Blasphemy?

Ellis Dee

philologos wrote: »

I agree with Ellis Dee to a degree. It is a persons right to be obnoxious, but nobody is obliged to respect it as it is the height of bad manners.

Faint praise, indeed! But, as always with religious people, you are the one who arbitrarily makes the definition (in this case of what is and isn't good manners and what is obnoxious) and then expects everyone to agree with that definition. The so-called pro-lifers and Youth Defence bullies with their arbitrary decisions are examples of the same thing. If you want respect from me, give me evidence - any at all - that a supernatural being exists.:rolleyes:

philologos

Ellis Dee: I've given numerous reasons. This thread is about blasphemy. I think it should be 100% legal for people to blaspheme just as much as I believe it should be 100% legal for people to be rude and obnoxious.

I don't expect you to hold any definition I hold. I'm just telling you don't be so surprised if people turn off if they hear you claiming that they haven't thought about what they believe, that they are less intelligent or other such vitriol that you come out with. You have free speech, but who says that all must accept what you say? The same is true for me.

Bob Cratchet

Ellis Dee wrote: »

As I've said before - and you will notice that I have been careful never to be personally offensive or ad hominen - offence is usually in the eye of the beholder, in the eyes of people who choose to take offence. That is their way of seeking to dominate others. What a cowardly cop-out it is to just scream "offence" or "blasphemy" every time someone says something that ridicules your beliefs!

As for respect, I have always believed that it is something that has to be earned.

I also reject your assertion that mockery is a form of discrimination. I would call it free speech. Sorry if it is not always what you are hoping to hear.

How old are you? Probably not old enough to remember the days when some of Ireland's finest and internationally renowned writers were banned in their home country, usually because self-appointed offence-detectors took it upon themselves to snitch on them to the censors.

Mary, the mother of Jesus is a peaceful an inoffensive figure, as I'm sure so is your own mother.

So if I painted a derogatory picture of your mother in an attempt to damage her character and reputation, and I put it on public display, and you took offense, I could easily retort with ;

"offence is usually in the eye of the beholder, in the eyes of people who choose to take offence. That is your way of seeking to dominate others. What a cowardly cop-out it is to just scream "offence" every time someone says something that ridicules your belief about your mother!"

No one is asking anyone to believe eachothers beliefs, but don't expect people to tolerate or respect intolerance.

Ellis Dee

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

Mary, the mother of Jesus is a peaceful an inoffensive figure, as I'm sure so is your own mother.

My mother is dead. And I would prefer if you did not drag her into this discussion. In fact, I find it offensive that you do.

The difference between her and Mary is that I know for certain she (my mother) existed.

philologos

Sometimes I have to wonder is Ellis Dee a reincarnation of the one and only rohatch.

Ellis Dee

philologos wrote: »

Sometimes I have to wonder is Ellis Dee a reincarnation of the one and only rohatch.

Let me tell you that I have never heard of rohatch. Look at my profile and you will see that I only joined about a week ago and have never been here before. Whether or not you believe me is likewise pretty irrelevant to me, but I'm glad to see you wondering about something rather than just automatically believing it. Developing an enquiring mind is definitely the way to go IMHO.;)I suppose it will be a simple thing for one of the site administrators to check my IP number and then that of rohatch. It would greatly surprise me if we were even in the same country.

I don't believe in reincarnation, either.;)

Guitar_Monkey

Ellis Dee wrote: »

As I've said before - and you will notice that I have been careful never to be personally offensive or ad hominen - offence is usually in the eye of the beholder, in the eyes of people who choose to take offence. That is their way of seeking to dominate others. What a cowardly cop-out it is to just scream "offence" or "blasphemy" every time someone says something that ridicules your beliefs!

As for respect, I have always believed that it is something that has to be earned.

I also reject your assertion that mockery is a form of discrimination. I would call it free speech. Sorry if it is not always what you are hoping to hear.

How old are you? Probably not old enough to remember the days when some of Ireland's finest and internationally renowned writers were banned in their home country, usually because self-appointed offence-detectors took it upon themselves to snitch on them to the censors.

First of all, i fully support free speech ! I also believe that it is possible to make a point without knowingly causing offense to others. My previous comments relate to the fact that this is a Christian forum. You've come into this thread mocking Christian beliefs. You're fully entitled to your opionion of course, i just think you're being a bit disrespectful.
As for saying people choose to take offence as way to dominate others ??
Do you realise how crazy that sounds ?? So do you believe in a society where everyone can just do whatever the hell the please with no regards to anyone else ?
I'm not a big fan of censorship. As i said, nobody has to go an see the artwork in question. I would only have a problem with it if it was imposed on people who might find it blasphemous, against their will. What's my age got to do with anything ? Get off your high horse. I can remember when Life of Brian and The Exorcist were banned. Did i agree with it ? No. I don't see what that's got to do with you coming in here and disrespecting people ? Just so you know....most of them probably don't give a damn what you say, they're used to it...i don't either. I just think people are entitled to believe whatever they want to believe as long as they're not harming anyone, without the persecution of others.

Bob Cratchet

Ellis Dee wrote: »

My mother is dead. And I would prefer if you did not drag her into this discussion. In fact, I find it offensive that you do.

. . .

Ellis Dee wrote: »

offence is usually in the eye of the beholder, in the eyes of people who choose to take offence. That is their way of seeking to dominate others. What a cowardly cop-out it is to just scream "offence" or "blasphemy" every time someone says something that ridicules your beliefs!

As for respect, I have always believed that it is something that has to be earned.

I also reject your assertion that mockery is a form of discrimination. I would call it free speech. Sorry if it is not always what you are hoping to hear.

Ellis Dee

Guitar_Monkey wrote: »

First of all, i fully support free speech ! I also believe that it is possible to make a point without knowingly causing offense to others. My previous comments relate to the fact that this is a Christian forum. You've come into this thread mocking Christian beliefs. You're fully entitled to your opionion of course, i just think you're being a bit disrespectful.
As for saying people choose to take offence as way to dominate others ??
Do you realise how crazy that sounds ?? So do you believe in a society where everyone can just do whatever the hell the please with no regards to anyone else ?
I'm not a big fan of censorship. As i said, nobody has to go an see the artwork in question. I would only have a problem with it if it was imposed on people who might find it blasphemous, against their will. What's my age got to do with anything ? Get off your high horse. I can remember when Life of Brian and The Exorcist were banned. Did i agree with it ? No. I don't see what that's got to do with you coming in here and disrespecting people ? Just so you know....most of them probably don't give a damn what you say, they're used to it...i don't either. I just think people are entitled to believe whatever they want to believe as long as they're not harming anyone, without the persecution of others.

You really need to chill a bit.:rolleyes: And stop lecturing people so self-righteously.

I did not understand that this is a Christian forum. I thought it was a general forum and that this was a thread discussing blasphemy. Are you sure it is a Christian forum, and do you really expect everyone to just accept that particular ethos?

As it happens, I am totally opposed to anti-blasphemy laws. Totally. And I also believe Ireland has a really shameful history of censorship and hope we never go back there.

However, when you write: "So do you believe in a society where everyone can just do whatever the hell they please with no regards to anyone else?", you are indulging in utter absurdity and really need to cop yourself on. I never said that people could do whatever they please. I said they should be free to express their opinions. There is a difference, you know.:rolleyes:

Incidentally, you mention the Life of Brian movie. Fortunately, it was not banned in the country where I lived; almost nothing is in peacetime. There were quite a few self-righteous and judgemental fuddy-duddies tut-tutting about it in the newspapers, but that died down very quickly when one of the country's most respected film critics - who happened to be both an acquaintance of mine and an ordained minister, as it happens - wrote his review and pointed out that the movie was not mocking God at all, but was a fantastic send up of people.

Ellis Dee

Bob Cratchet, As I said already, I am mourning my mother and I asked you not to drag her into this discussion. Anyone who wasn't a scut would have left the matter at that and discuss issues rather than persons.

if you represent what Christianity is all about, then I'm doubly glad that I have nothing to do with it. Nor will I ever want to.:mad::mad:

Bob Cratchet

Ellis Dee wrote: »

Bob Cratchet, As I said already, I am mourning my mother and I asked you not to drag her into this discussion. Anyone who wasn't a scut would have left the matter at that and discuss issues rather than persons.

if you represent what Christianity is all about, then I'm doubly glad that I have nothing to do with it. Nor will I ever want to.:mad::mad:

Using you're very own argument (not mine), why would anyone respect your requests, beliefs, mourning or mother ?

Ellis Dee wrote: »

"offence is usually in the eye of the beholder, in the eyes of people who choose to take offence. That is your way of seeking to dominate others. What a cowardly cop-out it is to just scream "offence" every time someone says something that ridicules your belief

As for respect, I have always believed that it is something that has to be earned.

Guitar_Monkey

Ellis Dee wrote: »

I did not understand that this is a Christian forum. I thought it was a general forum and that this was a thread discussing blasphemy. Are you sure it is a Christian forum, and do you really expect everyone to just accept that particular ethos?

Look at the top left of your screen. I'm not lecturing anyone, i'm just asking you to show a little respect and be less offensive in the way you choose to get your point across. I have no problem with your beliefs at all or you engaging in this thread on the topic of blasphemy. As i previously said, i believe everybody has the right to believe in whatever they want without persecution or mockery from others...be it God, Allah, Satan, Odin, Fairies, Pixies...whatever....as long as they're not harming anyone. I believe it's called religious freedom.

Ellis Dee

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

Using you're very own argument (not mine), why would anyone respect your requests, beliefs, mourning or mother ?

There is something called decency. Ask someone to explain it to you.:mad:

Ellis Dee

Guitar_Monkey wrote: »

Ellis Dee wrote: »

I did not understand that this is a Christian forum. I thought it was a general forum and that this was a thread discussing blasphemy. Are you sure it is a Christian forum, and do you really expect everyone to just accept that particular ethos?

Look at the top left of your screen. I'm not lecturing anyone, i'm just asking you to show a little respect and be less offensive in the way you choose to get your point across. I have no problem with your beliefs at all or you engaging in this thread on the topic of blasphemy. As i previously said, i believe everybody has the right to believe in whatever they want without persecution or mockery from others...be it God, Allah, Satan, Odin, Fairies, Pixies...whatever....as long as they're not harming anyone. I believe it's called religious freedom.

Yes, you are lecturing, but that's your own problem.:rolleyes:

I, too, believe in religious freedom, but understand that as meaning that people are free to believe in whatever religion they want, or none. It seems you just understand freedom as being the freedom to agree with you.

Incidentally, do you know anything about blasphemy laws in other countries, and do you think you might like to outline some interesting examples of such legislation and engage in discussion of them rather than coming on as a rather bullying person who takes it upon himself to tell others how they should express themselves?

Guitar_Monkey

Ellis Dee wrote: »

Guitar_Monkey wrote: »

Yes, you are lecturing, but that's your own problem.:rolleyes:


Incidentally, do you know anything about blasphemy laws in other countries, and do you think you might like to outline some interesting examples of such legislation and engage in discussion of them rather than coming on as a rather bullying person who takes it upon himself to tell others how they should express themselves?

No...i'm not. I'm just asking you to be a bit more considerate in some of your comments. You asked me my age earlier....i'd be interested in your own, because you're behaving rather childishly.
As for your second point......."It seems you just understand freedom as being the freedom to agree with you."...absolute bull....i told you i had no problem with whatever people choose to believe in...or not, as the case may be. Some of my best friends are Athiests, and they're very capable of arguing their points without resorting to mockery.
I'm not really concerned with blasphemy laws. The thread isn't even about that. It's about wether a certain image is blasphemous to Christians. I don't really agree with blasphemy laws to be honest. As i said, it's pretty easy to avoid that stuff if you want. As a fan of extreme music, i've been exposed to all sorts....it dosn't really bother me. So i don't think stuff should be banned just because a certain group might find it offensive. It's only if it's in someone's without their consent that i think it's a bit of a problem.

By the way....i think we both need to step back a bit. I didn't mean to come across bullyish...if i did, i apologise. There is a bit of a trend of people trolling in this forum with the attitude of winding up and mocking the Christians and religious for a bit of a "laugh". All i meant was have a bit of consideration for the beliefs of others, seeing as this is a Christian forum.
Anyway....whatever.....i'm not out for a fight. I just want to enjoy my weekend. Take it easy.

Onesimus

Ellis Dee wrote: »

There is something called decency. Ask someone to explain it to you.:mad:

*poking you with his finger and teasing you* Stop talking to your self, stop talking to yourself :pac:

Ellis Dee

Onesimus wrote: »

*poking you with his finger and teasing you* Stop talking to your self, stop talking to yourself :pac:

Ellis Dee

Guitar_Monkey wrote: »

Ellis Dee wrote: »

No...i'm not. I'm just asking you to be a bit more considerate in some of your comments. You asked me my age earlier....i'd be interested in your own, because you're behaving rather childishly.

Why do you half-apologise and then make snide comments like that? My age is none of your business, but I suppose I'm old enough to be your father; I'm old enough to be most people's.:rolleyes: Fortunately, I know I'm not yours. Now, enjoy your weekend, too.

Morbert

ISAW wrote: »

Yes. An atheistic government which wont protest them and institute a "There is no God and we will work against any who ask us to respect their religious beliefs" regime.

Every time that happened in history you could count the corpses. Hundreds of millions of them! That's a reason why.

I did not say atheistic. I said secular. Secular governments protect the right of people to practice their religion (within the confines of the law). "Atheistic governments" (by which you presumably mean the Godless, but still deeply religious regimes of Stalin and Mao) do not.

The Church is helping children worldwide. I don't see international atheism helping any of them . Their meetings seem to be more concerned with talk and doing down religions.

How is this related to the question of whether or not it should be illegal to offend religious sensibilities?

Ellis Dee

Morbert wrote: »

I did not say atheistic. I said secular. Secular governments protect the right of people to practice their religion (within the confines of the law). "Atheistic governments" (by which you presumably mean the Godless, but still deeply religious regimes of Stalin and Mao) do not.



How is this related to the question of whether or not it should be illegal to offend religious sensibilities?

Good points! Actually, I doubt whether there have been many genuinely atheistic governments at all in the history of the world. By that I mean governments that have really thought about the matter and come to the realisation that religion has a pernicious influence on people. Those governments that have cracked down on religion have always been totalitarian ones, which want to control everything and are unwilling to tolerate any organised groups that are not under their (the governments') control. It is not religion per se that has bothered them, but any hint of groups that might conceivably challenge or erode their power.

lmaopml

I don't think anybody thinks that it should be illegal. The same way as it's not illegal to view those who actually thrive on it as somewhat arrogant, obnoxious, and childish (none of these things are illegal ) - Neither is ignoring those dipictions as a childish kind of ruse...daily mail style.

Ellis Dee, I'm sorry for your loss. I lost my Dad just over a year ago and it's difficult to come to terms with any loss, especially that of a parent or child. I wish you the best..

Guitar_Monkey

Ellis Dee wrote: »

Guitar_Monkey wrote: »

Why do you half-apologise and then make snide comments like that? My age is none of your business, but I suppose I'm old enough to be your father; I'm old enough to be most people's.:rolleyes: Fortunately, I know I'm not yours. Now, enjoy your weekend, too.

Fair enough, your age is none of my business, just as mine is none of yours. Don't try and say i'm making snide comments when you've been acting like a tosser all day. Oh, and those smileys you keep using...with the raised eyes ? Really cool ! If you're old enough to be my father, then start acting like it. You're a classy individual....:rolleyes: (see what i did there ?)
Good luck to you sir !

Ellis Dee

lmaopml wrote: »

I don't think anybody thinks that it should be illegal. The same way as it's not illegal to view those who actually thrive on it as somewhat arrogant, obnoxious, and childish (none of these things are illegal ) - Neither is ignoring those dipictions as a childish kind of ruse...daily mail style.

Ellis Dee, I'm sorry for your loss. I lost my Dad just over a year ago and it's difficult to come to terms with any loss, especially that of a parent or child. I wish you the best..

Thank you, Imaopml. Very kind of you to say that. I know it takes time to get over a bereavement and what you say about the loss of a child reminds me of one of the few things that really scare me. Fortunately, that is one thing that I have been spared and my children are grown up and successful.

As the Vulcans say, I say to you: Live long and prosper.:)

lmaopml

Star Trek Love it! You too...

Ellis Dee

Guitar_Monkey wrote: »

Ellis Dee wrote: »

Fair enough, your age is none of my business, just as mine is none of yours. Don't try and say i'm making snide comments when you've been acting like a tosser all day. Oh, and those smileys you keep using...with the raised eyes ? Really cool ! If you're old enough to be my father, then start acting like it. You're a classy individual....:rolleyes: (see what i did there ?)
Good luck to you sir !

Note to self: Ignore this eejit from now on!:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

lmaopml

Ellis Dee, do you have a cauldron for that big spoon of yours? Oh sorry, it seems you do a favourite.

I think I'll go off and look at some other threads now...lol....

Guitar_Monkey

Ellis Dee wrote: »

Note to self: Ignore this eejit from now on!:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Right back at ya !

philologos

Bob Cratchet

A little bit of moderation goes a long way

Ellis Dee

Guitar_Monkey wrote: »

Right back at ya !

Is this one of the smarter members of your family?:D:D:D ROFLMAO

PDN

Mod Warning

Can we stop the bickering please? Moderating this thread is like having to look after a group of 5-year olds. Posters should address the post, rather than attacking the poster.

Also, leave the moderating to the mods. Let them determine who is trolling and who isn't. Moderating issues are addressed by the Reported Post button, or via PM, not inthread.

Guitar_Monkey

Apologies to everyone for taking the thread off topic...and to you PDN, i'll leave it to you guys from now on. I'm not much of a poster anyway, i tend to lurk mostly . Maybe i'll stick to that from now on.

Bob Cratchet

PDN wrote: »

Mod Warning

Can we stop the bickering please? Moderating this thread is like having to look after a group of 5-year olds. Posters should address the post, rather than attacking the poster.

Also, leave the moderating to the mods. Let them determine who is trolling and who isn't. Moderating issues are addressed by the Reported Post button, or via PM, not inthread.

Good man. Best to nip it in the bud early in future, then there would be no problems.
I always report trolling, but it can be a long time before anything can be done about it, and by that stage it gets way out of hand. I'm not blaming you guys, you can't be here all the time. BTW my surname is not misspelt as you referred to earlier, it's the correct Irish spelling as used in our family. I'd appreciate if you could respect that small point, at it is important to us. Thanks

Lapin

Lapin wrote: »

Anyone know where and when this art exhibition is taking place?

According to the UCC website, it's on in the O'Rahilly Building on Thursday, 23th June. However, ANF says it's on (additionally?) Friday, 24th June. ANF has the details of people to contact if you want to protest (phone and email) here.

I am so saddened by this, though not particularly surprised that such an exhibition is being shown.

Kyrie eleison!
Mother Mary, have pity on us!

Bob Cratchet

Deleted User wrote: »

According to the UCC website, it's on in the O'Rahilly Building on Thursday, 23th June. However, ANF says it's on (additionally?) Friday, 24th June. ANF has the details of people to contact if you want to protest (phone and email) here.

I am so saddened by this, though not particularly surprised that such an exhibition is being shown.

Kyrie eleison!
Mother Mary, have pity on us!

They are not much of an artist if they have to go down that route for publicity and to get their pictures on display. What's the matter with UCC, can they attract no other artists ?

gimmebroadband

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

They are not much of an artist if they have to go down that route for publicity and to get their pictures on display. What's the matter with UCC, can they attract no other artists ?

None with any taste anyway!

mehfesto

Surely art is not only subjective, but multi-layered and heavily reliant on context. I mean a shark in formaldehyde in a museum is informative, but place it in a gallery and it is art and we are forced to look at in a different way. That's before we read or inspect what the artist was trying to say with what he or she presents to us.

A lot of people here seem to think that the Virgin Mary simply cannot be depicted in a way that does not fit their notions of what Mary 'is'. It could be argued that in this way, Christians are reacting not un-similarly (albeit less aggressively) to how some Muslims reacted to the depiction of Mohammed. It is not a case of 'you can't', but rather a case of 'you shouldn't'. It implies there is an ownership of Mary. Which is interesting.

Blasphemy is questionable in this instance for me. It harks back to this:

'This is not a pipe'. And it isn't. It's a 2 dimensional depiction of what we understand to be a pipe. Similarly, this is not Mary. It is one person's depiction of her. The artists depiction cannot harm or undermine what you believe Mary to be. You are not being told for definite, something that is grossly offensive. You are merely shown an image which you are asked bisect and mentally digest for yourself.

In all comes down to perspective, I suppose. But for me, something like this is quite tame. By the standards of 'Piss Christ' at least.

Morbert

Just so we're all on the right page, how many Catholics here think such art should be illegal?

gimmebroadband

Morbert wrote: »

Just so we're all on the right page, how many Catholics here think such art should be illegal?

What sort of a question is that???? God gave everyone FREE WILL to sin or not to sin, to blaspheme or not blaspheme! I'm sure Jesus wouldn't approve of His Mother being mocked!!!!

Morbert

gimmebroadband wrote: »

What sort of a question is that???? God gave everyone FREE WILL to sin or not to sin, to blaspheme or not blaspheme! I'm sure Jesus wouldn't approve of His Mother being mocked!!!!

Just making sure, as it is technically illegal in Ireland to blaspheme.

gigino

gimmebroadband wrote: »

I'm sure Jesus wouldn't approve of His Mother being mocked!!!!

I do not think the intention of the artist was to mock. Besides, we do not know what Jesus's mother really looked like, so we do not know if the painting is a resemblance or not - most likely not. Why would Jesus care less if someone painted a picture of someone who was not his mother ? She was only mentioned a handful of times in the bible anyway, and Jesus said " This do in remembrance of me ". Those offended by a piece of art should worry about other things in the world like overpopulation ( the worlds population is EIGHT times more than what it was when our great great grandparents were born ), climate change, global warming, world hunger etc.

Bob Cratchet

gigino wrote: »

I do not think the intention of the artist was to mock. Besides, we do not know what Jesus's mother really looked like, so we do not know if the painting is a resemblance or not - most likely not. Why would Jesus care less if someone painted a picture of someone who was not his mother ? She was only mentioned a handful of times in the bible anyway, and Jesus said " This do in remembrance of me ". Those offended by a piece of art should worry about other things in the world like overpopulation ( the worlds population is EIGHT times more than what it was when our great great grandparents were born ), climate change, global warming, world hunger etc.

What would be your opinion if an "art" painting was made of your mother depicting her in a disrespectful way, and a public institution spent Irish taxpayers money promoting it instead of local Irish artists that are trying to get a break ?

gimmebroadband

gigino wrote: »

I do not think the intention of the artist was to mock. Besides, we do not know what Jesus's mother really looked like, so we do not know if the painting is a resemblance or not - most likely not. .

It was the intention of the artist to mock alright, he used an image based on the miraculous image of Our Lady of Guadalupe!

News story here!

dvpower

gimmebroadband wrote: »

News story here!

She identified herself as the ever virgin Holy Mary, Mother of the True God for whom we live, of the Creator of all things, Lord of heaven and the earth.

Not backward in coming forward anyway.

lmaopml

LOL, Blaspheme your heart out. Hopefully you will find a reporter to report it, and some protesters that protest. - Idiots the lot!

strobe

dvpower wrote: »

Not backward in coming forward anyway.

lmaopml wrote: »

LOL, Blaspheme your heart out. Hopefully you will find a reporter to report it, and some protesters that protest. - Idiots the lot!

If I was inside then other times I slipped inside the eye of your mind, cabbage...

Only in the other time, inside I knew it was grey...


...

oceanclub

ISAW wrote: »

I=Now back to the relativism. People who say there is no absolute right or wrong and it all depends on the individual or the society at the time. Certain atheists promote this agenda of no overarching absolute natural law which says some things are always right or always wrong. They will tell you such a think depends on the society of the time. So they would say child porn or insulting a religious icon is acceptable to them if society wants that. And a society without natural law will permit such a thing.

Got it?

Relativism of course is terrible. Until it's used by the Catholic Church to defend their attitude towards the commiting and coverup of child rape in previous decades, in which case they pull "moral relativism" out of the bag and claim it wasn't considered a serious matter than like it is now.

P.

Fanny Cradock

What?

Take it to the appropriate thread.

philologos

For the sake of discussion this is the offending image.



I looked at it and wondered what all the fuss was about. Now the Gardaí are investigating it. This is a good reason why we need to have a referendum on the place of blasphemy in the constitution.

gimmebroadband

The Blessed Virgin, bore the Son of God, the Eternal Word made flesh in her womb, and I don't think trashy images like the above appropriate!