See my preceding post. I agree, it is hard. But, we managed to convict Martha Stewart on arcane stuff no one can comprehend, - why can't we have someone define blasphemy and still discuss religion? It was done for centuries, until Larry Flynt became a 1st Amendment expert.
Martha Stewart was convicted of lying to an FBI agent. I don't know if she was actually guilty and make no judgment on her case but the charge she was convicted of was neither arcane or difficult to comprehend. Especially for someone who held a seat on the NYSE (as Martha did)
She lied to Federal investigators. What is arcane about that?
Also I hope you hold the Muslim clerics who screech in mosques about the Great Satan, the evil Jews and Christians etc. to the same standard of blasphemy. But of course the point is moot in their case as anything they write or say will be zealously defended by the left. Which is possibly the case with the judge in Italy.