You do understand that you are talking about a law in a country where religious riots are pretty common? It is similar to how race-hate or sexism is viewed in the U.S. It better to have laws that disallows picking on people's sensitive sides and causing a blowout than ignoring it. You could do a simple risk-benefit analysis and come to the same conclusion.
It is simplistic to assume that it's all the political parties' fault. They can take advantage of these things only if the people let them. They are able to exploit deep seated feelings and insecurities because those exist.
Let me throw a similar question at you, define "race hate" or "sexism". Does making a joke about generalized views on race or sex contribute to "race hate" or "sexism"? If not where do we draw the line? When someone makes a remark about their own race or sex, why aren't we up in arms about it but if someone else does it, why do end up in a riot. See its not that easy to define things that are driven by complex emotions.
>Keep in mind that anybody can invent any religion at any point.
You are absolutely right.
Religion in it simplistic form is simply a belief that a group of people share and unite under. Within that definition, even atheism is a religion, although an Oxymoron.
We know what the church has done to heretics in the past...
Galileo was threatened with torture (torture was common practice at the time) if he continued to prove to the public that Earth was not the center of the universe.
On a separate note, I don't understand is why no miracle is ever tangible. Restored eyesight? Intangible. Walking again? Intangible. Growing back a missing limb or missing eye? Tangible - therefore, this miracle has never occurred, and never will.
I come from a religious family (a catholic and protestant). Both churches rejected my parents for marrying "the enemy". To this day, I struggle to have any empathy with these entities.
