The_Squid Posted February 18, 2017 Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 Insulting someone personally is not the same as drawing a mythical character that is upsetting to some people for some bizarre reason. The analogy is all wrong. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
?Impact Posted February 18, 2017 Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 3 minutes ago, The_Squid said: Insulting someone personally is not the same as drawing a mythical character that is upsetting to some people for some bizarre reason. The analogy is all wrong. I think there are many Christians who would be offended if I called Jesus a child molester, a homosexual, or even non-celibate. There are some indications that he could have been any of those, although none is concrete evidence just like there is no concrete evidence that he remained celibate as many Christians choose to believe. Beyond the many references to Mary Magdalene which many interpret to be his partner, there is the possibly forged Gospel of Jesus Wife, the Gospel of John has been interpreted by some to imply he had a homosexual relationship with John the Apostle, and the Gospel of Mark could suggest that Jesus had a sexual encounter with a young boy. I am not suggesting any of the above, just pointing out that if I were to walk down the street with a sign that said Jesus was a sexual pervert there are many who would take offence to that. I am no hero for doing that, I would be wrong. I am not supporting anyones freedom of speech by doing such an act. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted February 18, 2017 Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 2 minutes ago, ?Impact said: I think there are many Christians who would be offended if I called Jesus a child molester, a homosexual, or even non-celibate So what? Who cares if they're offended. No one has a right not to be offended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted February 18, 2017 Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 5 minutes ago, ?Impact said: I think there are many Christians who would be offended if I called Jesus a child molester, a homosexual, or even non-celibate. There are some indications that he could have been any of those, although none is concrete evidence just like there is no concrete evidence that he remained celibate as many Christians choose to believe. Beyond the many references to Mary Magdalene which many interpret to be his partner, there is the possibly forged Gospel of Jesus Wife, the Gospel of John has been interpreted by some to imply he had a homosexual relationship with John the Apostle, and the Gospel of Mark could suggest that Jesus had a sexual encounter with a young boy. I am not suggesting any of the above, just pointing out that if I were to walk down the street with a sign that said Jesus was a sexual pervert there are many who would take offence to that. I am no hero for doing that, I would be wrong. I am not supporting anyones freedom of speech by doing such an act. So it's offensive. I think denial of the holocaust is offensive and has no basis in fact, but denying the holocaust happened isn't the same as saying murdering Jews is OK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
?Impact Posted February 18, 2017 Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 3 minutes ago, Wilber said: denying the holocaust happened isn't the same as saying murdering Jews is OK. I think I have already pointed that out many times before. One is legal and wrong, the other is illegal and wrong. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted February 18, 2017 Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 Just now, ?Impact said: I think I have already pointed that out many times before. One is legal and wrong, the other is illegal and wrong. So I don't understand what you are getting at. One of the foundations of a free society is the right to offend and be offended. What offends or not, wrong or not, is purely subjective and subject to the political correctness of the day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted February 18, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 39 minutes ago, ?Impact said: I think there are many Christians who would be offended if I called Jesus a child molester, a homosexual, or even non-celibate. There are some indications that he could have been any of those, although none is concrete evidence just like there is no concrete evidence that he remained celibate as many Christians choose to believe. Beyond the many references to Mary Magdalene which many interpret to be his partner, there is the possibly forged Gospel of Jesus Wife, the Gospel of John has been interpreted by some to imply he had a homosexual relationship with John the Apostle, and the Gospel of Mark could suggest that Jesus had a sexual encounter with a young boy. I am not suggesting any of the above, just pointing out that if I were to walk down the street with a sign that said Jesus was a sexual pervert there are many who would take offence to that. I am no hero for doing that, I would be wrong. I am not supporting anyones freedom of speech by doing such an act. You will be my hero. Please do it and post it on youtube! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
?Impact Posted February 18, 2017 Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 42 minutes ago, -1=e^ipi said: You will be my hero. Please do it and post it on youtube! Why would I do it? Just to inflame others? Note that if Jesus were alive today, and I did such a thing, I might find myself in civil court defending a defamation suit. While not a criminal offence, that doesn't mean I could get away without any consequences. Defamation is a concept understood under both common law (most of Canada), and the Civil Code in Quebec under section 1457. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted February 18, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 10 minutes ago, ?Impact said: Why would I do it? Just to inflame others? For the lulz and views. And to be my hero of course. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted February 18, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 (edited) Also, if Jesus were alive today, we could confirm if he could turn water into wine or not. And if he couldn't, then it would be much easier to stop a religion from forming around him. Unfortunately, we don't have that option. So sometimes it is helpful to use other tools, such as ridicule, to fight against the insanity of religion. Edited February 18, 2017 by -1=e^ipi 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted February 18, 2017 Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 32 minutes ago, -1=e^ipi said: Also, if Jesus were alive today, we could confirm if he could turn water into wine or not. And if he couldn't, then it would be much easier to stop a religion from forming around him. Unfortunately, we don't have that option. So sometimes it is helpful to use other tools, such as ridicule, to fight against the insanity of religion. Jesus never existed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 18, 2017 Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 1 minute ago, GostHacked said: Jesus never existed. I thought historians agreed that he existed, but he was just a nice guy? Like me, really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
?Impact Posted February 18, 2017 Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 4 minutes ago, GostHacked said: Jesus never existed. I think there are ample separate accounts to corroborate the story that a man did live in that part of the world and did some of the the things as suggested in the Bible. That doesn`t mean that many of the stories are not embellished, just like many of Donald Trump`s "accomplishments" are embellished. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted February 18, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 33 minutes ago, GostHacked said: Jesus never existed. Maybe he did. Maybe he didn't. We should have the right to criticize this character and make claims about this character if we wish. I'm sure we agree on that (not impact though). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
?Impact Posted February 18, 2017 Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 20 minutes ago, -1=e^ipi said: We should have the right to criticize this character and make claims about this character if we wish. So you disagree with defamation suits? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted February 18, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 Just now, ?Impact said: So you disagree with defamation suits? For fictional or long-since-dead people, yes. Also, I'd argue that our defamation laws go a bit too far. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
?Impact Posted February 18, 2017 Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 1 minute ago, -1=e^ipi said: Also, I'd argue that our defamation laws go a bit too far. How so? Regarding 'fictional people', you know that similar laws happen in the corporate world. I am not free to go out and make wild public claims against a corporate entity without something to back it up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted February 18, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 2 minutes ago, ?Impact said: Regarding 'fictional people', you know that similar laws happen in the corporate world. I am not free to go out and make wild public claims against a corporate entity without something to back it up. Back it up? I guess we need to ban religion. Where's the stuff to back up the existence of god, the claim that Jesus turned water into wine, or the claim that Mohammed flew to heaven on a magic flying horse (with human face)? If a company claimed they had a magic device that turned water into wine, they would be fined for fraud. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted February 18, 2017 Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 12 minutes ago, ?Impact said: So you disagree with defamation suits? How would you know he was defamed, could you ask him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
?Impact Posted February 18, 2017 Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 1 minute ago, -1=e^ipi said: If a company claimed they had a magic device that turned water into wine, they would be fined for fraud. Seems there are a lot of drug companies that made many false claims about their synthetic opioids, and ended up destroying many lives. They seem to have gotten away with it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted February 18, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 18, 2017 2 minutes ago, ?Impact said: Seems there are a lot of drug companies that made many false claims about their synthetic opioids, and ended up destroying many lives. They seem to have gotten away with it. If they committed fraud, they should be fined for it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 The notion that religion is above reproach or exempt from criticism has been linked to many historical tragedies and debacles. It is an unacceptable premise. Lampooning religion figures and doctrines and practices is worthwhile, even if just to make that point. It's my opinion that many people try to use the label "Islamophobic!" to shout down reasonable criticism of Muslim practices. I can't help thinking that the same people, if we were in the 1600s, would be running around shouting "Christophobic!!" in response to criticism of burning "witches" at the stake. -k 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altai Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 11 hours ago, GostHacked said: Jesus never existed. LoL nice belief, what is the name of this religion ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpankyMcFarland Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 The references to God reflect the history of the state. Politicians and lawyers who were atheists or at best bleak agnostics have used them for centuries without suffering any harm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted February 19, 2017 Report Share Posted February 19, 2017 21 hours ago, bcsapper said: I thought historians agreed that he existed, but he was just a nice guy? Like me, really. People are still looking for any evidence that he existed. Since God has not be forthcoming with revealing himself, having someone claim to be the 'son of God' is just as crazy a notion then as it is now. How do we treat others who claim to be Jesus? All religious figures seem to be made up aside from Buddha. Buddha never claimed to be a god or a relative of one as far as I can tell. Otherwise, all religions are made up by man and there is no proof that any of these entities existed. Jesus never existed, Muhammed never existed. People are still fighting over imaginary gods. 11 hours ago, Altai said: LoL nice belief, what is the name of this religion ? You can call it what you want, I don't feel the need to deceive myself with false gods and their sacrificed offspring and the many hypocritical things that have been said and done in the name of religion. This atheist simply wants peace. The religious followers are simply ruining it for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.