Has blasphemy been freed or constrained by TSV?

[Stephen]

In Joseph Anton Rushdie remarks that, had he published The Satanic Verses after the advent of the internet/social-networking age, he would not have survived (the backlash would have been far more swift and violent). On the other hand, the battle to preserve freedom of expression against religiously-inspired oppression has become much more urgent.

Knowing what we know now -- of Salman Rushdie, Theo Van Gogh, Ayaan Hirsi Ali -- do you believe that fiction writers today have greater, or less, freedom to explore and convey "blasphemous" subjects and themes? When it comes to that third rail, religion, are do we constrain ourselves with self-censorship?

[Julie]

I've also read Ayaan Hirsi Ali's excellent autobiography and her struggle against religious fundamentalists. I have tremendous respect for these strong individuals who are willing to stand up and defend freedom of speech (like Canada's Irshad Manji). I think; however, (unlike Rushdie) that the internet/social-networking age is a boon to freedom of speech.

[Stephen]

Julie wrote: "I've also read Ayaan Hirsi Ali's excellent autobiography and her struggle against religious fundamentalists. I have tremendous respect for these strong individuals who are willing to stand up and ..."

Julie -- I've been wanting to read Ali's autobiography as well, and agree wholeheartedly regarding the respect that these people deserve.

I imagine that Rushdie would agree that the i'net/social networking is a boon to freedom of speech, but would add that it's a double-edged sword ... that freedom has also been a boon to hate-mongers, history-deniers, and conspiracy-theorists.

[Patrick]

I believe we have much greater freedom to explore blasphemous ideas. Just taking into consideration the sheer number of books and authors on the subject of atheism makes me think so. (I feel like the religious, especially the extremists, would take any denial of the existence of God as blasphemy.