Europeans have a lower level of freedom of expression than Americans do. I'm not familiar with the free speech laws of every single European nation, but I know there are prohibitions against certain political affiliations in many of the more prominent members of the EU and I know that very very few places have the same level of mandated freedom of expression that Americans get from their constitution. Britain has legality standards for what can be said of the Royalty, for example. There's nothing like that here in the states.
Pretty much this. It's not like Europe is some third-world tin-pot-dictatorship, or something. But most of Europe just doesn't have the sorts of protection on speech that the U.S. does. Whether or not that's a good thing is pretty subjective; in a case like this, I personally think it's a bad thing, but that's not to say that I don't think most of Europe isn't better than the U.S. in a lot of other ways.
On the other hand I have never wanted to say anything that would get me a fine or jail. edit:*lives in Europe*
Europeans have a lower level of freedom of expression than Americans do. I'm not familiar with the free speech laws of every single European nation, but I know there are prohibitions against certain political affiliations in many of the more prominent members of the EU and I know that very very few places have the same level of mandated freedom of expression that Americans get from their constitution. Britain has legality standards for what can be said of the Royalty, for example. There's nothing like that here in the states.
Pretty much this. It's not like Europe is some third-world tin-pot-dictatorship, or something. But most of Europe just doesn't have the sorts of protection on speech that the U.S. does. Whether or not that's a good thing is pretty subjective; in a case like this, I personally think it's a bad thing, but that's not to say that I don't think most of Europe isn't better than the U.S. in a lot of other ways.
On the other hand I have never wanted to say anything that would get me a fine or jail. edit:*lives in Europe*
Yeah, really, on a one-to-ten scale of freedom of speech, the U.S. is probably a 9, and most of Europe is probably an 8 or 8.5. This is not a tremendous difference we're talking about, here.
Thanatos on
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
edited October 2009
At the very least, I think we can all agree that when free speech, religion, and intellect clash, no one wins.
Organized religion should just be done away with. Keep your hangups at home, people.
Organized religion should just be done away with. Keep your hangups at home, people.
As wonderful as that would be, we're about 10,000 years away from that being possible, so we have to deal with it.
You don't need to go that far, just defang organized religion as a political force.
(cue pet theories about the decline of religion in Western Europe and whether the causes are universally applicable)
Also there's actually an up-and-coming country where the Abrahamic religions have little sway and the government has little interest in letting then have any. I wonder what impact that will have.
Also there's actually an up-and-coming country where the Abrahamic religions have little sway and the government has little interest in letting then have any. I wonder what impact that will have.
Depends on whether or not they take up some equally absurd ideology.
Also there's actually an up-and-coming country where the Abrahamic religions have little sway and the government has little interest in letting then have any. I wonder what impact that will have.
Depends on whether or not they take up some equally absurd ideology.
Don't they have a "never again" attitude to actual communism?
Also there's actually an up-and-coming country where the Abrahamic religions have little sway and the government has little interest in letting then have any. I wonder what impact that will have.
Depends on whether or not they take up some equally absurd ideology.
Don't they have a "never again" attitude to actual communism?
Not really. Mao is just getting quietly erased from the textbooks.
As really really bad ideas go, there's a lot in their history to dig up. The Great Leap Forward killed maybe twenty million people (the official estimate is 14 million). Okay. The Taiping Rebellion killed 25 million people.
Two thousand years of this sort of stuff tends to lend itself to cynicism, I imagine.
Also there's actually an up-and-coming country where the Abrahamic religions have little sway and the government has little interest in letting then have any. I wonder what impact that will have.
Depends on whether or not they take up some equally absurd ideology.
I believe ^ should be replaced with:
Depends on how absurd their ideology is in comparison to the other competing loony belief systems of the day
Don't worry man, I trust you and your 100% true arguements in favor of how Black People are trying to oppress the Poor White Man. Fucking savages, why can't those backwards bunch of motherfuckers learn how to be enlightened. Whatever though, as a Evil Hypocritical Liberal I realize I'm not as Racially Enlightened as you, Mr. Deep South Is Far More Racially Progressive Guy And Man We Should Just Let Them N**gers Fight It Out, Don't Get Involved Okay?
Are you sure you'e posting in the right thread here? This thread is about a free speech law in England, and, more generally, the limitations, if any, on reasonable speech.
It's just staggering, the level of internal hypocrisy I have. I mean, I thought reasonably limiting hate speech was a good idea
Define "reasonably limiting" and "hate speech." In any event, at least in the US, the Constitution would protect pretty much any definition of hate speech. Maybe you don't like that fact, but take it up with the Supreme Court- they're the ones who have ruled that hate speech is perfectly Constitutional.
but I realized we should be far more like the Racial Disneyland South, with their Awesome "Call Minorities Anything You Want, It's Your Right To Openly Hate Others In A Way That Intimidates Your Targets!" Policy!
Do you think free speech is different in the South than it is in the North? Give examples, if you think that's the case.
Look how well it works for them! There is simply no racial segregation in the U.S., besides the North because us Dirty Liberal Closet Racists aren't allowed to openly terrorize blacks for being black like in Alabama!
You're pulling this crap out of your ass. Give examples where threats of violence towards minorities are legal under State and/or Federal law anywhere in the US. You can't, because that is simply not the case.
Modern Man on
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
So, hypothetically, and this may be a terrible analogy:
You're at the hospital for a routine procedure. You're not on a special diet of any kind. While you're there, a guy in a nursing uniform comes by and asks you to drink something, telling you it's medicine. You do so.
The next day, he calls you at the hospital and informs you that he's not a nurse. He snuck in and gave you poison.
He didn't actually give you poison -- he gave you water with a bit of soda water in there so it'd fizz. He is attempting to hurt you solely by the placebo effect, and you weren't offended or hurt at the time.
Is that harassment?
Alternately, how is my metaphor crap, beyond "I believe in medicine, and I don't believe in religion"?
It's not a good analogy, because the issue in the hypothetical isn't offensive speech, it's a question of illegal action. The guy in your analogy probably violated a number of laws based on his actions, such as impersonating a medical professional, trespassing, assault and any applicable laws dealing with dispensing fake medication. That's different from the guy in the church, because his actions didn't seem to be illegal- just, potentially, his speech.
Modern Man on
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
I'm not aware of any laws in the UK against badmouthing the monarchy. Anti-blasphemy laws yes, but not anti-republican ones, as far as I'm aware. Anyway, a far bigger issue is how fucked up England & Wales' libel laws are.
I'm not aware of any laws in the UK against badmouthing the monarchy. Anti-blasphemy laws yes, but not anti-republican ones, as far as I'm aware. Anyway, a far bigger issue is how fucked up England & Wales' libel laws are.
It's starting to sound like the only reason people in the UK are polite is because it is illegal not to be. :P
Yeah, probably. Just so silly though. I think there are a lot of Xians we could throw darts at here.
I wouldn't mind being able to have constables arrest Christians who tell people they are praying for them to go to die and go hell. It is unreasonable, obviously likely to cause offense, intentionally meant to threaten a person, and not passive-aggressive like "I'll pray for you." It sounds like that would be comparable to talking about how you summoned an evil demon to cause you to commit suicide.
I agree that some one saying that they'll pray for you to die and go to hell is a terrible, terrible thing. It is unchristian and sinful.
I am not sure where my evangelical brothers and sisters get the idea from. In Matthew, Jesus says to not judge.
The superior protections of freedom of speech is one of the few things the US has going for it.
I think Europeans are more concerned about social stability and stopping the spread of extremist ideologies than the US. Which is understandable, given their recent history. Extermist ideologies have been relegated to the fringe in American politics for a very long time and we don't have any experiences with dictators coming to power and slaughtering minority groups. Europe, not so much. For much (most?) of the Continent, democracy has shallower roots than in the US.
The problem in Europe (and to a lesser degree, Canada) is that certain extermist groups, such as radical Muslims, are using hate speech laws to silence people who oppose their extremism (such as the recent Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant controversies with the Canadian Human Rights Tribunals)
Modern Man on
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Yeah, it's twisted for someone to pray that you die. In the same sense it is even twisted that the more mainstream are praying for your soul because they fear your life of _____ will lead to to eternal hellfire. But is that a crime?
Yar on
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Yeah, it's twisted for someone to pray that you die. In the same sense it is even twisted that the more mainstream are praying for your soul because they fear your life of _____ will lead to to eternal hellfire. But is that a crime?
I always loved the ridiculously stupid (and obvious) hypocrisy of the act of praying, anyway.
If God is in control, does praying change his mind? Either God has a will or he doesn't. Spiritualism isn't bottleservice.
I am now pondering if this person had murderous intent. Hell, if he really did believe he was summoning a demon, he should be locked away - if his "magicks" prove impotent, he might turn to explosives.
Robman on
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
I am now pondering if this person had murderous intent. Hell, if he really did believe he was summoning a demon, he should be locked away - if his "magicks" prove impotent, he might turn to explosives.
That's an interesting argument.
Can you arrest someone for attempted murder if their methods were utterly incompetent but their intent was honest? Like, if I stab someone with a balloon, and then a bunnyrabbit, and then a handful of marshmallows, it won't be too long before I look for something sharper.
But then again, if someone takes offense to being cursed by a demon, are they not exactly as maladjusted as the one performing the curse? The penalty for one should be the penalty for the other.
Atomika on
0
Options
The Black HunterThe key is a minimum of compromise, and a simple,unimpeachable reason to existRegistered Userregular
edited October 2009
It's petty, wrong and the people who do it should be in a heap on the canyon floor, not in the newspaper
The Black Hunter on
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
I am now pondering if this person had murderous intent. Hell, if he really did believe he was summoning a demon, he should be locked away - if his "magicks" prove impotent, he might turn to explosives.
That's an interesting argument.
Can you arrest someone for attempted murder if their methods were utterly incompetent but their intent was honest? Like, if I stab someone with a balloon, and then a bunnyrabbit, and then a handful of marshmallows, it won't be too long before I look for something sharper.
But then again, if someone takes offense to being cursed by a demon, are they not exactly as maladjusted as the one performing the curse? The penalty for one should be the penalty for the other.
You can't be arrested for attempted murder for "stabbing" someone with a mashmellow
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Well it is incredibly obvious you have never had anything resembling religion in your life, that doesn't mean you have to be a dick head about it
Two quick things:
1.) Every living member of my family, outside of my brother, are either Methodists or Baptists. I was confirmed at age 12.
2.) Misconstruing polite explaining of logical fallacies as my being a "dick head" is far more likely to be a projection on your part.
A person who believes in demons is just as culpable in the crime as the perpetrator. If we have to honor the guilelessness of those offended by the thought of demon possession, we equally have to honor the religious beliefs of someone who thinks they can summon demons.
Well it is incredibly obvious you have never had anything resembling religion in your life, that doesn't mean you have to be a dick head about it
Two quick things:
1.) Every living member of my family, outside of my brother, are either Methodists or Baptists. I was confirmed at age 12.
2.) Misconstruing polite explaining of logical fallacies as my being a "dick head" is far more likely to be a projection on your part.
A person who believes in demons is just as culpable in the crime as the perpetrator. If we have to honor the guilelessness of those offended by the thought of demon possession, we equally have to honor the religious beliefs of someone who thinks they can summon demons.
This "crime" is the equivalent of someone wearing full (impenetrable) body armour and then taking it off to be stabbed by some idiot they know wants to stab them and has a knife in their hand.
You can only be hurt by demonic summonings if you allow them to hurt you.
edit: on a sidenote - I thought religions didn't teach belief in demons or demonic possession any more.. It's not like we're still in the 18th century.
Daxon on
0
Options
The Black HunterThe key is a minimum of compromise, and a simple,unimpeachable reason to existRegistered Userregular
edited October 2009
It's less about the demonic possession and a lot more to do with some prick essentially having their way with the church for kicks
The Black Hunter on
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
It's less about the demonic possession and a lot more to do with some prick essentially having their way with the church for kicks
But he's doing it within the confines of the rules of the religion. What makes the church so special as to be above practical jokes? Or are churchgoers sat alongside the mentally handicapped in the benches of the "Don't make fun of the crippled" section?
Atomika on
0
Options
The Black HunterThe key is a minimum of compromise, and a simple,unimpeachable reason to existRegistered Userregular
edited October 2009
That isn't just a practical joke, and how is he doing it within the confines of the religious rules?
Religion is sacred, and is not to be made fun of by someone blatantly being inflammatory.
I'm confused to why the priest doesn't perform an exorcism or get someone from the church to come out and do one.
I followed the discussion of how Satan and Demons can't penetrate the church's walls, but if the churchgoers are honestly disconcerted and believe a Demon has taken up residence in their church. . . why not do it?
It'd be major cool for the priest to come off as a personal holy warrior against the Demon and get him some credit for protecting his flock.
I don't go to church or anything, and don't believe much of anything - but if I were to attend, I'd sure as hell be more inclined to attend a service ran by some guy who exorcised a demon.
I'm confused to why the priest doesn't perform an exorcism or get someone from the church to come out and do one.
I followed the discussion of how Satan and Demons can't penetrate the church's walls, but if the churchgoers are honestly disconcerted and believe a Demon has taken up residence in their church. . . why not do it?
It'd be major cool for the priest to come off as a personal holy warrior against the Demon and get him some credit for protecting his flock.
I don't go to church or anything, and don't believe much of anything - but if I were to attend, I'd sure as hell be more inclined to attend a service ran by some guy who exorcised a demon.
He doesn't want to verify the cursing douche
He doesn't think there is a spirit there, but the smartass witchfaggot shouldn't have taunted them like this for no reason
Posts
On the other hand I have never wanted to say anything that would get me a fine or jail. edit:*lives in Europe*
Organized religion should just be done away with. Keep your hangups at home, people.
As wonderful as that would be, we're about 10,000 years away from that being possible, so we have to deal with it.
You don't need to go that far, just defang organized religion as a political force.
(cue pet theories about the decline of religion in Western Europe and whether the causes are universally applicable)
Also there's actually an up-and-coming country where the Abrahamic religions have little sway and the government has little interest in letting then have any. I wonder what impact that will have.
Especially seeing how one is a realistic possibility whereas the other is just as plausible as me making a knife levitate and stabbing you with it.
Depends on whether or not they take up some equally absurd ideology.
Don't they have a "never again" attitude to actual communism?
Not really. Mao is just getting quietly erased from the textbooks.
As really really bad ideas go, there's a lot in their history to dig up. The Great Leap Forward killed maybe twenty million people (the official estimate is 14 million). Okay. The Taiping Rebellion killed 25 million people.
Two thousand years of this sort of stuff tends to lend itself to cynicism, I imagine.
I believe ^ should be replaced with:
Depends on how absurd their ideology is in comparison to the other competing loony belief systems of the day
Define "reasonably limiting" and "hate speech." In any event, at least in the US, the Constitution would protect pretty much any definition of hate speech. Maybe you don't like that fact, but take it up with the Supreme Court- they're the ones who have ruled that hate speech is perfectly Constitutional.
Do you think free speech is different in the South than it is in the North? Give examples, if you think that's the case.
You're pulling this crap out of your ass. Give examples where threats of violence towards minorities are legal under State and/or Federal law anywhere in the US. You can't, because that is simply not the case.
Rigorous Scholarship
Rigorous Scholarship
It's starting to sound like the only reason people in the UK are polite is because it is illegal not to be. :P
Just as an aside,
http://conservapedia.com/Adulteress_story
Herein is a peek into the fevered mind of the evangelical and their judging.
The problem in Europe (and to a lesser degree, Canada) is that certain extermist groups, such as radical Muslims, are using hate speech laws to silence people who oppose their extremism (such as the recent Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant controversies with the Canadian Human Rights Tribunals)
Rigorous Scholarship
Don't forget about the cheap landscaping.
Oooh! Oooh! And Burger King! Land of the free, home of the Whopper.
I always loved the ridiculously stupid (and obvious) hypocrisy of the act of praying, anyway.
If God is in control, does praying change his mind? Either God has a will or he doesn't. Spiritualism isn't bottleservice.
That's an interesting argument.
Can you arrest someone for attempted murder if their methods were utterly incompetent but their intent was honest? Like, if I stab someone with a balloon, and then a bunnyrabbit, and then a handful of marshmallows, it won't be too long before I look for something sharper.
But then again, if someone takes offense to being cursed by a demon, are they not exactly as maladjusted as the one performing the curse? The penalty for one should be the penalty for the other.
What is?
scaremongering the innocent for petty self satisfaction
You can't be arrested for attempted murder for "stabbing" someone with a mashmellow
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
So in essence you're saying that you can't be charged with attempting an act if your attempt in no way will accomplish that act, right?
That's not all that different from what happened here. We might as well make it illegal to eat unicorns.
I'm saying that if I claim I will try to eat a sandwich so hard that it will be fatal to you
I am not guilty of attempted murder
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
There's no such thing as innocent self-imposed ignorance.
Well it is incredibly obvious you have never had anything resembling religion in your life, that doesn't mean you have to be a dick head about it
Two quick things:
1.) Every living member of my family, outside of my brother, are either Methodists or Baptists. I was confirmed at age 12.
2.) Misconstruing polite explaining of logical fallacies as my being a "dick head" is far more likely to be a projection on your part.
A person who believes in demons is just as culpable in the crime as the perpetrator. If we have to honor the guilelessness of those offended by the thought of demon possession, we equally have to honor the religious beliefs of someone who thinks they can summon demons.
This "crime" is the equivalent of someone wearing full (impenetrable) body armour and then taking it off to be stabbed by some idiot they know wants to stab them and has a knife in their hand.
You can only be hurt by demonic summonings if you allow them to hurt you.
edit: on a sidenote - I thought religions didn't teach belief in demons or demonic possession any more.. It's not like we're still in the 18th century.
But he's doing it within the confines of the rules of the religion. What makes the church so special as to be above practical jokes? Or are churchgoers sat alongside the mentally handicapped in the benches of the "Don't make fun of the crippled" section?
Religion is sacred, and is not to be made fun of by someone blatantly being inflammatory.
I followed the discussion of how Satan and Demons can't penetrate the church's walls, but if the churchgoers are honestly disconcerted and believe a Demon has taken up residence in their church. . . why not do it?
It'd be major cool for the priest to come off as a personal holy warrior against the Demon and get him some credit for protecting his flock.
I don't go to church or anything, and don't believe much of anything - but if I were to attend, I'd sure as hell be more inclined to attend a service ran by some guy who exorcised a demon.
And have you priced those lately?
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
He doesn't want to verify the cursing douche
He doesn't think there is a spirit there, but the smartass witchfaggot shouldn't have taunted them like this for no reason