(January 26, 2015 at 5:45 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:Blaspheming religion, and scrutinising religion, are two different things.

Not to the true believer they aren't.

Took the West 1,000 years to get xtians assholes under control and the muslims still haven't managed it.

If any Christian thinks "that is not true" is scrutiny and not blasphemy they can try saying "Mohammed never spoke to a god anymore than Jesus" in Saudi Arabia or parts of Pakistan and see how quickly you get mobed, murdered or arrested by the state and or murdered by the state.

Now the same like mentioned before, was true of Christianity. A simple "that is not true" got Galileo put under house arrest. To the church at the time what they heard was "FUCK YOU CHURCH'.

Only an idiot thinks getting insulted is worse than being murdered over an insult. Insults and blasphemy in religion are the same to far too many so the default position is to treat them the same. Trying to put outright bans on either really is nothing more than that power protecting it's own ego.

Quote:Only an idiot thinks getting insulted is worse

Or a believer. Worst people going.

(January 26, 2015 at 5:19 pm)Vicki Q Wrote:

(January 25, 2015 at 7:42 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Depends, I am willing to work with any human worldwide willing to put religion on the back burner, be even with that I still reserve the right to blaspheme religion. I can get along with individuals, but as an idea religion must always be subject to scrutiny.

I think the point is that many Xians in the UK work on environmental issues because that's what they think Xians should do. Mankind given stewardship of the earth with God as owner, that sort of thing. It's important they (we) don't put religion on the back burner.

Blaspheming religion, and scrutinising religion, are two different things. Those atheists I'm familiar with at the cutting edge of the latter generally don't like doing the former.

You really do need to accept that word choice to fundies means nothing, insult or blasphemy, to them any challenge to their social norms is seen as a threat. Trying to separate those two words allows them to move the goal posts. Also like when Muslims and Jews use both race and religion interchangeably. When you call them out they say "no it is race" when you call them on that "they say no it's my religion" that moving back and forth allows them to avoid the real problem which is religion itself.

Same with the words "insult" and "Blasphemy" I just yesterday had a Muslim on twitter say "we don't mind you insulting us, just not our prophet" He used the word "insult" not blasphemy, so they do use them interchangeably. And this was a Muslim who agreed with me that violence is never the solution.

What he still does not face as a moderate Muslim and you are not facing is the same thing. Both books in both religions are used by both liberals and zealots and they still contain the same words.

Allowing word games gives cover to ALL religions and allows excuses for the violent ones to exist. The only way you can stop that is to allow for both insults and blasphemy and insist on non violence.

That will not happen if you allow them to go back and forth between the words "scrutiny" and "blasphemy" and "insults", what protects us isn't being free from being offended. What protects us is common law and laws banning physical violence.

The other reason you don't play that game is long term. Long term power shifts and you might not be in that majority in the future. It is a bad idea to hand "who gets to decide" to a power that might not like what you have to say.

What you can do as far as law without outright bans, is have the regulation of "free speech" and laws against violence.

No one likes to get picked on, and having been bullied as a kid, I know. But when you are an adult you cannot force everyone else to only say nice things about you and sometimes others will say things that offend you.

We need another blaspheme thread. A competitive one maybe?

(January 27, 2015 at 8:44 am)robvalue Wrote: We need another blaspheme thread. A competitive one maybe?

What we need is government's around the world to protect speech and allow it and simply outlaw acts of violence.

But for any individual, or political party or religion to think it is the center of the planet or universe those types need to grow up.

You bet. I think all these religious figures coming out and trying to use this tragedy as a way to enforce stricter speech laws is disgusting. Instead, they need to be telling their followers to stop crying and learn that their beliefs are as imaginary to others as other religion's beliefs are to them. We're not mocking the people, we're mocking the ideas. Because they are not only stupid, they are offensive and dangerous. The fact that they won't admit to that makes it worse. I'm sorry, but if you are worshiping and promoting a book filled with disgusting immorality, you deserve to be mocked.

There's also a lot of difference between posting things online for anyone to read, and going up to someone specific in the street, getting in their face and then laying on insults about their belief. The latter is unacceptable in my opinion, because it is harassment and an invasion of personal space. But there's no requirement for everyone to search out cartoons, forums and articles on the internet and read them all through. If you do that, and then get offended, you're a dick head. Just ignore them! If you can't give a rational rebuttal (even in your head) to the criticism, then it's your religion that is the problem and we've just highlighted it. The fact that someone takes it personally is a clear indicator that "god" is really just themselves. If god was real, I think he could handle the smack talk, don't you? Pathetic.