Biblical matters

[Shan]

Likewise for race, colour, nationality, parental or marital status, class or social background; and quite rightly so.

However it appears that when someone does the same with regard to religious or political belief, the gloves are off and it becomes open season on anyone who expresses a religious belief or political opinion contrary to what some others believe.

The only thing I can say is that I don't believe that mocking folk on racial grounds, for example, is the same as mocking folk on religious belief grounds. Nobody can choose their race.

That being said it can depend on what we mean by mocking. I mean I might mock somebody who believes their God directs them to deny freedom to people or to target them for shaming or worse. As far as I am concerned that is not just a right but a civic duty.

Trying to belittle somebody only because they profess a belief in a particular God and a desire to live their own lives in line with the details of that belief is not something to admire. However we need to be careful we don't go down the road of wishing to outlaw all speech which may trigger somebody to be offended.

As for political belief - It depends on what you mean. I mean I don't see anything wrong with ridiculing somebody who supports a political movement based on targetting the poor, thirsting for wars, denial of freedoms for example.

[UlsterAreBrill]

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opin ... 44089.html

Interesting article. Many will no doubt ignore the theology, but I dont think he’s too far wrong here on the wider issues of free speech, etc

[big mervyn]

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opin ... 44089.html

Interesting article. Many will no doubt ignore the theology, but I dont think he’s too far wrong here on the wider issues of free speech, etc

Stopped reading at "Peter Lynas". There's one sanctimonious git who gets way more airtime for "free speech" than he warrants.

[UlsterAreBrill]

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opin ... 44089.html

Interesting article. Many will no doubt ignore the theology, but I dont think he’s too far wrong here on the wider issues of free speech, etc

Stopped reading at "Peter Lynas". There's one sanctimonious git who gets way more airtime for "free speech" than he warrants.

So you’re going to reject an article based on who wrote it?

That’s precisely the problem. How can you (by that I mean all) come to, at least understand, another POV, if you refuse to read it? Suppose he wrote an article claiming a massive U-turn to actually agree with you, would you still reject what he said based on the authorship?

Only reading one side of the story doesnt help anyone

[jean valjean]

Freedom of religion does equate to freedom to discriminate against. I suspect the likes of Lynas would happily support the barring of gay folk from a b&b should the owner wish. Has a Christian in this country ever been barred from receiving a service due to their faith? Absolutely not, and rightly so.
Why is no-one taking offence at jesus being depicted as a white bearded man?


Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Dave]

Freedom of religion does equate to freedom to discriminate against. I suspect the likes of Lynas would happily support the barring of gay folk from a b&b should the owner wish. Has a Christian in this country ever been barred from receiving a service due to their faith? Absolutely not, and rightly so.
Why is no-one taking offence at jesus being depicted as a white bearded man?


Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

I thought it was just a man walking out of a small door. Lynas didn't even question that assumption. Let's not forget that Christian's are currently preventing equal rights for gay/lesbian people to marry. Yet other Christian's are on here crying for equal rights because of a few memes.

[big mervyn]

Freedom of religion does equate to freedom to discriminate against. I suspect the likes of Lynas would happily support the barring of gay folk from a b&b should the owner wish. Has a Christian in this country ever been barred from receiving a service due to their faith? Absolutely not, and rightly so.
Why is no-one taking offence at jesus being depicted as a white bearded man?


Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

I thought it was just a man walking out of a small door. Lynas didn't even question that assumption. Let's not forget that Christian's are currently preventing equal rights for gay/lesbian people to marry. Yet other Christian's are on here crying for equal rights because of a few memes.

Peter Lynas has been promoting a homophobic agenda for years. One of the things that annoys me most about Nolan is that unelected scrotes like Jamie Bryson, Jim Wilson, mad Bernie the pro-lifer and Lynas are given an inordinate amount of air space to promote their narrow minded little agendas.

[UlsterAreBrill]

Freedom of religion does equate to freedom to discriminate against. I suspect the likes of Lynas would happily support the barring of gay folk from a b&b should the owner wish. Has a Christian in this country ever been barred from receiving a service due to their faith? Absolutely not, and rightly so.
Why is no-one taking offence at jesus being depicted as a white bearded man?


Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

I thought it was just a man walking out of a small door. Lynas didn't even question that assumption. Let's not forget that Christian's are currently preventing equal rights for gay/lesbian people to marry. Yet other Christian's are on here crying for equal rights because of a few memes.

I thought it was just a man walking out of a small door.

Enough with that nonsense. Clearly, I can post memes mocking other world views or lifestyles and just plead ignorance. Let me find some over the next few days, and i'll post them up later. And if you question my assumption, the fact is that it is just a bit of craic is fine

Let's not forget that Christian's are currently preventing equal rights for gay/lesbian people to marry.

Are they? Obviously in NI there are issues, granted, but let's see:

As of 2 April 2019, same-sex marriage is legally performed and recognized (nationwide or in some jurisdictions) in Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, the Netherlands,New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Uruguay. Israel recognizes same-sex marriages entered into abroad as full marriages. Estonia recognizes foreign same-sex marriages to some degree, and a ministerial decision decreed that Armenia shall as well, though as of February 2019 there had been no actual cases. Same-sex marriage is also due to become legal in Costa Rica and Taiwan. Furthermore, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has issued a ruling which is expected to facilitate recognition in several countries in the Americas.

Seems an awful lot of countries have passed something which Christians are preventing? Funny that. Unless you mean eastern countries, which aren't Christian nations. Why not go after the leaders in the middle east who prevent same-sex marriage? See that is a bit of a myth, based on a minority sample. Consider the number of countries Christians face persecution: more or less everywhere. The number of Christian martyrs over the past 100 years is more than in the whole of church history. So much so, the ex-President of the united states and an unsuccessful presidential candidate can't even refer to Christians as Christians. Apparently they are people who worship Easter.

Yet other Christian's are on here crying for equal rights because of a few memes.

No, I'm asking you to respect a belief system which a vast number of people hold too. Nowhere have I posted anything offensive to other world views or lifestyles, yet yourself, JB and, to an extent, Big Mervyn seem so keen to be intentionally provocative. Why is this?

[Shan]

No, I'm asking you to respect a belief system which a vast number of people hold too. Nowhere have I posted anything offensive to other world views or lifestyles, yet yourself, JB and, to an extent, Big Mervyn seem so keen to be intentionally provocative. Why is this?

Asking others to respect your belief system for no reason in particular is not something which should be entertained. However asking for respect for your right to hold and express your belief free from interference or abuse is a valid and reasonable ask.

[big mervyn]

No, I'm asking you to respect a belief system which a vast number of people hold too. Nowhere have I posted anything offensive to other world views or lifestyles, yet yourself, JB and, to an extent, Big Mervyn seem so keen to be intentionally provocative. Why is this?

Respect for individuals and their right to hold such beliefs maybe but I don't think the "belief system" is necessarily deserving of respect. Why should anyone be required to respect a belief system that one believes to be a complete fabrication and one that promotes misogyny and homophobia, amongst other things.

I thought I'd done rather well this Easter. Even posted The Messiah Will Come Again by Roy Buchanan for any of youse god botherers with a bit of taste

This one did make me smile. Less offensive and more a comment on bizarre Sunday opening rstrictions?

[UlsterAreBrill]

No, I'm asking you to respect a belief system which a vast number of people hold too. Nowhere have I posted anything offensive to other world views or lifestyles, yet yourself, JB and, to an extent, Big Mervyn seem so keen to be intentionally provocative. Why is this?

Asking others to respect your belief system for no reason in particular is not something which should be entertained. However asking for respect for your right to hold and express your belief free from interference or abuse is a valid and reasonable ask.

Yes, you're right. Poorly worded on my part. Perhaps an acknowledgment of such a belief system would be a better way to put it. Regardless of how you put it though, the balance must be struck. And being told "away and boil your head" on the basis of religion, as JB put it so well, doesnt really make him much better than Folau, IMO

[Jackie Brown]

Mocking a religion is not the same as mocking someone for their sexuality. One is only faith decided in most cases by the lottery of birth. May be strongly held but it can be changed none the less, you decide to be religious. Sexuality isn't chosen and persecution of it is common especially by Jesus worriers.

Surely you see the difference.

Why should anyone respect beliefs or ideas, beliefs and ideas, especially stupid ones, should be constantly challenged.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[Shan]

At least down here they got rid of the bizaare no pubs open on Good Friday ballix last year. It is stuff like that which can provoke a backlash against religion in general.

Unfortunately it also can trigger the mocking or even abuse of individual religious people who are not clamouring for their personal beliefs to dictate state policy.

[Snipe Watson]

No, I'm asking you to respect a belief system which a vast number of people hold too. Nowhere have I posted anything offensive to other world views or lifestyles, yet yourself, JB and, to an extent, Big Mervyn seem so keen to be intentionally provocative. Why is this?

Asking others to respect your belief system for no reason in particular is not something which should be entertained. However asking for respect for your right to hold and express your belief free from interference or abuse is a valid and reasonable ask.

Exackerly. Is it not about basic respect as individuals rather than a respect for a belief system?
Something we could all do a lot better.

Imagine a ballix of a Clare muck-savage hitting the nail on the head? What's the world coming to

[UlsterAreBrill]

Mocking a religion is not the same as mocking someone for their sexuality. One is only faith decided in most cases by the lottery of birth. May be strongly held but it can be changed none the less, you decide to be religious. Sexuality isn't chosen and persecution of it is common especially by Jesus worriers.

Surely you see the difference.

Why should anyone respect beliefs or ideas, beliefs and ideas, especially stupid ones, should be constantly challenged.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

Those two statements are contradictory, because they are relative. If I claimed, and believed wholeheartedly, that the LGBT community held to stupid ideas on sexuality, does that give me the right to mock them? Just because you say something is stupid, doesnt give you the upper hand

I do agree with you somewhat, however. Sexuality isnt a choice, however it deserves as much recognition in the public sphere as religion does. Both are fundamental to many people's identity, regardless of how they "come about", so to speak, so just because you say it is stupid, doesnt give you the right to mock it openly because it is just a bit of fun. Why not the mock other religions around Ramadan, etc? And yes, there are undoubtedly gay people persecuted, but I don't, and many other Christians, would openly condemn them. Such as Lynas did in the article above when talking about Folau. You're lumping all Christians in to the same boat, which isnt right