Lump Left After A Bang On Face
Body & Soul0 min ago
Now We Have Witnessed The Censoring Of The Bible, Can We Now Expect To See Some Censorship Of The Koran?
89 Answers
Answers
Khandro, //An '
06:35 Mon 30th Mar 2015
Khandro
Quite correct,and that is what I pretty much said earlier but was accused of being a troll.
//"The vast majority of Muslim, and indeed other religious people, or people with no religion but who have strong views about homosexuality, are able to express their views if they wish in a critical but lawful, moderate and self-controlled way. That's one of the rights we have."//
That was the a quote from Bobbie Cheema who was opening the prosecution against some Muslims who incited people on the street in this country to kill homosexuals with the distribution of pamphlets.
There is a whole world of difference to quoting selective pieces from a christian bible in a christian country by a christian than Muslims inciting people to kill homosexuals.The Muslim judge IS censoring our bible by dis allowing passages to be read from it.The same bible which christians are to swear an oath of giving the truth in court when giving evidence.
You could almost argue when giving evidence in this Judges court under oath that perjury doesn't apply in his court because he doesn't agree with the words written in the Christian Holy Book.
Naomi,who seems more knowledgable on the writings of the Koran may like to say what that Holy Tome says about Homosexuality.
Quite correct,and that is what I pretty much said earlier but was accused of being a troll.
//"The vast majority of Muslim, and indeed other religious people, or people with no religion but who have strong views about homosexuality, are able to express their views if they wish in a critical but lawful, moderate and self-controlled way. That's one of the rights we have."//
That was the a quote from Bobbie Cheema who was opening the prosecution against some Muslims who incited people on the street in this country to kill homosexuals with the distribution of pamphlets.
There is a whole world of difference to quoting selective pieces from a christian bible in a christian country by a christian than Muslims inciting people to kill homosexuals.The Muslim judge IS censoring our bible by dis allowing passages to be read from it.The same bible which christians are to swear an oath of giving the truth in court when giving evidence.
You could almost argue when giving evidence in this Judges court under oath that perjury doesn't apply in his court because he doesn't agree with the words written in the Christian Holy Book.
Naomi,who seems more knowledgable on the writings of the Koran may like to say what that Holy Tome says about Homosexuality.
Naomi - // andy-hughes, if it's illegal to read a bible text in public we have a very strange situation on our hands. //
I don't believe it is illegal to read a bible text in public.
If you read a text and use it to back up inflammatory views -as in this case, that is what is against the law, not the reading in isolation.
I don't believe it is illegal to read a bible text in public.
If you read a text and use it to back up inflammatory views -as in this case, that is what is against the law, not the reading in isolation.
I though I'd post some some censorship definitions as people are struggling to agree on what it is..
The suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security:
(oxfordictionaries.com)
Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.
(wikipedia)
Censorship is the name for the process or idea of keeping things like obscene word or graphic images from an audience. There is also such a thing as self-censorship, which is when you refrain from saying certain things — or possibly re-wording them — depending on who is listening.
(vocabulary.com)
The suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security:
(oxfordictionaries.com)
Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.
(wikipedia)
Censorship is the name for the process or idea of keeping things like obscene word or graphic images from an audience. There is also such a thing as self-censorship, which is when you refrain from saying certain things — or possibly re-wording them — depending on who is listening.
(vocabulary.com)
andy-hughes, //If you read a text and use it to back up inflammatory views -as in this case, that is what is against the law, not the reading in isolation.//
The judge said //he could have used other less offensive parts of the Bible to quote from on the issue of homosexuality.//
What more did the preacher say then? The report makes no reference to anything else.
The judge said //he could have used other less offensive parts of the Bible to quote from on the issue of homosexuality.//
What more did the preacher say then? The report makes no reference to anything else.
It should be a matter of some concern that, in 2015, we still give enough credibility to institutional religion to worry about whether or not one should be free to quote from the Bible.
The Bible is offensive to many aspects of common decency and respect. It is offensive both to common sense, and to educated reasoning.
Even the Church themselves appear that they have to reinterpret (ie completely change) some parts of it, to fit in with modern society.
If the Tooth Fairy Believers want to cling on to their ridiculous book, they need to understand that, in doing so, they cannot expect to set themselves apart and above from other, more rational members of society.
It's jolly well time that people in authority start being brave enough to say ... the Bible is offensive, and needs to be censored.
The Bible is offensive to many aspects of common decency and respect. It is offensive both to common sense, and to educated reasoning.
Even the Church themselves appear that they have to reinterpret (ie completely change) some parts of it, to fit in with modern society.
If the Tooth Fairy Believers want to cling on to their ridiculous book, they need to understand that, in doing so, they cannot expect to set themselves apart and above from other, more rational members of society.
It's jolly well time that people in authority start being brave enough to say ... the Bible is offensive, and needs to be censored.
In answer to the question, I think a Muslim street preacher would get the same treatment.
The situation is that we're supposed to respect these books and the people who follow them, when they're clearly full of anachronistic hatred, contradiction, and downright nonsense that has no place in the modern world.
Society doesn't really know how to deal with that conundrum, and to be fair neither do half the people that follow the books.
The situation is that we're supposed to respect these books and the people who follow them, when they're clearly full of anachronistic hatred, contradiction, and downright nonsense that has no place in the modern world.
Society doesn't really know how to deal with that conundrum, and to be fair neither do half the people that follow the books.
douglas - // "...not prattle on street corners like the heathen who believes that the more noise he makes, the better he is heard."
A muezzin by any other name..... //
Your comparison does not stand up. A muezzin does not preach, he calls the faithful to prayer, at a set time in the day, he recites a set speech for a set amount of time.
The only comparison with Christianity is a church bell tolling on Sunday morning for ten minutes before the service.
A muezzin by any other name..... //
Your comparison does not stand up. A muezzin does not preach, he calls the faithful to prayer, at a set time in the day, he recites a set speech for a set amount of time.
The only comparison with Christianity is a church bell tolling on Sunday morning for ten minutes before the service.
//That was the a quote from Bobbie Cheema who was opening the prosecution against some Muslims//
o god that was a statement from counsel leading a prosecution, redressed by retro as the unvarnished truth ....
this thread should be in the 'joke' section ....
and anyway Retro dont you hold common views with muslims on the subject of homosexuality whether or not Parliament has legalised it ?
( not of course do I suggest that Retro should not be allowed to express these views )
o god that was a statement from counsel leading a prosecution, redressed by retro as the unvarnished truth ....
this thread should be in the 'joke' section ....
and anyway Retro dont you hold common views with muslims on the subject of homosexuality whether or not Parliament has legalised it ?
( not of course do I suggest that Retro should not be allowed to express these views )
pp
//o god that was a statement from counsel leading a prosecution, redressed by retro as the unvarnished truth .... //
But you are wrong.I didn't say it was the unvarnished truth.Au contraire.
//That's one of the rights we have// Clearly this preacher does not have his rights does he?
And yes. To answer your question I believe that the Islamic view on homosexuality is similar to the views of the christian faith and that is all.
Still why should any one be offended by a sole preacher on a street corner
It was done en masse on Speakers corner years ago.The only reason police attended on a Sunday was to stop the occasional breach of the peace but police did not censor some of the outrageous views held by the soapbox speakers.It was more entertainment than offensive.
Should not the Majority find Gay Marches offensive and disruptive but they are not banned.Perhaps those who find offence should ask for these annoying and disruptive marches to be banned also.
Well if the Christian bible says homosexuality is wrong then the almighty seems to have found his own way of punishing the wrongdoers without resorting to beheadings and lobbing gays off of buildings.Trouble is those who do not indulge in homosexuality pay the price also don't they?
// Men who have sex with men
By the end of 2012, 56,284 MSM had been diagnosed with HIV in the UK. 5 The number of new HIV diagnoses among this group has been steadily increasing since 2001 - peaking in 2007 at 2,829. It is likely this trend is due to an increase in HIV testing, although a rise in high risk sexual behaviour has also been suggested as a contributory factor//
//o god that was a statement from counsel leading a prosecution, redressed by retro as the unvarnished truth .... //
But you are wrong.I didn't say it was the unvarnished truth.Au contraire.
//That's one of the rights we have// Clearly this preacher does not have his rights does he?
And yes. To answer your question I believe that the Islamic view on homosexuality is similar to the views of the christian faith and that is all.
Still why should any one be offended by a sole preacher on a street corner
It was done en masse on Speakers corner years ago.The only reason police attended on a Sunday was to stop the occasional breach of the peace but police did not censor some of the outrageous views held by the soapbox speakers.It was more entertainment than offensive.
Should not the Majority find Gay Marches offensive and disruptive but they are not banned.Perhaps those who find offence should ask for these annoying and disruptive marches to be banned also.
Well if the Christian bible says homosexuality is wrong then the almighty seems to have found his own way of punishing the wrongdoers without resorting to beheadings and lobbing gays off of buildings.Trouble is those who do not indulge in homosexuality pay the price also don't they?
// Men who have sex with men
By the end of 2012, 56,284 MSM had been diagnosed with HIV in the UK. 5 The number of new HIV diagnoses among this group has been steadily increasing since 2001 - peaking in 2007 at 2,829. It is likely this trend is due to an increase in HIV testing, although a rise in high risk sexual behaviour has also been suggested as a contributory factor//
http://
Michael Overd is alleged to have made "belligerent and angry" remarks over a loudspeaker system set up in the High Street of Taunton, Somerset, last year.
Loudspeaker eh?
Michael Overd is alleged to have made "belligerent and angry" remarks over a loudspeaker system set up in the High Street of Taunton, Somerset, last year.
Loudspeaker eh?
ludwig
Thanks for your post on censorship - in the dictionary context, I still don't agree though, that the Bible has been censored. I think the preacher has been censored.
On another slightly unrelated matter - is there anyone who needs to be brought up to speed on the Bible's teachings on homosexuality?
I mean, was he expecting to catch the ear of a gay man and have them think, "Blimey! Eternal damnation?! I never knew THAT. Better stop fancying Tom Hardy and switch to Sophia Vergara"
(Gents...look her up on Google Images).
Thanks for your post on censorship - in the dictionary context, I still don't agree though, that the Bible has been censored. I think the preacher has been censored.
On another slightly unrelated matter - is there anyone who needs to be brought up to speed on the Bible's teachings on homosexuality?
I mean, was he expecting to catch the ear of a gay man and have them think, "Blimey! Eternal damnation?! I never knew THAT. Better stop fancying Tom Hardy and switch to Sophia Vergara"
(Gents...look her up on Google Images).
SP, //still don't agree though, that the Bible has been censored. I think the preacher has been censored.//
I disagree. Had he mentioned a different biblical text he wouldn’t have ended up in court. I assume that neither he nor anyone else will be free to read that passage aloud in public in future.
I disagree. Had he mentioned a different biblical text he wouldn’t have ended up in court. I assume that neither he nor anyone else will be free to read that passage aloud in public in future.
Latest Posts
And Even More Good News From Labour.
News1 min ago
Business & Finance2 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles6 mins ago
Radio Times Wordfinder Week 51
Crosswords14 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles16 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.