or invitation and not purely on the result of logical argument. (Portion: Jurisprudences p. 121).'" p. 16, Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani, "Islam and Modernism".

(Note:, the unusual capitalisations and disjointed sentences are how Paton's passage is quoted in the mufti's book)

koran is the source of sharia Sharia is to do what is commanded in Koran - kill, behead, murder
"The Koran is one of the main sources of Sharia", from the Australian government braodcaster (ABC).

To prevent the Koran from being criticised and spare Muslims' feelings a variety of mechanisms are employed by the state and its apparatus.

Blog by Lee-Anne Raymond in 2012

"Blasphemy Laws, Atheism and Offending Religion"

The Australian state is seeking to impose blasphemy law by stealth

[Own ref: "HREOC religion = Race crime"]


A belief is not the equivalent to a logical corollary. And, a logical corollary is not "an opinion". Australia's judiciary conflate these concepts and deem them to be of the same meaning.