| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
faceless
admin
Joined: 25 Apr 2006
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 4:06 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
|
| Most non-religious people aren't atheists who insult those of faith. It's the rabid anti-religious people (who are no different from extremist religious types) who bother me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Mandy
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| nekokate wrote: | | What it boils down to is the simple need to find a balance between respecting each other's beliefs and tolerating each other's right to air those beliefs. |
Absolutely .. and just like with friendly neighbours, writing a book which is bound to be VERY offensive to the other "crosses the line" of what should be done. Giving an honour to the person who wrote the book condones and magnifies the insult considerably to cover the whole nation.
I feel like saying "NOT IN MY NAME" .. and that is the problem with the honour to Rushdie. It tarnishes the whole nation in the eyes of a HUGE number of people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mandy
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 4:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| faceless wrote: | | Most non-religious people aren't atheists who insult those of faith. It's the rabid anti-religious people (who are no different from extremist religious types) who bother me. |
Well said. Totally agreed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nekokate
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 5:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Mandy wrote: | | ...that is the problem with the honour to Rushdie. It tarnishes the whole nation in the eyes of a HUGE number of people. |
And it's not like we were squeaky clean before, either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
luke
Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Location: by the sea
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| mandy, do you think the book should never have been allowed to have released? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GingerTruck
Joined: 19 May 2007
Location: tipton west midlands uk
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
 knighthoods what a load of crap why dont they wake up and live in the real world |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
popinjay
Joined: 02 Jan 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 9:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Mandy wrote: | | Absolutely .. and just like with friendly neighbours, writing a book which is bound to be VERY offensive to the other "crosses the line" of what should be done. |
But a book like The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins is the kind of thing that moves us forward when it enters the public consciousness. People can't ban logic and progress just because it will offend someone. People don't have the right not to be offended. I'm offended by things all the time. I'd moan about them but I've never said they should be banned.
I'm with Boris Johnson on Rushdie. I disgree with his knighthood on literary grounds. If he had wrote books worthy of a knighthood, then it would be ridiculous to deny him one because fanatics didn't agree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
faceless
admin
Joined: 25 Apr 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 10:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Popinjay wrote: | | I'm offended by things all the time. |
that doesn't give you the right to offend others, does it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nekokate
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| faceless wrote: | | Popinjay wrote: | | I'm offended by things all the time. |
that doesn't give you the right to offend others, does it? |
That depends how one defines offence. If you look back through history a lot of things were considered offensive that no longer are. Why did Oscar Wilde spend time in jail? Because he committed the offensive, morally repugnant sin of homosexuality?
People have every right to be offended by whatever they like. What they don't have is the right to demand someone's death because of it. Or, for that matter, the smothering of their literature no matter how crap and boring it is (I'm talking to you, Rushdie!) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
faceless
admin
Joined: 25 Apr 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 11:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Saying that people who have a religion need straight-jackets is an insult. There's no arguing that point.
Of course, with atheism being a religion by definition, in that it is a set of beliefs that you live your life by - and because it is becoming more and more organised (without a hint of irony) it makes me wonder if the Southpark plot about an Atheist War could actually become a possibility!
You don't need a religion to understand that you shouldn't insult other people in a broad sweeping generalisation. That's just common sense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mandy
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| luke wrote: | | mandy, do you think the book should never have been allowed to have released? |
If people want to promote crap, then I am fine with that. But the government, knowing the book was likely to be contentious and damaging to national interests, should have publicly disassociated themselves from it, and even critized it along the lines of : yes we have freedom of speech, but this book is insulting to Muslims and shouldn't have been published [i.e. whilst not stopping it, they didn't have to effectively endorse it]
As a government, I would have asked Rushdie to directly pay for any extra protection he is given. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
luke
Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Location: by the sea
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Mandy wrote: | If people want to promote crap, then I am fine with that. But the government, knowing the book was likely to be contentious and damaging to national interests, should have publicly disassociated themselves from it, and even critized it along the lines of : yes we have freedom of speech, but this book is insulting to Muslims and shouldn't have been published [i.e. whilst not stopping it, they didn't have to effectively endorse it]
As a government, I would have asked Rushdie to directly pay for any extra protection he is given. |
yeah i agree with that  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
popinjay
Joined: 02 Jan 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| faceless wrote: | | Popinjay wrote: | | I'm offended by things all the time. |
that doesn't give you the right to offend others, does it? |
That doesn't, no. But freedom of expression does, within certain boundries.
| faceless wrote: | | Saying that people who have a religion need straight-jackets is an insult. There's no arguing that point. |
That's not what I said. What I actually said was that people have been put in straight jackets for believing less outlandish things. There's a big difference there. There's no arguing that point either.
| faceless wrote: | | Of course, with atheism being a religion by definition, in that it is a set of beliefs that you live your life by |
It's not a religion. Religion is theism, atheism is a lack of theism. If a religion was "a set of beliefs that you live your life by" then everything is a religion. Philosophy would be a religion. Instead of going off on a semantic tangent and getting wrapped up in word games, how about for this debate we classify religion as belief in a diety?
| faceless wrote: | | You don't need a religion to understand that you shouldn't insult other people in a broad sweeping generalisation. That's just common sense. |
It's also common sense to know that if we're to progress as a species, theories need to be challenged. Sometimes that will offend religious people, but that's a small price to pay. Religion is ridiculous. If people grew up in a secular environment then learned about religion in their late teens or early twenties, nobody would believe it. The problem is that it's hammered into people when they're young alongside their education. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
faceless
admin
Joined: 25 Apr 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 11:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| ok, you've had your say - now you're welcome to fuck off and say it elsewhere. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
popinjay
Joined: 02 Jan 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 11:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| faceless wrote: | | ok, you've had your say - now you're welcome to fuck off and say it elsewhere. |
Let's not get our knickers in a twist over nothing, eh? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
