• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Blasphemy Laws - Victim-less Crimes.

arthwollipot said:
So you say things that are deliberately intended to cause hurt and anger, for no reason other than your own pleasure. That is, arguably, a purely evil act.
Click to expand...


Do you pretend that you do anything that doesn't, in the balance, please you?

I say things to some people that I hope is a verbal slap in the face or worse. I do so because I think they deserve it, because I want them to stop what they are doing, and because that I think doing so is in the interest of justice. Acting for these reasons pleases me.

I think you are deliberately misunderstanding what I am saying for your own purposes, and I daresay doing so pleases you.
 
Marduk said:
only if you do it properly
:degrin:
Click to expand...


I don't know why I simply didn't embrace the evil.

Missed you. I've been interacting with some very Serious people. :(

Dude, I made your siggy!

(that makes it worth having talked to Those people in That thread)
 
Complexity said:
I say things to some people that I hope is a verbal slap in the face or worse. I do so because I think they deserve it, because I want them to stop what they are doing, and because that I think doing so is in the interest of justice. Acting for these reasons pleases me.
Click to expand...
So in fact, you do desire to influence people.
 
arthwollipot said:
Blasphemy laws are morally repugnant, but the lack of them does not give us license to be egregiously offensive.
Click to expand...

Isn't that exactly what it gives us? Either it's illegal, or it's not. If it's not we can say what we want to.

Personally I have no problem whatsoever with being an aggressive atheist. After all we have aggressive preachers as well.

Pissing someone off is not the bar and should not be the bar.

Then again I believe in liberty and don't have a problem hurting peoples feelings. In fact our society needs a lot more reality than it is. If it's harsh, too bad.
 
Frankly I'm amazed that so many people think that being deliberately rude is a good idea. My mum taught me that the way to get what I want is to be polite, and so far it seems to be working for me.

Sure, free speech means that you are permitted to say what you want. There is no right to not be offended, and this is a Good Thing. But being deliberately rude does absolutely nothing to convince either the person you are being rude to, or any third party observers, of your point of view. You just come across as a dick. And you fuel the misapprehension that atheists are hateful, spiteful jerks. Wonder why atheists are one of the most mistrusted minorities in America? Perhaps it's because some of us think that being deliberately offensive is appropriate behaviour.

Sure, there are, as Complexity pointed out, people who will take the most general and benign statement like "I don't believe in God" as a personal affront to them. Neither you nor I can prevent that. But if my statement is "You're a *********** ******* and so is your *********** god, you religious ****", that is an entirely different matter. The latter statement directly addresses and insults an individual, and they and anyone else you might be trying to convince have every right to dismiss anything and everything you say from then on, because you're just a dick and your opinions don't mean jack.

You can criticise the behaviour of religions without being directly insulting to individuals. And if their religion and their behaviour offends you, be better than them. If you stoop to their level, you're no better than they are.
 
If it weren't for good people being offensive and insulting towards religion, I would still be a religious person today. I am thankful that the world isn't full of people like arthwollipot who not only think but INSIST their way is the only way and everyone else is wrong. It's this kind of arrogance that I think is problematic among Atheists. So many Atheists think that because they have overcome a logical hurdle on religion that they are now a completely rational and logical person. But aside from a lack in a belief in gods, Atheists are every bit as irrational and prone to being completely oblivious to their own shortcomings as theists are.

People like him actually think that they have a right to dictate how to behave as if everyone is the same. Again, if everyone were like him, I and many many other people would still be creationists.
 
arthwollipot said:
Frankly I'm amazed that so many people think that being deliberately rude is a good idea. My mum taught me that the way to get what I want is to be polite, and so far it seems to be working for me.

Sure, free speech means that you are permitted to say what you want. There is no right to not be offended, and this is a Good Thing. But being deliberately rude does absolutely nothing to convince either the person you are being rude to, or any third party observers, of your point of view. You just come across as a dick. And you fuel the misapprehension that atheists are hateful, spiteful jerks. Wonder why atheists are one of the most mistrusted minorities in America? Perhaps it's because some of us think that being deliberately offensive is appropriate behaviour.

Sure, there are, as Complexity pointed out, people who will take the most general and benign statement like "I don't believe in God" as a personal affront to them. Neither you nor I can prevent that. But if my statement is "You're a *********** ******* and so is your *********** god, you religious ****", that is an entirely different matter. The latter statement directly addresses and insults an individual, and they and anyone else you might be trying to convince have every right to dismiss anything and everything you say from then on, because you're just a dick and your opinions don't mean jack.

You can criticise the behaviour of religions without being directly insulting to individuals. And if their religion and their behaviour offends you, be better than them. If you stoop to their level, you're no better than they are.
Click to expand...

If that were the only benchmark, Evangelicals would be the most mistrusted in the US.
 
Jonnyclueless said:
People like him actually think that they have a right to dictate how to behave as if everyone is the same.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you missed the part where I stated repeatedly that I think blasphemy laws are morally repugnant?

Yes, I give people advice on how to behave, when I see that their behaviour is counterproductive. I see that you do, too, although in a third-person kind of way. I do not dictate.

Who looks more arrogant? The one who uses the quiet but polite and well-reasoned argument, or the one that screams and shouts and condemns others for expressing an opinion?

But I see that politeness and concern for the feelings of others are not considered virtues here, so if you don't mind I'll just take my courtesy elsewhere, since I'm obviously too nice for this thread.
 
I have a middle ground to suggest. In general, rudeness is not productive. However, I have known quite a few people, especially around where I grew up, who will mistake anything but a full-throated rant for "uncertainty", and who decide on the fervor presented by the arguers, not on the basis of logic.

So, sometimes, rudeness may be necessary. Can't say as I like it, much.
 
arthwollipot said:
Perhaps you missed the part where I stated repeatedly that I think blasphemy laws are morally repugnant?

Yes, I give people advice on how to behave, when I see that their behaviour is counterproductive. I see that you do, too, although in a third-person kind of way. I do not dictate.

Who looks more arrogant? The one who uses the quiet but polite and well-reasoned argument, or the one that screams and shouts and condemns others for expressing an opinion?

But I see that politeness and concern for the feelings of others are not considered virtues here, so if you don't mind I'll just take my courtesy elsewhere, since I'm obviously too nice for this thread.
Click to expand...

No I didn't miss the part you said about blasphemy laws. And it has no bearing on my post. Perhaps you missed my not stating anything on blasphemy laws?

Who looks more arrogant? The one going around telling everyone right and wrong ways to talk to people. There is no right and wrong way to communicate with every single person. Everyone is different and different people response to different ways of communication. You thinking your way is better is no better than the people you are complaining about.

You're obviously too full of yourself for this thread. You're just trying to inflate your ego by pretending that everyone else if they disagrees with you must be going around shouting at others because you're such a swell person. Give me a break with the holier than thou speech.

I am thankful for the people you're trying to condemn to feel good about yourself because without them many of us would not have learned to think for ourselves. I am living proof that your argument is flawed. Some people might respond well to you,. but others will not. Don't try to tell everyone how to behave and expect not to be criticized for it.
 
See what I mean? I just completely lost interest in your opinion because you engaged in a personal attack on me and my motives. Rant away, dear friend, I won't be listening.
 
arthwollipot said:
You can criticise the behaviour of religions without being directly insulting to individuals. And if their religion and their behaviour offends you, be better than them. If you stoop to their level, you're no better than they are.
Click to expand...


The problem is that what is redeemed insulting when it comes to religions is very nefariously and malleably all encompassing. It is not out of nothing that they always keep moving the goalposts in any discussion.

BLASPHEMY is considered so not just for profaning the god, rather it is the mere act of DENYING this god.

If I use profanity against a person directly, then sure, that is insulting and rude. But if I use profanity against a god, shouldn't that be considered insulting to the god not the person?

People are offended if I say Allah is a repugnant despot...sure....but they are EQUALLY offended if I say that Allah does not exist. In Islam I would have my head hacked off for saying either.

In Judaism if it were to be enforced the same fate awaits me for saying that YHWH is a despicable bungler just as much as if I say he does not exist.

In Christianity I once would have been burnt to death after a few sessions of agonizing torture just for saying the Earth is a globe let alone that Jesus was a cowardly fool (in some countries they STILL do).


Something I never understood is why do people feel compelled to fighting god's duels for him?


In the good olden days :p when a man insulted another they threw down the gauntlet at each other and fought it out MAN TO MAN. Why do people feel that their god is such a COWARD that he needs THEM to fight his fight and defend HIS honor? Are people so unsure of the abilities of their God so as to have to defend him from a blasphemer themselves?

Why don't they reason like Abraham or Elijah: "If a god cannot defend HIMSELF then he either doesn't exist or is a false god".


So now we have religious fundamentalists who are quite dubious about the powers of their gods, sneaking in a GLOBAL LAW decreeing that man should be allowed to defend the honor of his gods despite the fact that these gods are quite obviously not OFFENDED by virtue of their silence. And if their silence is due to inability to act whether out of feebleness or nonexistence then shouldn’t this be a sign that they should be seeking out other gods.


Should a man be able to jail someone for telling him that his CAR is ugly or inferior or that he obviously does not have a car as evinced by the empty garage and driveway and parking lot and the lack of a title deed in the municipality records?

This UN law is tantamount to allowing man to LEGALLY castigate another for saying that his favorite fiction story is rubbish and its protagonist is just fiction. Should we make it law to punish people who say Michael Jackson was hideous and Elvis Presley was not the King because it offends their worshipers? And these guys were actually real.

I think this UN resolution, which has been endorsed by the USA, is in fact quite an ominous portend that we are marching ever so steadily BACKWARDS.

Why doesn't the UN also pass a resolution forbidding the Saudi royal baboons from prohibiting women to drive and being able to go out in public un-chaperoned and un-palled.


Watch this video and see where we have come from and where we are INSIDIOUSLY heading back. Western countries were pretty much like this FOSSILIZED (in brains and culture) country called Saudi. Our western Kings and Churches behaved very much in the same hideous manners depicted in the video (but without the jets and SUVs).

Do we want to go back to this heinous state of arbitrary power of the SYSTEM over the individual? It seems we are precipitously heading in that direction … proving the aphorism that “history repeats itself”.


Isn’t this resolution tantamount to a GLOBALLY RATIFIED FATWA?


 
Last edited:
arthwollipot said:
See what I mean? I just completely lost interest in your opinion because you engaged in a personal attack on me and my motives. Rant away, dear friend, I won't be listening.
Click to expand...

Oh brother. I have a hard time telling you apart from a theist. Pretend to be some victim every time something doesn't go your way. You've done nothing but make personal attacks against people, yet you're the one who is oblivious to it. Once pointed out, you plug your ears.

So continue with your head buried in the sand, just don't keep acting surprised when people don't look up to you as much as you look up to yourself.
 
Jonnyclueless said:
Oh brother. I have a hard time telling you apart from a theist. Pretend to be some victim every time something doesn't go your way. You've done nothing but make personal attacks against people, yet you're the one who is oblivious to it. Once pointed out, you plug your ears.

So continue with your head buried in the sand, just don't keep acting surprised when people don't look up to you as much as you look up to yourself.
Click to expand...

Funny how you talk about how one needs to treat every person differently in order to make progress with them... But is yet unwilling to treat arth in the way that he's already said is the most effective way to get him to listen to you. Maybe you should practise what you preach, eh? ;)
 
arthwollipot said:
Perhaps you missed the part where I stated repeatedly that I think blasphemy laws are morally repugnant?

Yes, I give people advice on how to behave, when I see that their behaviour is counterproductive. I see that you do, too, although in a third-person kind of way. I do not dictate.

Who looks more arrogant? The one who uses the quiet but polite and well-reasoned argument, or the one that screams and shouts and condemns others for expressing an opinion?

But I see that politeness and concern for the feelings of others are not considered virtues here, so if you don't mind I'll just take my courtesy elsewhere, since I'm obviously too nice for this thread.
Click to expand...

Cookies and milk are served in the JREF Annex, just follow the egrets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom