The Hazards of Belief

Nodin

seamus wrote: »

I do agree in part though. When anyone is forcing priests at gunpoint to marry anyone, something has gone seriously wrong.

Bit of a non-sequitur though. It's very much like anti-abortion activists saying that abortion legislation will cause women to be strapped down and forcibly have children removed from their wombs.

...by men with giant plungers, from the abortion industry. I have me CV prepared.

PopePalpatine

Nodin wrote: »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2013/mar/19/michelle-shocked-anti-gay-rant

This is the problem when they find Jesus...you're always wondering which Jesus it is that they've found. Well, this is one where the mystery is over.

Mark Hamill

Nodin wrote: »

"When they stop Prop 8 and force priests at gunpoint to marry gays, it will be the downfall of civilisation, and Jesus will come back,"

Surely they should want Prop 8 stopped if it means that Jesus would come back.

Nodin

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Surely they should want Prop 8 stopped if it means that Jesus would come back.

Where are you goin, with yer 'logic'?

Obliq

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Meh - she started off as a Mormon so crazy was there from the beginning and, imho having met her back in the day, was only courting the Sapphic set to further her career by pretending to be down with the Lesbos while secretly shagging her male manager - and The Campfire Tapes are a fake - they were recorded in a studio with ye authentic campfire sounds over dubbed.

I bow to your great knowledge oh mighty Bann I only had the mormon bit to put here!

Hotblack Desiato

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Meh - she started off as a Mormon so crazy was there from the beginning and, imho having met her back in the day, was only courting the Sapphic set to further her career by pretending to be down with the Lesbos while secretly shagging her male manager - and The Campfire Tapes are a fake - they were recorded in a studio with ye authentic campfire sounds over dubbed.

Aha, so can I be forgiven my 'WTF? I always thought she was a lesbian' reaction then?

Bannasidhe

ninja900 wrote: »

Aha, so can I be forgiven my 'WTF? I always thought she was a lesbian' reaction then?

Lot of people did - an impression she encouraged.

robindch

Kenya condom advert pulled after religious complaints

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-21859665

BBC wrote:

A TV advertisement promoting condom use in Kenya has been withdrawn after an outcry by religious leaders, health official Peter Cherutich has said.

Christian and Muslim clerics said the advert encouraged infidelity, rather than safe sex to curb HIV/Aids. In the government-sponsored advert, a woman in an extra-marital affair is advised to use condoms. Dr Cherutich told the BBC the advert had been launched because up to 30% of married couples had other partners.

Around 1.6 million people out of Kenya's population of 41.6 million are living with HIV, according to the UN. The Kenyan Anglican Church's Bishop Julius Kalu said the advert, shown on free-to-air TV stations at peak audience times, had promoted extra-marital affairs and sex among school pupils, Kenya's Daily Nation newspaper reports. "There are better ways of passing useful information to society. This one has certainly failed," he is quoted as saying. "It openly propagates immorality, especially when all family members are gathered before television sets, waiting to watch news," Bishop Kalu said.

In a BBC Focus on Africa interview, Dr Cherutich said that while the advert had been withdrawn, he was unapologetic about its message - that it was essential for people to use condoms to prevent the spread of HIV/Aids. A survey had shown that between 20% and 30% of married couples had other sexual partners, yet a majority of them did not use condoms, said Dr Cherutich, the deputy director of Kenya's National Aids and STI Control Programme.

Kenya's Muslim religious body, the Council of Imams and Preachers of Kenya (CIPK), also condemned TV stations for showing the one-minute-long advert. "The advertisement depicts this nation as Sodom and Gomorra and not one that values the institution of marriage and family," Sheikh Mohammed Khalifa, CIPK's organising secretary, told Kenya's Business Daily newspaper. The BBC's Anne Soy in the capital, Nairobi, says many conservative Kenyans supported religious leaders in opposing the advert.

Some parents said they found it embarrassing to watch the advert with their children, and switched channels when it appeared, she reports. The advert was part of a series of anti-HIV campaigns that health officials have been running in Kenya for years. Its slogan board said it had been sponsored by Kenya's health ministry, USAid and UKAid - an apparent reference to the UK government's department of international development, our correspondent says.

More than 80% of Kenyans are Christians, with Muslims forming the second biggest religious group.

Kiwi in IE

Nodin wrote: »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2013/mar/19/michelle-shocked-anti-gay-rant

This is the problem when they find Jesus...you're always wondering which Jesus it is that they've found. Well, this is one where the mystery is over.

I met several people who thought they were Jesus when I worked in acute psych. I could never work out why that particular belief indicated they were mentally ill, while lots of other people with beliefs related to Jesus that are just as silly are perfectly sane!

When Jesus does come back he had better pick a country with no psychiatric care.

Kiwi in IE

Maintaining Christian morality is far more important than health. Much better that those who are having unprotected sex contract HIV, rather than watch something that promotes immorality. If they are behaving in an immoral fashion god will punish them. Condoms must not interfere with God's punishment. And if they pass HIV to their children? Never mind, the 'sins of the fathers' and all! Anyway who cares about children. Only unwanted foetuses in Western countries are important. Kenyan foetuses at risk of contracting HIV are surely not of enough significance to allow the promotion of condoms!

Dades

BBC wrote:

A survey had shown that between 20% and 30% of married couples had other sexual partners
...
More than 80% of Kenyans are Christians, with Muslims forming the second biggest religious group.

Not too many Scotsmen in Kenya, it seems.

Bannasidhe

Nodin wrote: »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2013/mar/19/michelle-shocked-anti-gay-rant

This is the problem when they find Jesus...you're always wondering which Jesus it is that they've found. Well, this is one where the mystery is over.

Michelle has said 'Soz' - or rather Michelle's PR wonks have issued a statement where Michelle says comments were taken out of context.

May or may not have something to do with the remaining dates on her tour being cancelled by the promoters....

http://gcn.ie/Michelle_Shocked_Apologises_For_Homophobic_Rant

sbsquarepants

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Maintaining Christian morality is far more important than health. Much better that those who are having unprotected sex contract HIV, rather than watch something that promotes immorality. If they are behaving in an immoral fashion god will punish them. Condoms must not interfere with God's punishment. And if they pass HIV to their children? Never mind, the 'sins of the fathers' and all! Anyway who cares about children. Only unwanted foetuses in Western countries are important. Kenyan foetuses at risk of contracting HIV are surely not of enough significance to allow the promotion of condoms!

Wait a minute. The best laid plan of the omnipotent creator of the universe, can be scuppered by a mere mortal with a rubber johnny?
Are you sure this guy is omnipotent? He doesn't even seem particularly smart to me!

I mean if i was god, i just wouldn't make any gays if they disturbed me that much. For example i don't like cheese cake, so i don't make it - seems so much easier than filling my house with them, and then threatening the kids with smallpox if they eat one.

Sarky

He's like the bad guy in Dodgeball, continually tempting himself with the fattening diversity of humanity, and then electrocuting himself in the nadgers every time he reaches for it due to a bizarre-yet-amusing self-loathing.

Gbear

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I mean if i was god, i just wouldn't make any gays if they disturbed me that much. For example i don't like cheese cake, so i don't make it - seems so much easier than filling my house with them, and then threatening the kids with smallpox if they eat one.

Please make that your signature.


It's very good.:o

MrPudding

Sarky wrote: »

He's like the bad guy in Dodgeball, continually tempting himself with the fattening diversity of humanity, and then electrocuting himself in the nadgers every time he reaches for it due to a bizarre-yet-amusing self-loathing.

I love that movie.

MrP

oldrnwisr

the_eman wrote: »

Thats not true, I posted this already, its from Psalm 24, Seeking the Lord.



Excerpt from Commentary by Art Katz


When you state "There aren't any other instances.." you are wrong.

And just as I have posted previously, language is your problem. This quote doesn't support your argument in the way that you think it does.

Firstly, the word

דּ֣וֹר

or dor in Hebrew occurs several times in the OT. The problem for your argument is that a definition of generation which matches with the one you are claiming does not explain the other uses of dor in the OT, particularly where dor is used to refer to all generations (Exodus 3:15, Deuteronomy 32:7) or to specific future generations (Deuteronomy 23:8, 1 Chronicles 16:15).

Secondly, the problem is that, even if we accept the use of dor in Psalm 24 to mean the same as the claimed meaning of Matthew 24:34, there are still two large obstacles to explain. Firstly, this usage is unique in the OT and yet is offered without any context or parenthetical statement to explain what the author means. Secondly, it doesn't explain why the author if he meant generation in the sense you understand it, didn't use a more appropriate hebrew word such as ummah or ethnos in the Septuagint.

Ultimately, this passage doesn't resolve the problems with your interpretation of Matthew 24. I have outlined the big problems below, which you have yet to address in any meaningful way.

1. The author of Matthew's gospel in the very first chapter (1:17) uses the word generation in the accepted sense of a period of approximately 40 years. Later on, you argue that he uses the same word in an entirely different sense but there is no parenthetical statement or other context to suggest that the meaning should be different.
2. Using your alternate definition of generation doesn't explain your original quote from 2 Peter 3. The passage here is quite clear that Matthew's gospel refers to generation in the accepted sense: "Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.”
3. Your suggested definition of generation makes any sense of prophecy meaningless. In Matthew 24:34 Jesus talks about his second coming (or his first depending on some interpretations of Paul) and says that it will happen before the people he is speaking to have died. However, if you take that to mean humanity then where is the prophecy. So, humanity will still be around for the second coming? So what? You've stretched the prophecy to the point of tautology.

the_eman wrote: »

I'm sure you are aware scientists from NASA have investigated this and the results prove without a shadow of a doubt the validity of the miracle. There is a bunch of scientific evidence about this miracle. Are NASA a Catholic organization? ... ....


Many scientific studies have been done and there is much data available if you seek it out. There are links to such data off this site:
http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/F034_OLGuadalupe.html

OK, I'm going to keep this to bullet points again to explain why this is not a miracle.

• To date, there have been four actual studies done on the tilma: Miguel Cabrera in 1756, Jose Gomez in 1947, Philip Callahan in 1979 and Jose Rosales in 1982.
• Optical stereomicroscopy of the tilma shows that it is actually composed of a hemp-linen weave and not agave fibre as traditionally believed.
• The surface of the tilma was prepared with a coat (albeit uneven) of calcium sulphate primer.
• Infrared photography has revealed sketch lines underneath the painting as well as suggesting that many of the more elaborate features of the painting are later additions.
• The painting contains numerous features typical of paintings but which are absent in reality such as outlines around the irises.

Then there is the painting itself.




The problem with this image is that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense as a miraculous image. First of all, the image is of "Our Lady of Guadalupe". The reference to Guadalupe is a reference to the marian shrine of Extremadura in Spain. This was the home of Hernan Cortes and when he went to the New World, he and his associates distributed pamphlets about our Lady of Guadalupe. However, the image above bears no resemblance to the traditional representation of Our Lady of Guadalupe seen here.



However, it bears no resemblance to an actual 14-year old Palestinian girl either. (The red hair is the dead giveaway).



The thing is though, the image does bear a remarkable resemblance to other paintings of Mary from the period, particularly this one:



This is a painting by Bonanat Zoartiga, a prominent Spanish painter in the century leading up to Cortes' invasion.

Then there are the other issues with this "miracle" story.

Firstly, there is Juan Diego and the record of his revelation. The problem is that there is no supporting evidence. While the story of Juan Diego is reported to have taken place in December 1531, the first recorded mention of the event isn't found until the writings of Antonio Valeriano, sometime after 1556. Indeed Valeriano himself wasn't born until 1531. Valeriano's writings themselves are only preserved in a collection of writings dated to 1649. So the question is where did Valeriano come by his information? There are no other writings to support this event.

Secondly, we have a pretty good idea where this story comes from. According to the Guadalupe miracle story, Juan Diego sees the apparition at the foot of the hill of Tepeyac, once home to a shrine to the Aztec goddess Tonantzin. The later story of the miracle is grafted on to the wider mythological framework of Tonantzin as a method of syncretical revisioning. This is nothing new in mythological terms and serves as a method to advertise and promote your new religion to unbelievers but in a way which will be familiar to them. The bible itself is replete with examples of such syncretism with parallels between Jesus and Elijah and Moses and even Egyptian and Greek myth to be found in the gospels.

the_eman wrote: »

There is an absolute raft of commentaries with OT and NT references placing Mary as the new Ark of the covenant the New Covenant. If you knew the teachings of the largest bodies of Christian churches that uphold the apostolic succession you would find these references. Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and probably Church of England and Lutheran.

Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant

Catholics also view Mary as the New Testament Ark of the Covenant. The Old Testament Ark of the Covenant contained three items – The Word of God in the form of stone tablets (the 10 Commandments), manna (bread) from Heaven, and the rod of Aaron that resprouted and came back to life (Hebrews 9:4). Just so, the womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary contained Jesus Christ – The living Word of God (John 1:1), the bread of life (John 6:48), and the ruler with a rod of iron who also came back to life (Rev.12:5).

The New Ark the New Covenant

Also remember, the chapter and verse numbers were added to the Bible in the Middle Ages by monks to make reading and copying the Bible easier. So in the original writing of Revelation, there is no separation of ch.11 verse 19, and ch.12 verse 1. (12:1 A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, ..., ...)

OK, I think we've lost sight of the overall topic here.

This all started because I pointed out that 2 Peter 3:3 refers to the idea which prevailed in early Christianity that Jesus' prophecy of his second coming had failed. In addition to disputing that it had failed, you posted a number of other bible prophecies which you claim had been fulfilled in support of the bible's authenticity.

The problem is that your argument consists of claiming that Revelation 12:1 is a prophecy which is somehow fulfilled through the apparition of Our Lady of Guadalupe. However, that's not the prophecy at all. The prophecy, such as it is, is highlighted below.

"A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth. Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads. Its tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that it might devour her child the moment he was born. She gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.” And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne. The woman fled into the wilderness to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days.Then war broke out in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him."


You see a prophecy is comprised of two components: sign and fulfillment. Take one of your failed prophecies from earlier on, the Immanuel prophecy. This prophecy consists of Isaiah predicting to Ahaz that God will destroy Judah's enemies. The sign (a "virgin" giving birth to a son who she names Immanuel) is supposed to indicate that the prophecy is about to be fulfilled.


In the case of the Revelation passage above, the apparition at Teyepac, even were it substantiated, is only evidence of the sign. The prophecy claims that armageddon will begin 1260 days after this appearance. So far, we're 175,00 days after the supposed apparition and yet no war in heaven, so again, another failed prophecy.


Since you're in the A&A forum, you may want to come up with some better arguments if you want to proselytise. Miracles and prophecies are poor arguments at best and your efforts in supporting them haven't helped your case.

Nodin

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Michelle has said 'Soz' - or rather Michelle's PR wonks have issued a statement where Michelle says comments were taken out of context.

May or may not have something to do with the remaining dates on her tour being cancelled by the promoters....

http://gcn.ie/Michelle_Shocked_Apologises_For_Homophobic_Rant

Dear michelle evidently hasn't learned that shutting up betimes is often the best policy.

Michelle Shocked has responded to reports that she went on a homophobic rant at a recent gig, insisting she has been misunderstood. "My support for the LGBT community … has never wavered," she said in an open letter sent out by her publicist, claiming she was simply trying to speak up for "Christians with opinions I in no way share".

Unfortunately for Shocked, her statement follows the release of audio from the 17 March show, obtained by the San Francisco Bay Guardian. While the recording is a little hard to follow, Shocked clearly drew a line between California's gay marriage legislation and a Christian apocalypse. "From their vantage point – and I really shouldn't say 'their', because it's mine too – we are nearly at the end of time," she is heard to say, "and from our vantage point, we're gonna be – I think maybe Chinese water torture is going to be the method. Once Prop 8 gets [repealed] and once preachers are held at gunpoint and forced to marry the homosexuals, I'm pretty sure that that will be the signal for Jesus to come on back."

(my bold & underline)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2013/mar/21/michelle-shocked-sorry-anti-gay-comments

Brian Shanahan

Nodin wrote: »

This is the problem when they find Jesus...you're always wondering which Jesus it is that they've found. Well, this is one where the mystery is over.

I never wonder. It is pretty much always the one that is telling them that the Vulcans are spying on them and the only way to save the world is by burning down the family home with all their (the Jesus finder's) relatives in it.

The people who genuinely improve themselves by taking on what they believe to be the teachings of Jesus tend to be quiet and humble and are anyways too busy doing good (there is a lot of good in the words of Jesus, just no divinity) to be telling the rest of us that "the gheys/Jews/unmarried mothers/librulls/scientists {delete as appropriate} are the cause of the apocalypse" nor stupid enough to think it.

Kivaro

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I mean if i was god, i just wouldn't make any gays if they disturbed me that much. For example i don't like cheese cake, so i don't make it - seems so much easier than filling my house with them, and then threatening the kids with smallpox if they eat one.

How dare you use logic in your argument .......................... as it is incompatible with religion.

Links234

Mormon church president attempts to rape 13-year-old girl, then the girl's mother, then assaults the oldest son. Finally takes a big bloody bite out of the boy's penis. Give it up for Holy Men!

Gordon

Links234 wrote: »

Mormon church president attempts to rape 13-year-old girl, then the girl's mother, then assaults the oldest son. Finally takes a big bloody bite out of the boy's penis. Give it up for Holy Men!

Guzman was president of the LDS Union Park 9th Branch in Midvale. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints said after charges were filed that Guzman no longer holds that position.

He no longer holds that position, instead he is now forgiven and given a different position in the church.

PopePalpatine

It's the mystery of faith. :rolleyes:

Links234

Family values disaster in Paris as anti-gay protesters attack police, use kids as human shields

The same ****ing people who bang on and on about "family" show what family really means to them. Well done. :mad:

wp_rathead

Links234 wrote: »

Family values disaster in Paris as anti-gay protesters attack police, use kids as human shields

The same ****ing people who bang on and on about "family" show what family really means to them. Well done. :mad:

I'm sure there a meme in there somewhere but its put me in too bad mood to even attempt one..

robindch

Links234 wrote: »

The same ****ing people who bang on and on about "family" show what family really means to them. Well done.

Last Saturday, Snowflake and I were in the city center and Legion of Gregory or somesuch had had Molesworth Street blocked off and had deployed a bunch of people, teenagers included, to pepper passersby with leaflets which -- you guessed it -- documented the church's position on abortion. One kid told me that his father had told him to hand out this stuff. When I was heading back home, Kildare street was blocked off as well and I suppose a few hundred people were there, singing a raggedy-assed cover of "Ave Maria" and looking very, very cold indeed.

Anyhow, while I can't imagine there are any laws against instructing children to hand out political propaganda, it still seemed yet another typically unpleasant thing for the "pro-life" side to do.

FouxDaFaFa

robindch wrote: »

Anyhow, while I can't imagine there are any laws against instructing children to hand out political propaganda, it still seemed yet another typically unpleasant thing for the "pro-life" side to do.

Have you seen Jesus Camp? That was one of the most sinister parts of that for me. They of course claim that the kids "want" to do it but it was creepy as fcuk. Effective, though. No-one's going to ignore a child who comes up to them in case they need help or something.

Nodin

On a January morning a crowd of Buddhist monks storm a law college, yelling, chanting and even hitting one or two seemingly random people and pushing back the police. Furiously they shout that the exam results have been distorted to favour Muslims.

A few weeks later, apparently abetted by the police, monks attack a slaughterhouse in Dematagoda, Colombo, alleging that calves are being slaughtered inside (illegal in the capital) or the meat is improperly stored.
Both are incorrect, but the monks spread rumours that the facility is Muslim-owned as most of the truck drivers are Muslim.

Sri Lankan monks are now taking this so-called "direct action" every few days. It is part of a growing wave of anti-Muslim activities in Sri Lanka carried out by new hardline Buddhist groups - a trend that is making many people anxious, even fearful.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21840600

Having finished with the Tamils for the moment, it seems they've moved onto Muslims and (to a lesser extent) christians. After running them out, presumably they'll get to the atheists, and then presumably have to decide if theres groups who are the "wrong sort" of Buddhists....

Galvasean

Nodin wrote: »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2013/mar/19/michelle-shocked-anti-gay-rant

This is the problem when they find Jesus...you're always wondering which Jesus it is that they've found. Well, this is one where the mystery is over.

I am shocked...

Kivaro

Nodin wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21840600

Having finished with the Tamils for the moment, it seems they've moved onto Muslims and (to a lesser extent) christians. After running them out, presumably they'll get to the atheists, and then presumably have to decide if theres groups who are the "wrong sort" of Buddhists....

I recall seeing disturbing pictures of the retribution on captured Tamils. Still bothers me today.

"Hardline Buddhists"? Seems to be an oxymoron.

Banbh

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21873978

Buddhists are also engaged in ethnic cleansing in Burma.

Just because a few alternative-lifestylers in the west have promoted Buddhism as a trendy pastime, doesn't make it any less a religion with all the nastiness of the others.

robindch

Either (a) AtheistBerlin has dreamed up a splendid marketing wheeze; (b) the US Postal Service is having a highly selective bad week; or (c) clearly labelling a parcel with the word "Atheist" causes delivery problems in the USA:

sbsquarepants

Atheist shoes? WTF??
Tailor made to perfectly fit your cloven hoof i suppose!:D

Obliq

robindch wrote: »

Either (a) AtheistBerlin has dreamed up a splendid marketing wheeze; (b) the US Postal Service is having a highly selective bad week; or (c) clearly labelling a parcel with the word "Atheist" causes delivery problems in the USA:

I'm loving that slogan "It's like wearing kittens on your feet" :P

Have to steal this for an american friend. Too funny! The shoes are quite nice too.

robindch

Obliq wrote: »

I'm loving that slogan "It's like wearing kittens on your feet"

I'd have gone with something like "Buy your Soles Here" or maybe just "Unbelievably Good"

kylith

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Atheist shoes? WTF??
Tailor made to perfectly fit your cloven hoof i suppose!:D

I assume that they're manufactured without soles.

Bannasidhe

'You don't have to take our claims on faith'.

Dades

kylith wrote: »

I assume that they're manufactured without soles.

They're not actually manufactured. They just evolve.

SebBerkovich

Dades wrote: »

They're not actually manufactured. They just evolve.

I heard they're created by a Blind Shoemaker.

Nodin

Printer refuses to publish gay magazine

Editor of Northern Irish publication MyGayZine seeks legal advice over rejection said to have been on grounds of faith

But after approaching a local printer for a quote he was "hurt and embarrassed" to receive an email refusing to work with the magazine because of its readership.

"There are some types of work I do not feel comfortable taking on and this is definitely one them," wrote printer Nick Williamson from Blufire Media in County Armagh, who had advertised his services on Gumtree.

"To work alongside (even printing for) the LGBT [community] would be in contradiction to my own faith and so I will have to let this quote slide."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/29/printer-refuses-publish-gay-magazine

Charmers.

MrPudding

Nodin wrote: »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/29/printer-refuses-publish-gay-magazine

Charmers.

I think Mr Williamson may find himself in a spot of bother. Will be an interesting one to follow.

MrP

Gbear

MrPudding wrote: »

I think Mr Williamson may find himself in a spot of bother. Will be an interesting one to follow.

MrP

That sort of stuff really annoys me.

It should be entirely down to the printer to print what he wants and he shouldn't have to justify why.

This kind of overstepping the bounds tolerance is why "PC Brigade" gets irritatingly thrown around all the time.

TheChizler

Gbear wrote: »

That sort of stuff really annoys me.

It should be entirely down to the printer to print what he wants and he shouldn't have to justify why.

And in the same way it's entirely down to other customers if they want to give their business to people who openly refuse to publish certain types of media.

MrPudding

Gbear wrote: »

That sort of stuff really annoys me.

It should be entirely down to the printer to print what he wants and he shouldn't have to justify why.

This kind of overstepping the bounds tolerance is why "PC Brigade" gets irritatingly thrown around all the time.

If you are providing a service to the public, or you are an organ of the state, you are not allowed to discriminate on certain protected grounds. It really is quite simple. Homosexuality is one of those protected grounds. Where you discriminate you must justify why, and this is perfectly correct.

This has nothing to do with overstepping the bounds of tolerance. As a businessman he is bound by the equality act. And just like he could not refuse a job because the customer is black, he can't refuse because the customer is gay. The fact that he is too stupid/honest to hide the fact that he is discriminating on a protected ground is neither here nor there. The law is there to prevent discrimination. Do you not agree with reducing discrimination?

MrP

recedite

If it was a publican refusing to serve beer to a gay or black person, instead of a printer refusing to print, I think it would be easier for people to see that this is plain old discrimination. The principle is the same.

If Mr Robinson really didn't want to have his name associated with the LGBT community, all he had to do was submit a very high quote for the job, and then sit back and say nothing. But no, he wanted to be able to put it about to his buddies in his "faith" community that he had rejected the gay offer "as a matter of principle" which IMO is tantamount to incitement to hatred.
Hopefully he will now feel the full force of the law on his ass, as they say :pac:

It's what he was asked to print rather than who asked that's the issue. I'm not too sure what law can be used to molest his ass.:rolleyes:

Galvasean

Aren't people working in shops like Boots etc. allowed refuse to sell contraceptives based on religious grounds? I think the printer could use the same defense in this situation. I think it's a somewhat bogus defense, but it seems to work.

Nodin

Galvasean wrote: »

Aren't people working in shops like Boots etc. allowed refuse to sell contraceptives based on religious grounds? I think the printer could use the same defense in this situation. I think it's a somewhat bogus defense, but it seems to work.

Presumably in Boots, someone else just handles the sale, where here ye have to feck off to an entirely different chemist, then go through the whole Nurofen plus interrogation again....

The Black Oil

Wouldn't someone then argue that their human rights, were undermined by having to against their personal beliefs in order to comply with equality legislation, and they weren't allowed to exercise freedom of conscience? At least, that is what seems to come across as a sticking point when some of these cases end up before the courts as the oppressed Christian routine gets thrown around...or something.

recedite

Deleted User wrote: »

It's what he was asked to print rather than who asked that's the issue.

Good point, but you are getting dangerously close to the religious position of tolerating the homosexual "sinner", but not the sin itself. It seems that the material to be printed is not illegal, but it does involve taking homosexuality out of the closet.

Robinson will probably get away with it though, because if you plead "religious exemption" you can get away with all kinds of discrimination. Including relgious discrimination itself, for example in the hiring of teachers at a denominational school.
Someone can refuse to handle condoms at a chemist on religious grounds, but if the person working at a supermarket checkout refused to handle meat on the grounds that they were vegetarian, they would be sacked immediately.