Exactly this. This is why we allow the racist christofascists spout their nonsense. This is why we fight back by ridiculing the racism and fascism. This is what the Regime is afraid of, and why der FΓΌhrer has tried to equate any expression that opposes him to terrorism.
It is possible to oppose Islam without being against Muslims. It is possible to oppose Israel without being against Jews. It is possible to oppose Christianity without being against Christians.
All we really want is to be allowed to hold and express ideas without being targeted for them, and we have no problem extending the same courtesy to those with whom we disagree.
The problem is, I disagree with anti-abortion extremists whose actions have caused death and irreparable harm to goddess knows how many women. My desire to burn a bible outside of right-wing churches that led to this current scenario where having children is now as deadly as playing Russian roulette comes from this. It is the only way I can think of that would actually piss them off enough to get their attention. Reasoned debate and discourse is an anathema to these people, and I harbor nothing but the most virulent contempt for the lot of them.
If you buy a bible it is your possession and really no one's else's business what you do with it - burn, tear up, give away, sell it on eBay. But if there is, for example, an ordnance banning burning a book or anything else on anti-pollutions laws, then that may be reasonable but unlikely to get anyone into court.
I deconverted 10 yrs ago after decades of ardent fundyism. I had no way of burning my bible. so I shredded it and added it, in small amounts, to my compost bin. I like to think my strawberry and raspberry crop was extra good the next year. My dear friend, who was raped by her brother in their fine x-tian home during her teens - and parents did nothing about it, found 2 bibles on her doormat last xmas from a church inviting her to their xmas services. (The duplicate obviously being a mistake on the part of distributors working her street.) She lives in a 2nd floor flat and is triggered, as I am, by seeing that horrible book. She took old saucepan into the communal garden, and set fire to them in it. We celebrated together with a glass of wine!
I will defend someone right to have what ever belief that person wants to believe in.
I AM UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO RESPECT ANY PART OF YOUR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS! I AM UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO FOLLOW ANY OF YOUR RELIGIOUS RULES!
The religious seem to not able or willing to understand that their religious beliefs do not override my freedom of speech or any other of my rights for that matter.
I put it that I am obligated to respect people. I am not obligated to respect their religious beliefs. I donβt believe that eating crackers and drinking crappy wine is going to save me from an eternal punishment that I also donβt believe in..
βI put it that I am obligated to respect people.β
I will respect people who have earned respect. People I donβt know anything about get the benefit of the doubt. And unless they show that theyβre dickheads, they will keep that benefit.
If an imaginary being such as Allah can be so upset by mere humans criticizing it...so much so that Allah's followers feel the need to take direct violent action against that naysayer on behalf of that deity...what does this say about either that god, its followers and its religion?
Blasphemy laws of ANY kind need to go the way of the passenger pigeon.
Allah and Yahweh both are a pair of snowflakes, incapable of taking a joke or brushing off an insult. Their followers are little better, if "better" at all.
And we continue to have to deal with their infantile attitudes. π
It would seem that there are people who don't get the idea that YOU CANNOT DESTROY IDEAS! Books and paper you can burn all day long, and that includes the Bible, the Quran, and the US Constitution, but the IDEAS represented in them will still remain extant. It's reasonably clear to me that Hamit Coskun understands this principle, even if some Turkish courts do not, and it looks as though calmer minds may prevail in this whole debacle.
To be candid, I'm not wild for burning books. Over the years, I have collected my share of favorite tomes, including a healthy portion of Robert Heinlein, Isaac Asimov, and multiple other titles which I value. Were the reality of Fahrenheit 451 come to pass, though, I would not hesitate to become a book, myself, probably one of Bob Heinlein's pieces. Stranger in a Strange Land, Job, and The Moon is a Harsh Mistress come to mind, though I just reread The Star Beast, and it's a sentimental favorite with me. The Quran? Not so much.
Which doesn't change the fact that the ideas espoused by the Quran will continue to be out there, regardless of book burnings ... and so will Thomas Paine's Common Sense.
I can see the utility of burning a single book in an act of protest, but it is something I wouldn't do. It is the banning of books that puts one on the wrong side of history, when books are burned wholesale in an effort to remove them from availability.
I love the series, but it amazes me that Peter Thiel names his evil companies after Tolkien names. I think he missed the message that even small, everyday, people can do wonderful things, and decided Sauron was the hero.
The entire oligarchy (including those who support the regime) are a brand of illiterate that they can read the stories, perhaps understand the superficial meaning of the plot of the stories, but not comprehend the full meanings. Yes, they understand that Frodo, Samwise and everyone went walking on an adventure, but they cannot comprehend the overt symbolism of destroying the ring, or what Sauron represented and all that. They cannot even comprehend the meaning of Giraffes Canβt Dance. Theyβre fed the meaning behind all the Bible stories, and yet they still get the wrong message from them. Mostly because of the agenda of the preachers a d apologists who explain it.
The ideas of the quran, bible, tanakh will always be out there as long a their followers continue to believe in some "god" or other. But burning a book, such as, the quoran and other faith manuals, is sometimes the only way to say, NO: e.g,, to fatwas, special privileging for religious institutions, to religious totalitarianism, etc. I've never burned a book, but might consider Trump and his ghost's, Art of the Deal, except that I would need to buy it and contribute to the wealth of a convicted felon, sexual predator, insurrectionist and wannabee dictator. Burning a few bibles in the U.S., as political protest, may be necessary in future to even be heard, let alone heeded, there in future.
I notice that however often religious people scream about how their religious feelings are offended or outraged, they never seem to care about how often I've been hurt, insulted, or threatened by their religious dogma. I notice that they seem to expect that I will just deal with whatever results from their hate spewing, cruel, anti-social, and generally repugnant ideas that stem from their faith, and my well-being in the face of that onslaught isn't something they worry about. I notice that even when some of these religious folks try to sugarcoat their vitriol, they often don't seem to care how their messaging lands or that it's obvious they aren't being truthful. To simplify: They've made it clear they don't care about me or anyone else not in their tribe, but expect that I'll kowtow to their precious religious sensibilities.
π»πππ ππ ππππππππ π ππππππ ππ πππ ππππππ ππππππππ. This is advocating for one set of rules for one group, and a different set of rules for another. If religious folks want to be able to practice their faith without having to worry about what they say being a crime, then they will have to tolerate other folks having very different opinions on the matter being protected from punishment for blasphemy. It means, in short, that religious folks cannot have it both ways: protection for their group means protection for dissimilar groups, and if they dismantle that protection for those dissimilar groups, they'll dismantle the protection for everyone including themselves. They are, in fact, the problem here however much or often they attempt to deny it.
ββYour actions in burning the Koran where you did were highly provocative,β
Uh, duh, it wouldnβt be a protest if it werenβt provocative. That was the whole point, without being provocative, no one would have even noticed.
βand your actions were accompanied by bad language in some cases directed toward the religion and were motivated at least in part by hatred of followers of the religion.ββ
More free speech, if freedom of speech doesnβt protect speech we donβt like it isnβt free speech. There is a possibility that maybe he doesnβt hate the people per se, but the actions of many of the people (especially those in charge) have done that are harmful. Sometimes those who identify closely with a religion cannot separate themselves from the religion and they assume any critique of the religious ideas are attacks on them as individuals. The more fundamentalist the person is the more this happens. Besides, it is very difficult to separate your anger over an action from the person who committed the action. There are few other instances where society expects a victim to do this. A victim of theft isnβt expected to say pretty words about the thief, or never show animosity towards them. Why would a victim of religious violence have to pretend the folks who commit, or aid, or support the violence is not a villain? This is absolutely victim blaming.
Plus the whole βthe fact he was attacked proves he is a menace to society.β Sounds a lot like, β the fact that she was beaten for wearing pants proves that women who wear pants are bad for society.β Or that black people eating at the lunch counter cause white people to spit on them proves they donβt belong at the lunch counter. Itβs all self serving for the folks assaulting people who are trying to be equal.
And this is part of the problem that we are having in the US today. Liberal ideals include the right to freedom of expression. Those of us on the left will defend the right of anyone to their free speech. Will we turn up en masse and shout down a Nazi in public? You betcha, that's OUR free speech. Yours does not mean that anyone needs to listen to you. The so-called conservatives though, find that blasphemy laws look really good to them right now as a way to quash speech they disagree with. After all, they rarely have the numbers to shout down someone speaking intelligently. But this means that the Fox propaganda network can spout lies all day while the 'left-wing' CNN needs to uphold journalistic integrity.
A considerable portion of the reason why Democrats are behind the curve is that too many of them continue to play by the rules, whereas Republicans take their cue from Trump and speak and act as they please, rules be damned. Gavin Newsom is one Democrat who has gotten the message and has acted on it in California with their redistricting effort, and other states may follow suit.
Ultimately, what the Dems need to learn is to fight fire with fire. I don't especially like that idea, but for now, it may be the only solution.
I have had problems with the Democrats' anemic, milquetoast messaging for quite a while now. Enough with this "they go low, we go high." It doesn't fucking work. You don't win a street fight playing by the Marquis of Queensberry rules.
How does "fighting fire with fire" help put out fires, except as backburning in forest fires. In a city, in real life, more fire to stop a tenement fire, for example, would lead to whole city blocks going up in flame. As a metaphor for dealing with Trumpism, it seems too much like becoming a name calling, insulting bully like Trump and his mafia, calling for restrictions on speech, etc. Newsom seems to be standing up to Trumpite bullies, not copying them. It will nice to see more democrats join Jasmin Crockett, Charles Schumer, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Adam Schiff and Jamie Raskin in calling out Trump and his republican mafia where ever possible, not just sending "strong letters" - e.g., Steny H. Hoyer.
It's not an ideal solution ... but the blunt end of the stick is that, if Democrats play by the rules while the MAGA Republicans play be NO RULES ... well, I'll give you ONE GUESS as to what the final result will be.
Yeah, yeah, it'd be great if EVERYONE PLAYED BY THE RULES. The blunt fact is that TRUMP IS NOT PLAYING BY THE RULES. Worse, he's depending on everyone else to stick to the rule book while he tears the Constitution and our government to shreds.
Is that what you want? Also, do you have a viable alternative? Please give very serious thought to your answer.
Here's another atheist's thoughts on the matter of being offended
"It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what?"
-- Stephen Fry, from his "I Saw Hate in a Graveyard" piece for "The Guardian," dated June 5th 2005
Iβm offended that Iβm offended that I eat our dear kangaroos.
Iβm also extremely offended that Iβm not a THEIST, and in fact that Iβm an anti-theist. I donβt eat mayonnaise, but if there was a dead THEIST covered in mayonnaise on a plate, Iβd most probably eat it if itβs been kept in the fridge,
Remember Einstein's comment:
"There is a major difference between intelligence and stupidity; intelligence has its limits." β¦ Einstein has offended me.
you are so extremely offensive in having the need to grossly offend me with that question. :-)
In addition to vegan types, some people in Oz do not eat kangaroo on Friday, and I think they are a certain type of theist. From memory they are members of the Cattletick faith and go out of their way not to offend some fella known as THE POPE. On Fridays they apparently only eat jesus fish meat.
I'm not usually a fan of people who burn the Koran. They're usually RWNJ's who'd have a fit if you burned the Bible. But I still defend their right to do it β though not actually to the death. I'm not sure I'd defend anything to the death to be honest.
I'd like to burn a bible outside the church of every rightwing pastor who has defended their state's abortion ban contributing to the deaths of women not allowed emergency care for doomed pregnancies. But I know I would quickly run out of money. That effort would require a Fort Knox Mint just to buy enough bibles.
The last few hotels* Iβve been in didnβt have those Gideon bibles in them.
*Not counting the one in WV that I checked out of this morning. I forgot to look in the nightstand drawer. It was the kind of region where there was a church** for every 15 houses.
** I used to keep track of bizarre church names but havenβt recently. Too many of them. The weirdest one I remember -rural Arkansas β was something like βSilver Half-Moon Baptist Churchβ. I suspect my memory is playing tricks but not necessarily in favor of the ridiculousness of the churchβs name.
You atheists are really just nihilists determined to destroy the world. First it's blasphemy towards God. Next you want words to mean things they don't mean. You want people to be who they aren't. Nothing means anything to you. It's just a big joke. Well I'm not laughing.
Repent. Beg forgiveness. Eat the holy sandwiches which Jibbers has so grandly deigned for you to have and remember that words can hurt and often do. But sticks will kill you. Praise Jibbers Crabst.
Well until they do, they are damned. So sayeth Jibbers. Say Brother Larry, your words seem...suspect. When was the last time you've been to the alter of Braunschweiger and Pumpernickel? Hmmmmm?
Ham and Cheddar cheese sandwiches are great. Especially between noon and 3 on good Friday. This has the enviable property of pissing off 4 gods at once. It PO's god, jesus, yahwey asnd allah all at once. The kkkrister god for dissing its kid. Dissing jesus and his time "...on the cross" Yahwey by mixing meat and dairy, and allah by eating pork.
My uncle was a Marine. He spent a lot of time in Europe. Right before my first deployment he told me to say hi to all my cousins over there. I didn't know what he meant. I figured it out later.
Had severe crushes on seversal who got sent to Nam. I wonder about them sometimes. Did have serious crushes on 2 returnees from Nam. It took only a few mo9nths for the army to begin immediate discharges for Viet Nam returnees. They were sent to Nam soon after reaching a duty station or from AIT. They soon realized they had few openings stateside.
Not all draftees were sent to Nam. My brother was a cook in Germany and toured Europe. NO passport. Military ID was fine. My original AIT was **** at Fort *****in desert state. Officer Candidate School possibility got me and others kicked out of the batch. We were held over till Mid January after basic. All of us went to east coast. After AIT we were top's problem kids for several weeks. Others went to Fort Benning and became clerks at d army HQ. I was hospitalized for carthrosed(IIRC) hemorrhoids. I got to my duty station and one of us was my company clerk. He said all of them were made clerks at fort Benning. I thought it strange none of us went to Nam. During the 3 weeks it took to process out ALL of us got togetyher so I asked why, just to be sure. I got a very dirty look and told "You know nothing. WE MEAN NOTHING." That told me all I ever needed to know. Sometimes the eraser was far stronger than the word.
Mine was in Saipan and Guadalcanal. And other places I don't know about because he so seldom mentioned anything about that time. Sometimes I wished I had asked more questions, other times I'm glad I didn't because he really didn't like thinking about it.
Same with mine. He didn't talk too much about what he saw and did and I didn't ask bcause I didn't want to say something that would bring it all back again.
I didn't dare ask him if he helped liberate the death camps.
I hear ya. As much as I would have liked to know more, maybe itβs better that I didnβt. At least, better that I didnβt ask. The most info I ever got was one evening when I was about 10 or 11. I had a social studies assignment and we were looking up my assigned countries on a huge globe he had in his study, and somehow he drifted into showing me the different places he went to in the Pacific theater during WWII, tracing the path between locations with his finger. I asked him what happened in all those places and he went really quiet and said we could talk about that later. We never did. I did ask maybe half a dozen more questions through the years, and got very general answers. I could tell he didnβt like talking about it.
Then many many years later, he was chatting with one of my aunts and just made this off-hand remark that he thought the main reason he was getting hard of hearing was all those years in the war with machine guns rattling in his ears. My own ears perked up at that, because he had never mentioned machine guns before. I waited to see if he would say anything else, but he didnβt, and neither of us pressed him on the matter. The conversation drifted to other subjects.
The only other significant fact Iβm aware of was he received orders to go to Japan just 24 hours before the first bomb was dropped, and those orders were subsequently scuttled. I never found out more than that.
Looking back, my impression was he came back from the war determined to leave something horrific behind, and live out his life in a quiet, peaceful life in our small town. I hope it was everything he wanted and needed.
I don't give him space in my head. This article does point out what these awful people are doing and for those who haven't paid attention, it's helpful.
Justa Dick Vance said his light bulb moment at Yale was a lecture by the insane Mr. Theil.
"The High Courtβs reversal reaffirmed a truth we must defend: freedom of speech includes the freedom to offend, and no religion or ideology deserves immunity from scrutiny or insult."
I understand the POV from someone from the United States, but where do you place the limit between "blasphemy" and hate speech ? One of the cause of the genocide in WW2 was unrestrained hate speech.
"In victory for free speech"
Hidden conditions apply, for example if you march peacefully to support Palestinians.
There is no way Bibi isn't just gargling trump's tiny balls, by claiming the man who can't make a coherent point, brokered a peaceful settlement of hostilities. It is just not believable unless the translators speak gibberish. (which is trump's only language these days.)
The one with all the world leaders recognizing Palestine as a state?
Israel appears to be the distinct minority. Just like when they were the last remaining supporters of Apartheid in South Africa. I'm seeing a connection here.
I think Israel has forgotten what it was like post-World War II, when the state of Jewry was far more tenuous than it is now. Netanyahu's actions against the Palestinians have genuinely given the rest of the world something to hate about Israel.
WaPo had an article a couple of days ago about IDF destroying 8 high rise buildings in Gaza City over the last 6 weeks becauseβ¦.well, it wasnβt clear. To prevent loss of life Israel would notify residents and business owners in the building that it was targeted for destruction. Sometimes IDF would call up someone in the building and tell them to run around knocking on doors to let others know.
So clearly it was about destroying residences and offices and not about killing Hamas people in the building.
Thereβs actually a really old joke. βBibiβ was his wifeβs nickname for him (as I understand it). So the joke, back when Yasir Arafat was alive was that Netanyahuβs wife should introduce the two of them: βYasir, thatβs my Bibi.β
I have a moral conundrum. My local newspaper has a weekly βWords of Faithβ column. The columns are mostly provided by local clergy. Dominated by Christians of various kinds but also a Bahaβi, a rabbi, a Hindu, and a pagan. Iβve spoken with the reporter/editor about contributing a column that I would call βWords of No Faithβ. And she is receptive. The religious contributors do not receive any compensation (which I donβt care about at all). But hereβs my moral dilemmma: Almost anything I wrote would barely be original. Between Hemant, commenters here, the βnew atheistsβ, all Iβm really doing is regurgitating the ideas of other people.
Iβm not looking for credit or glory. I do like the idea of making atheism more visible. I donβt like the feeling that Iβm stealing other peopleβs ideas.
Paraphrasing is legal. Also, attrtibut('ing' or '[at]ion'?) is legal. Prolly the first time in several years I have used the bracket keys on this pooter.
πβπ πππβπ‘ π‘π πππππππ ππ ππ₯ππππ π πππ, ππ ππ‘ ππ π πππβπ‘ π€πππ‘β βππ£πππ, ππ’π π‘ πππππ’ππ π‘βπ πππβπ‘ π‘π ππ₯ππππ π π£πππ€π π‘βππ‘ ππππππ, π βπππ ππ πππ π‘π’ππ.
Exactly this. This is why we allow the racist christofascists spout their nonsense. This is why we fight back by ridiculing the racism and fascism. This is what the Regime is afraid of, and why der FΓΌhrer has tried to equate any expression that opposes him to terrorism.
It is possible to oppose Islam without being against Muslims. It is possible to oppose Israel without being against Jews. It is possible to oppose Christianity without being against Christians.
All we really want is to be allowed to hold and express ideas without being targeted for them, and we have no problem extending the same courtesy to those with whom we disagree.
The problem is, I disagree with anti-abortion extremists whose actions have caused death and irreparable harm to goddess knows how many women. My desire to burn a bible outside of right-wing churches that led to this current scenario where having children is now as deadly as playing Russian roulette comes from this. It is the only way I can think of that would actually piss them off enough to get their attention. Reasoned debate and discourse is an anathema to these people, and I harbor nothing but the most virulent contempt for the lot of them.
If you buy a bible it is your possession and really no one's else's business what you do with it - burn, tear up, give away, sell it on eBay. But if there is, for example, an ordnance banning burning a book or anything else on anti-pollutions laws, then that may be reasonable but unlikely to get anyone into court.
I deconverted 10 yrs ago after decades of ardent fundyism. I had no way of burning my bible. so I shredded it and added it, in small amounts, to my compost bin. I like to think my strawberry and raspberry crop was extra good the next year. My dear friend, who was raped by her brother in their fine x-tian home during her teens - and parents did nothing about it, found 2 bibles on her doormat last xmas from a church inviting her to their xmas services. (The duplicate obviously being a mistake on the part of distributors working her street.) She lives in a 2nd floor flat and is triggered, as I am, by seeing that horrible book. She took old saucepan into the communal garden, and set fire to them in it. We celebrated together with a glass of wine!
That is also true if you take one that has been freely provided.
Yup, took one from my Austrian hotel and rehomed it in a rubbish bin at the airport.
Yes, antiabortion orgs should be a designated as hate groups.
Ramen!
I will defend someone right to have what ever belief that person wants to believe in.
I AM UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO RESPECT ANY PART OF YOUR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS! I AM UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO FOLLOW ANY OF YOUR RELIGIOUS RULES!
The religious seem to not able or willing to understand that their religious beliefs do not override my freedom of speech or any other of my rights for that matter.
I put it that I am obligated to respect people. I am not obligated to respect their religious beliefs. I donβt believe that eating crackers and drinking crappy wine is going to save me from an eternal punishment that I also donβt believe in..
βI put it that I am obligated to respect people.β
I will respect people who have earned respect. People I donβt know anything about get the benefit of the doubt. And unless they show that theyβre dickheads, they will keep that benefit.
ETA added βanything aboutβ
Also quite true
And it wouldn't save you, you'd need to confess whatever to one of "god's" representatives on earth, who might/likely also be a serial child rapist and/or enabler. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/religion/nearly-1-700-priests-clergy-accused-sex-abuse-are-unsupervised-n1062396
"What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist".
Salman Rushdie
If someone knows what Freedom of Expression is, its Salman Rushdie.
Hitch was right. God is NOT great.
If an imaginary being such as Allah can be so upset by mere humans criticizing it...so much so that Allah's followers feel the need to take direct violent action against that naysayer on behalf of that deity...what does this say about either that god, its followers and its religion?
Blasphemy laws of ANY kind need to go the way of the passenger pigeon.
Allah and Yahweh both are a pair of snowflakes, incapable of taking a joke or brushing off an insult. Their followers are little better, if "better" at all.
And we continue to have to deal with their infantile attitudes. π
FYI - these may be amusing, and something to pass on to christian, muslim and jewish theists and apologists. With "respect", of course.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMhWJqIFR3Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnOCpacEOFA
I mourn the loss of the passenger pigeon. Not so much gods.
It would seem that there are people who don't get the idea that YOU CANNOT DESTROY IDEAS! Books and paper you can burn all day long, and that includes the Bible, the Quran, and the US Constitution, but the IDEAS represented in them will still remain extant. It's reasonably clear to me that Hamit Coskun understands this principle, even if some Turkish courts do not, and it looks as though calmer minds may prevail in this whole debacle.
To be candid, I'm not wild for burning books. Over the years, I have collected my share of favorite tomes, including a healthy portion of Robert Heinlein, Isaac Asimov, and multiple other titles which I value. Were the reality of Fahrenheit 451 come to pass, though, I would not hesitate to become a book, myself, probably one of Bob Heinlein's pieces. Stranger in a Strange Land, Job, and The Moon is a Harsh Mistress come to mind, though I just reread The Star Beast, and it's a sentimental favorite with me. The Quran? Not so much.
Which doesn't change the fact that the ideas espoused by the Quran will continue to be out there, regardless of book burnings ... and so will Thomas Paine's Common Sense.
I can see the utility of burning a single book in an act of protest, but it is something I wouldn't do. It is the banning of books that puts one on the wrong side of history, when books are burned wholesale in an effort to remove them from availability.
The only barrier to access for any book, in my opinion, should be the reading comprehension level of the person who wants the book. I know adults who would have difficulty with ππ©π¦ ππ°π³π₯ π°π§ π΅π©π¦ ππͺπ―π¨π΄, but i know there are children who can handle it. (My first reading I was 12)
I love the series, but it amazes me that Peter Thiel names his evil companies after Tolkien names. I think he missed the message that even small, everyday, people can do wonderful things, and decided Sauron was the hero.
The entire oligarchy (including those who support the regime) are a brand of illiterate that they can read the stories, perhaps understand the superficial meaning of the plot of the stories, but not comprehend the full meanings. Yes, they understand that Frodo, Samwise and everyone went walking on an adventure, but they cannot comprehend the overt symbolism of destroying the ring, or what Sauron represented and all that. They cannot even comprehend the meaning of Giraffes Canβt Dance. Theyβre fed the meaning behind all the Bible stories, and yet they still get the wrong message from them. Mostly because of the agenda of the preachers a d apologists who explain it.
Just for fun. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3g6mFI4Fug
Well stated. I believe their reading comprehension is lacking as well.
Trouble :it was an English court, not Turkish, That is what makes this story so poignant!
The ideas of the quran, bible, tanakh will always be out there as long a their followers continue to believe in some "god" or other. But burning a book, such as, the quoran and other faith manuals, is sometimes the only way to say, NO: e.g,, to fatwas, special privileging for religious institutions, to religious totalitarianism, etc. I've never burned a book, but might consider Trump and his ghost's, Art of the Deal, except that I would need to buy it and contribute to the wealth of a convicted felon, sexual predator, insurrectionist and wannabee dictator. Burning a few bibles in the U.S., as political protest, may be necessary in future to even be heard, let alone heeded, there in future.
Yeah, I'm afraid this one's a bit of a tangent.
I notice that however often religious people scream about how their religious feelings are offended or outraged, they never seem to care about how often I've been hurt, insulted, or threatened by their religious dogma. I notice that they seem to expect that I will just deal with whatever results from their hate spewing, cruel, anti-social, and generally repugnant ideas that stem from their faith, and my well-being in the face of that onslaught isn't something they worry about. I notice that even when some of these religious folks try to sugarcoat their vitriol, they often don't seem to care how their messaging lands or that it's obvious they aren't being truthful. To simplify: They've made it clear they don't care about me or anyone else not in their tribe, but expect that I'll kowtow to their precious religious sensibilities.
π»πππ ππ ππππππππ π ππππππ ππ πππ ππππππ ππππππππ. This is advocating for one set of rules for one group, and a different set of rules for another. If religious folks want to be able to practice their faith without having to worry about what they say being a crime, then they will have to tolerate other folks having very different opinions on the matter being protected from punishment for blasphemy. It means, in short, that religious folks cannot have it both ways: protection for their group means protection for dissimilar groups, and if they dismantle that protection for those dissimilar groups, they'll dismantle the protection for everyone including themselves. They are, in fact, the problem here however much or often they attempt to deny it.
You said more clearly and much to the point exactly what I wanted to say, but not able to expressed it as well as you did.
Stolen.
ββYour actions in burning the Koran where you did were highly provocative,β
Uh, duh, it wouldnβt be a protest if it werenβt provocative. That was the whole point, without being provocative, no one would have even noticed.
βand your actions were accompanied by bad language in some cases directed toward the religion and were motivated at least in part by hatred of followers of the religion.ββ
More free speech, if freedom of speech doesnβt protect speech we donβt like it isnβt free speech. There is a possibility that maybe he doesnβt hate the people per se, but the actions of many of the people (especially those in charge) have done that are harmful. Sometimes those who identify closely with a religion cannot separate themselves from the religion and they assume any critique of the religious ideas are attacks on them as individuals. The more fundamentalist the person is the more this happens. Besides, it is very difficult to separate your anger over an action from the person who committed the action. There are few other instances where society expects a victim to do this. A victim of theft isnβt expected to say pretty words about the thief, or never show animosity towards them. Why would a victim of religious violence have to pretend the folks who commit, or aid, or support the violence is not a villain? This is absolutely victim blaming.
Plus the whole βthe fact he was attacked proves he is a menace to society.β Sounds a lot like, β the fact that she was beaten for wearing pants proves that women who wear pants are bad for society.β Or that black people eating at the lunch counter cause white people to spit on them proves they donβt belong at the lunch counter. Itβs all self serving for the folks assaulting people who are trying to be equal.
And this is part of the problem that we are having in the US today. Liberal ideals include the right to freedom of expression. Those of us on the left will defend the right of anyone to their free speech. Will we turn up en masse and shout down a Nazi in public? You betcha, that's OUR free speech. Yours does not mean that anyone needs to listen to you. The so-called conservatives though, find that blasphemy laws look really good to them right now as a way to quash speech they disagree with. After all, they rarely have the numbers to shout down someone speaking intelligently. But this means that the Fox propaganda network can spout lies all day while the 'left-wing' CNN needs to uphold journalistic integrity.
A considerable portion of the reason why Democrats are behind the curve is that too many of them continue to play by the rules, whereas Republicans take their cue from Trump and speak and act as they please, rules be damned. Gavin Newsom is one Democrat who has gotten the message and has acted on it in California with their redistricting effort, and other states may follow suit.
Ultimately, what the Dems need to learn is to fight fire with fire. I don't especially like that idea, but for now, it may be the only solution.
I have had problems with the Democrats' anemic, milquetoast messaging for quite a while now. Enough with this "they go low, we go high." It doesn't fucking work. You don't win a street fight playing by the Marquis of Queensberry rules.
You get Trump & Co. the same way Jim Malone and Eliot Ness got Capone:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjOPLTTjnwc
I remember that scene. But Elliott Ness didnβt have MAGAts and a government infested with RWNJβs trying to undermine him.
That said, yes I love the general idea. Fight dirtier and nastier than the GOP, because they no longer have any restraints on them, What. So. Ever.
And they will stop at nothing.
Neither should we!
How does "fighting fire with fire" help put out fires, except as backburning in forest fires. In a city, in real life, more fire to stop a tenement fire, for example, would lead to whole city blocks going up in flame. As a metaphor for dealing with Trumpism, it seems too much like becoming a name calling, insulting bully like Trump and his mafia, calling for restrictions on speech, etc. Newsom seems to be standing up to Trumpite bullies, not copying them. It will nice to see more democrats join Jasmin Crockett, Charles Schumer, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Adam Schiff and Jamie Raskin in calling out Trump and his republican mafia where ever possible, not just sending "strong letters" - e.g., Steny H. Hoyer.
It's not an ideal solution ... but the blunt end of the stick is that, if Democrats play by the rules while the MAGA Republicans play be NO RULES ... well, I'll give you ONE GUESS as to what the final result will be.
Yeah, yeah, it'd be great if EVERYONE PLAYED BY THE RULES. The blunt fact is that TRUMP IS NOT PLAYING BY THE RULES. Worse, he's depending on everyone else to stick to the rule book while he tears the Constitution and our government to shreds.
Is that what you want? Also, do you have a viable alternative? Please give very serious thought to your answer.
Here's another atheist's thoughts on the matter of being offended
"It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what?"
-- Stephen Fry, from his "I Saw Hate in a Graveyard" piece for "The Guardian," dated June 5th 2005
I am offended by you loving mayonnaise.
Iβm offended that youβre offended that I love mayonnaise. π
Iβm offended that Iβm offended that I eat our dear kangaroos.
Iβm also extremely offended that Iβm not a THEIST, and in fact that Iβm an anti-theist. I donβt eat mayonnaise, but if there was a dead THEIST covered in mayonnaise on a plate, Iβd most probably eat it if itβs been kept in the fridge,
Remember Einstein's comment:
"There is a major difference between intelligence and stupidity; intelligence has its limits." β¦ Einstein has offended me.
ππ β¦π¦π¦π¦
People eat kangaroos?
Dear Lynn,
you are so extremely offensive in having the need to grossly offend me with that question. :-)
In addition to vegan types, some people in Oz do not eat kangaroo on Friday, and I think they are a certain type of theist. From memory they are members of the Cattletick faith and go out of their way not to offend some fella known as THE POPE. On Fridays they apparently only eat jesus fish meat.
FYI β¦
https://www.google.com/search?q=eating+kangaroo+benefits&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-au&client=safari
I was thinking kangaroos were a protected species, like the bald eagle in the US.
π€£π€£π€£
I'm offended that you two dare to mention mayo in my presence.
Will I offend you if I kidnapp you to a mayo free home ?
Only if you are offended by the shrine I build in your image. You'll love my chanting.
Will it be as melodious as my Aria was when she was hungry ? π
Such a simple concept, yet so hard to understand for so many lunkheads:
https://xkcd.com/1357/
Too often, the intention is free speech for me, but not for thee.
I'm not usually a fan of people who burn the Koran. They're usually RWNJ's who'd have a fit if you burned the Bible. But I still defend their right to do it β though not actually to the death. I'm not sure I'd defend anything to the death to be honest.
I'd like to burn a bible outside the church of every rightwing pastor who has defended their state's abortion ban contributing to the deaths of women not allowed emergency care for doomed pregnancies. But I know I would quickly run out of money. That effort would require a Fort Knox Mint just to buy enough bibles.
Gideons distributes them for free. :)
The last few hotels* Iβve been in didnβt have those Gideon bibles in them.
*Not counting the one in WV that I checked out of this morning. I forgot to look in the nightstand drawer. It was the kind of region where there was a church** for every 15 houses.
** I used to keep track of bizarre church names but havenβt recently. Too many of them. The weirdest one I remember -rural Arkansas β was something like βSilver Half-Moon Baptist Churchβ. I suspect my memory is playing tricks but not necessarily in favor of the ridiculousness of the churchβs name.
I found this one.
https://smfgchurch.org/
They are in Missouri.
The one I was remember was southwestern Missouri!
I was on my way to a bicycle thingy in NW Arkansas.
Or maybe Arkansas. Hard to tell the difference.
"Little Hope Baptist Church"
I had forgotten about them. But I still don't think I could get enough, even from them.
I'd defend my morning coffee to the death. My husband knows this and waits for me to pour the first cup each morning. π
I don't know about that. I do know that I would die without it.
https://ibb.co/JwJXv1wq
https://ibb.co/mFz4qnfr
I have that first one on a tee shirt.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/10/7d/52/107d524b75a414a2f6be6c77ae758aa9.jpg
Coffee is the elixir of life! You will die without it.
Veracity authenicated.
Your husband is a clever man.
He's not a big coffee drinker but he knows that I need my fix every morning.
Not even your wife precious stash of yarn ? π
I might pay someone a small sum to steal it to be honest.π
You atheists are really just nihilists determined to destroy the world. First it's blasphemy towards God. Next you want words to mean things they don't mean. You want people to be who they aren't. Nothing means anything to you. It's just a big joke. Well I'm not laughing.
Repent. Beg forgiveness. Eat the holy sandwiches which Jibbers has so grandly deigned for you to have and remember that words can hurt and often do. But sticks will kill you. Praise Jibbers Crabst.
"determined to destroy the world."
Naw, just the humans. All the other animals would be much better off.
Wrong! Animals do not make sandwiches, and therefore blaspheme! That's why they GO INTO sandwiches.
Just because other animals haven't invented sliced bread yet doesn't mean they won't.
Well until they do, they are damned. So sayeth Jibbers. Say Brother Larry, your words seem...suspect. When was the last time you've been to the alter of Braunschweiger and Pumpernickel? Hmmmmm?
I don't think I've ever had Braunschweiger. I do like liverwurst. Pumpernickel is pretty good, too.
Probably never had hasenpfeffer either. Rabbits, the worst sinners of them all. https://youtu.be/hSOcRHkII8c
Ham and Cheddar cheese sandwiches are great. Especially between noon and 3 on good Friday. This has the enviable property of pissing off 4 gods at once. It PO's god, jesus, yahwey asnd allah all at once. The kkkrister god for dissing its kid. Dissing jesus and his time "...on the cross" Yahwey by mixing meat and dairy, and allah by eating pork.
You've given this a lot of thought, haven't you? π
Meanwhile, in the Land of the FreeΒΉ, Dotard the Disgraced Orange Shitegibbon says "Not so fast....".
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-issues-ultimatum-american-flag-burners-10828800
(ΒΉ Many restrictions apply.)
β ππ©πͺπ΄ πΆπ΄π¦π³ πͺπ΄ π΄πΆπ΄π±π¦π€π΅π¦π₯ π°π§ π£π¦πͺπ―π¨ π΄π¦π―πͺπ°π³ ππ¦π’π₯π¦π³π΄π©πͺπ± π°π§ π’ π΅π¦π³π³π°π³πͺπ΄π΅ π°π³π¨π’π―πͺπ»π’π΅πͺπ°π― π€π’πππ¦π₯ ππ―π΅πͺπ§π’. πππ¦π’π΄π¦ π³π¦π±π°π³π΅ π’π―πΊ π΄πΆπ΄π±πͺπ€πͺπ°πΆπ΄ π£π¦π©π’π·πͺπ°π³.
My dad served in Antifa on General Eisenhower's staff in Naples.
Mine served in both France and Germany.
Have you ever wondered if you have half siblings in Europe ?
My uncle was a Marine. He spent a lot of time in Europe. Right before my first deployment he told me to say hi to all my cousins over there. I didn't know what he meant. I figured it out later.
Thought about that. I also wonder to this day if I fathered any children in Vietnam. Not a day passes that I don't ponder that and feel guilty.
Had severe crushes on seversal who got sent to Nam. I wonder about them sometimes. Did have serious crushes on 2 returnees from Nam. It took only a few mo9nths for the army to begin immediate discharges for Viet Nam returnees. They were sent to Nam soon after reaching a duty station or from AIT. They soon realized they had few openings stateside.
Not all draftees were sent to Nam. My brother was a cook in Germany and toured Europe. NO passport. Military ID was fine. My original AIT was **** at Fort *****in desert state. Officer Candidate School possibility got me and others kicked out of the batch. We were held over till Mid January after basic. All of us went to east coast. After AIT we were top's problem kids for several weeks. Others went to Fort Benning and became clerks at d army HQ. I was hospitalized for carthrosed(IIRC) hemorrhoids. I got to my duty station and one of us was my company clerk. He said all of them were made clerks at fort Benning. I thought it strange none of us went to Nam. During the 3 weeks it took to process out ALL of us got togetyher so I asked why, just to be sure. I got a very dirty look and told "You know nothing. WE MEAN NOTHING." That told me all I ever needed to know. Sometimes the eraser was far stronger than the word.
Mine was a company commander in the Pacific.
Mine was with the British Pacific Fleet. Although merely an able seaman β would have been a Killick but got involved in a fight.
Mine was in Saipan and Guadalcanal. And other places I don't know about because he so seldom mentioned anything about that time. Sometimes I wished I had asked more questions, other times I'm glad I didn't because he really didn't like thinking about it.
Same with mine. He didn't talk too much about what he saw and did and I didn't ask bcause I didn't want to say something that would bring it all back again.
I didn't dare ask him if he helped liberate the death camps.
I hear ya. As much as I would have liked to know more, maybe itβs better that I didnβt. At least, better that I didnβt ask. The most info I ever got was one evening when I was about 10 or 11. I had a social studies assignment and we were looking up my assigned countries on a huge globe he had in his study, and somehow he drifted into showing me the different places he went to in the Pacific theater during WWII, tracing the path between locations with his finger. I asked him what happened in all those places and he went really quiet and said we could talk about that later. We never did. I did ask maybe half a dozen more questions through the years, and got very general answers. I could tell he didnβt like talking about it.
Then many many years later, he was chatting with one of my aunts and just made this off-hand remark that he thought the main reason he was getting hard of hearing was all those years in the war with machine guns rattling in his ears. My own ears perked up at that, because he had never mentioned machine guns before. I waited to see if he would say anything else, but he didnβt, and neither of us pressed him on the matter. The conversation drifted to other subjects.
The only other significant fact Iβm aware of was he received orders to go to Japan just 24 hours before the first bomb was dropped, and those orders were subsequently scuttled. I never found out more than that.
Looking back, my impression was he came back from the war determined to leave something horrific behind, and live out his life in a quiet, peaceful life in our small town. I hope it was everything he wanted and needed.
Readers of Friendly Atheist will find this worth contemplating:
https://www.flyingpenguin.com/?p=72981
I don't give him space in my head. This article does point out what these awful people are doing and for those who haven't paid attention, it's helpful.
Justa Dick Vance said his light bulb moment at Yale was a lecture by the insane Mr. Theil.
Of course it was.
"The High Courtβs reversal reaffirmed a truth we must defend: freedom of speech includes the freedom to offend, and no religion or ideology deserves immunity from scrutiny or insult."
I understand the POV from someone from the United States, but where do you place the limit between "blasphemy" and hate speech ? One of the cause of the genocide in WW2 was unrestrained hate speech.
"In victory for free speech"
Hidden conditions apply, for example if you march peacefully to support Palestinians.
I don't know who it was who originally said the following, but I can think of a few foreheads it could stand to be tattooed on:
ππ πππ βππ π‘βπ πππβπ‘ πππ‘ π‘π ππ ππππππππ.
I believed it was Salman Rushdie who said that, but I am not sure!
It is. His full quote is "No one has the right not to be offended. That right doesn't exist in any declaration I have ever read,"
Phillip Pullman also said it in 2010.
Salman Rushdie and Phillip Pullman are two who have uttered that.
Don't know who originated it, though. Pullman said it in 2010. I can't find an attribution for when Rushdie said it.
I see Bibi bashed the Nobel committee for not giving the Peace Prize to Trump.
Genocidal war criminal says what?
There is no way Bibi isn't just gargling trump's tiny balls, by claiming the man who can't make a coherent point, brokered a peaceful settlement of hostilities. It is just not believable unless the translators speak gibberish. (which is trump's only language these days.)
Sucking up.
Maybe Bibi and Boo Boo are 69ing.
UGH! Brain Bleach! Where's the [expletive-deleted] BRAIN BLEACH?!?
Sorry. :)
I think we'll both live ... but the image of those two going at it ... YEEUUCH!
Stop that. Ugh.
Do I have to come over and muzzle you.
Soundsβ¦.erotic!
I learned from the queen herself, Ms. Mae West.
When asked why she had a mirror above her bed: To see how I'm doing.
She was a supporter of drag queens and gay people and was happy to tell anyone.
Go watch the video I posted on the previous post.
The one with all the world leaders recognizing Palestine as a state?
Israel appears to be the distinct minority. Just like when they were the last remaining supporters of Apartheid in South Africa. I'm seeing a connection here.
I was surprised to see poutine and modi among them. They are not really on democracy or the Muslims side.
Modi is a massive asshole, and dangerous, to boot. I could throw him further than I would EVER trust him.
Me too. Pooty ignores the fact that he invaded a sovereign state.
As far as he is concerned, Ukraine is a part of Russia.
I think Israel has forgotten what it was like post-World War II, when the state of Jewry was far more tenuous than it is now. Netanyahu's actions against the Palestinians have genuinely given the rest of the world something to hate about Israel.
And that does no one any favors.
WaPo had an article a couple of days ago about IDF destroying 8 high rise buildings in Gaza City over the last 6 weeks becauseβ¦.well, it wasnβt clear. To prevent loss of life Israel would notify residents and business owners in the building that it was targeted for destruction. Sometimes IDF would call up someone in the building and tell them to run around knocking on doors to let others know.
So clearly it was about destroying residences and offices and not about killing Hamas people in the building.
Bibi?
Bibi is a nickname for Benjamin.
Ahhh. Thanks, cause I was way off base. My first thought was Pam Bondi.
Thereβs actually a really old joke. βBibiβ was his wifeβs nickname for him (as I understand it). So the joke, back when Yasir Arafat was alive was that Netanyahuβs wife should introduce the two of them: βYasir, thatβs my Bibi.β
I have a moral conundrum. My local newspaper has a weekly βWords of Faithβ column. The columns are mostly provided by local clergy. Dominated by Christians of various kinds but also a Bahaβi, a rabbi, a Hindu, and a pagan. Iβve spoken with the reporter/editor about contributing a column that I would call βWords of No Faithβ. And she is receptive. The religious contributors do not receive any compensation (which I donβt care about at all). But hereβs my moral dilemmma: Almost anything I wrote would barely be original. Between Hemant, commenters here, the βnew atheistsβ, all Iβm really doing is regurgitating the ideas of other people.
Iβm not looking for credit or glory. I do like the idea of making atheism more visible. I donβt like the feeling that Iβm stealing other peopleβs ideas.
Should I do it?
There are few truly new ideas.
Write what you will, as long as you're not copy/pasting you're fine.
Thx
And please do share with us here, too. π«‘
Yes.
Thx.
Why not? It's not as if there is a plethora of openly atheist writing in the US is there? π
Agreed. It just feels β¦ odd and ever so slightly dishonest. Must be those atheist morals of mine.
Paraphrasing is legal. Also, attrtibut('ing' or '[at]ion'?) is legal. Prolly the first time in several years I have used the bracket keys on this pooter.
How many is a plethora? I know of several dozens. : )
Plethora (N) a shit heap. π
Cat shit, dog shit, sheep shit, horse shit, cow shit, elephant shit???
Everybody shits.
A myriad.
A whole bunch.
What RegularJoe said, plus, if you need/want to you can use quotes.
I would say very much yes. Newspapers are great for local reach -- not everyone reads blogs. Good luck!