yes your are correct.
it is much WORSE if they beleive what they say when they say it.
not more offensive to me though.
why do we blank out the word god?
- Thread starter helpimcrap
- Start date
yes your are correct.
it is much WORSE if they beleive what they say when they say it.
not more offensive to me though.
well if you can be offended by someone using a word but not caring that it breaks your religious laws, then surely the other person has an equal right to be offended that you would censored them based on your faith not their own (not to mention actual rights etc).
It places yours in a higher place of value,worth etc.
well that's your opinion.
meh I've broken far more commandants than this frequently converting ass's is a big one
but if it's not offensive why should it be censored?
ooo sorry missed your earlier post.
It's offensive because it's offensive to god, sorry but if this is the reason it has no reason to be censored, if god is offended he may come and complain to the music producer, this is just as bad as white people making up PC bs because it may offend other races.
The Only person with any right to complain is the offended.
Last edited:
well if that's how you want to see it, then so be it.
but the point of atheism being a non-religion is that it doesn't have laws etc to be broken which could then be found offensive, no?
People can find things offensive without it having anything to do with religion.
meh I've broken far more commandants than this frequently converting ass's is a big one
but if it's not offensive why should it be censored?
but the people saying it don't mean it! and if they did, then it shjouldnt been shown becasue it encourages it's use.
we all break commandments, and there all forgivable, except for the unforgivable sin, which is disrespecting the holy spirit, and if you do that and truly mean it, you will not be forgiven. But that usually means Satanists.
indeed, but we were talking about him supposedly finding christian laws offensive? so it has something to do with a religion.
yes but they have rights, and there's also Muslims, Jews, buhhdists(sp sorry ?) and atheists too, why should they have to sacrifice their rights and their free will because of Christian laws?
Surely then we must ban pork as it's offensive to Jews and Muslims, or ban religion because it is offensive to a tiny amount of silly people etc.
your entitled to your opinion.
im not saying we should ban it, i actually said early on it should not be prosecutable. As that infringes on free will, people will have to learn the hard way.
He would find it offensive that people would expect him to follow religious laws when he doesn't believe in said religion. It doesn't imply that atheism also has rules.
So unintentionally offending Christians is wrong, but blatently offending satanists is ok?
Strange how the unbreakable law is to question the belief, no?
Also i think you'll find that people (especially religious people) will say it and mean it in times of great hardship or loss, surely committing a man to eternal damnation for truly mean his blasphemy after say loosing his wife child etc, is just kicking a man while he's down?
"He would find it offensive that people would expect him to follow religious laws when he doesn't believe in said religion. It doesn't imply that atheism also has rules."
I didnt ask him to follow any laws, but merely to respect other people.
So unintentionally offending Christians is wrong, but blatently offending satanists is ok?
i don't remember saying that.
I didnt ask him to follow any laws, but merely to respect other people.
So unintentionally offending Christians is wrong, but blatently offending satanists is ok?
i don't remember saying that.
"Strange how the unbreakable law is to question the belief, no?"
no, there is no unbreakable "law", it's unforgivable. and disrespect isnt questioning belief, it's blaitently insulting (and meaning it) the holy spirit, and acting upon it.
"Also i think you'll find that people (especially religious people) will say it and mean it in times of great hardship or loss, surely committing a man to eternal damnation for truly mean his blasphemy after say loosing his wife child etc, is just kicking a man while he's down?"
you have to truly mean it, i think to truly mean it, you'd have to do more than just say something in anger.
half your questions are answered in Post 97.
no, there is no unbreakable "law", it's unforgivable. and disrespect isnt questioning belief, it's blaitently insulting (and meaning it) the holy spirit, and acting upon it.
"Also i think you'll find that people (especially religious people) will say it and mean it in times of great hardship or loss, surely committing a man to eternal damnation for truly mean his blasphemy after say loosing his wife child etc, is just kicking a man while he's down?"
you have to truly mean it, i think to truly mean it, you'd have to do more than just say something in anger.
half your questions are answered in Post 97.
but surely then you must respect him and let him say what he pleases, too many people have died and been hurt by people acting on the unspoken offence of god for it to be given any value.
What is in the bible applies to Christians and Christians alone, no one else, just as i will not follow shia law i will not follow yours.
because it offends god it should not offend you, it's gods problem he will be the one to deal with it.
and i thought Jesus's death forgave all sins past and future regardless of which law they broke?(I haven't' reached the new testament through reading of the bible yet.)
I imagine Satanists would find that quite offensive since it shows complete ignorance of what Satanism actually is.yantorsen said:
If the person saying it isn't Christian then where is the problem, if a christian agrees with what is said or says it themself then that is wrong for them.
it is like the picture of mummmad thing, I am allowed to draw a pile of poo and label it mohammad because I am not religius but if a muslim did it that would be wrong, if they don't like it then don't look at my picture?
And as said, where does it end, I could think of loads of stupid things that offend me but I can't make it "wrong" for people to do them, ahh yes because I am not a tax exempt brainwashing cult with no real evidence.
Do you not see the obvious logic here?
it is like the picture of mummmad thing, I am allowed to draw a pile of poo and label it mohammad because I am not religius but if a muslim did it that would be wrong, if they don't like it then don't look at my picture?
And as said, where does it end, I could think of loads of stupid things that offend me but I can't make it "wrong" for people to do them, ahh yes because I am not a tax exempt brainwashing cult with no real evidence.
Do you not see the obvious logic here?
Satanists were an example, not a defination.