Resolved: It should be illegal to denigrate fundamentalist beliefs

[cthulu2016]

If you think the world is more than 4-5,000 years old you have a right to that belief, but you do not have the right to say "young earth" believers are stupid, foolish, intellectually nihilistic, comical or pathetic.

That simply hurts people's feelings, and incites bad action on the part of the offended.

It shows a lack of respect for their viewpoint, and for their faith. The view that Noah's Ark was full of dinosaurs is no sillier than the belief that Noah's Ark was full of mammals. You don't have to agree, but you must respect the view.

Do you have any idea what it must feel like to have have core convictions that constitute your identity that you cannot voice without people laughing so hard they shoot beverages out of their nose?

Do you know how hurtful that is?

[WinkyDink]

78. It's called "satire."

[Canuckistanian]

81. It's a debate term

Meaning that the exact question for the debate is agreed upon.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

2. I do not care if it offends their little bizarre whirled built on fairy tales

They need to be shocked out of their stupidity. If being rude gets their attention, then amen. If denigrating their idiocy teaches them how they abuse their kids by brain washing them, so be it. They are a danger to society. Mere politeness and a live and let live approach helps not one bit.

[formercia]

4. Ramen n/t

[cali]

3. Calling such believers idiots and morons is hate speech.

I fully support your resolution.

[Socal31]

37. I hope this is sarcastic.

Using "hate speech" as a way to dump a load on our 1st should never be allowed.

Remember, the pendulum swings, and one day people that think this whole website is "hate-speech" will again be in power.

That is why the 1st is almost absolute. Your feelings are not protected by the constitution. A call for violence (which IS illegal) is not equivalent to denigrating a line of thought.

Just because I say something that causes violence does not mean it was a call for violence.

If I go to a Green Pay Packers game and hold a sign that says "Go Bears!", and get punched for it, my speech was still legal, and the a-hole is still getting arrested.

And sadly, religion is as trivial as a sports team fandom anyway. You are exposed to it young, go with whatever flavor that is local to you, and believe yours is the best that exists.

[cali]

87. why yes, yes it is satire. As the OP is clearly satire

I decided to respond in kind. You wasted your silly post.

[MNBrewer]

53. I think "hate speech" is A.O.K.

If "calling such believers idiots and morons is hate speech", then I'm perfectly fine with it.

[tama]

5. All strong emotional attachments

to identities are hurtful. We all carry the scars.

[cali]

7. so a strong emotional attachment to deaf culture

or gay culture is hurtful?

Most people have strong emotional attachments to identities. And it's not always hurtful and doesn't always entail bearing a scar.

[tama]

20. You are hurting

my identity of maker of unqualified over-generalizations.

[cali]

21. lol. I think most of us share that identity from time to time.

[Aerows]

35. Duzy worthy :D

[redqueen]

6. I hope those who think that using misogynist slurs is perfectly fine will jump all over this.

Because DAMN.

By all means, please draw some of their poorly-spelled fire from feminists. Thanks.

[glacierbay]

8. In this country you do have the right to ridicule people

w/o the fear of retaliation.
Where do you get the idea that I don't have the right to ridicule someone I don't agree with?

[Bigmack]

9. Whaaat..? The First Amendment guarantees free speech...

.. and I will laugh at and mock and denigrate anybody's moronic beliefs that I want to.

The willfully ignorant are not a protected class of people.

Part of my antipathy toward them is that they insist on making their ignorance a part of public policy.

And they don't leave the rest of us alone... they want us to believe the same stupid shit they do.

Pretending that ignorance is the same as knowledge is a false equivalence.

[mitchtv]

10. OMG hurtful?

the truth is funny that way

[cali]

14. I think you need to familiarize yourself with the op's

position on the 1st amendment. he/she has penned quite a bit about it.

[cthulu2016]

39. killjoy...

I want this OP to be despised. Because, weird empowerment fantasies aside, the odds of America having hate-speech laws that do not include Christianity as a protected class is 0.00%. (As you know, of course.)

And if the beverage/nose part wasn't enough warning...

[mitchtv]

59. OP's come and go

this one , my first thought was that they forgot the sarcasm marker. Meanwhile , I will
continue to do nothing to advance superstition over science

[porphyrian]

11. Why do you hate America?

[annabanana]

12. Sorry. Fundamentalism is a cancer on the human race.

It is a danger at home and a danger abroad. It is intrinsically dangerous.

Unreasoning adherence to a system that is convinced that they have the ONLY TRUTH and GOD'S EAR is destructive.

[redqueen]

13. The idea that religious "faith" deserves some kind of special protection from criticism or mockery

has to go.

Religious beliefs deserve no special consideration.


Illegal to show a lack of respect for their "faith"... are you serious with this?

People display a lack of respect for all kinds of things, in all kinds of ways. If you think it's rude and inconsiderate, more power to you. But illegal? I'm at a loss, really...

[Egalitarian Thug]

15. Yes, in fact I do have the right to do just that. It is my right to point out the absurdity

of these fantasies and if you or anyone else, doesn't like it, you are free to offer an argument in support of delusion.

So I'm voting against your resolution.

[cali]

16. SATIRE, folks, SATIRE.

[redqueen]

19. Oh...

[Politicalboi]

17. LOL!

"Do you have any idea what it must feel like to have have core convictions that constitute your identity that you cannot voice without people laughing so hard they shoot beverages out of their nose? "

Then maybe those who think that way should keep their mouths shut. This is poison to others, mainly children who repeat this junk to others. I bet some of these thinkers would mock other religions. Lies aren't good for ANYBODY. Religion has proved that to us for eons.

[dawg]

18. You were a "master debater" in high school, weren't you?

But that sounds like kind of a "squirrel" case to me.

[Cirque du So-What]

22. I see what you're doing

but saying 'hurtful' things about people's religions, whether fundamentalist Xian or Muslin, is the least of it. Is there anyone remaining who is too ignorant or misanthropic to realize that people die as a result of lampooning Mohammad? Sure, it's protected under the 1st Amendment, but those who choose to poke that hornet's nest are complicit in the murder of innocents. Such baiting is deliberately targeting a tiny minority of extremists who will lash out mindlessly to seek revenge, and while it may be perfectly 'legal,' it's undoubtedly sociopathic.

[cali]

24. yes, people die, and it would be disingenuous to suggest

that there isn't causality extant in the equation, but it's one causality and not the only one. And lampooning religion and religious figures including Mohammed isn't only done out of hate and it isn't always sociopathic- not by a long shot. Certainly that was true of the idiotic and hateful Innocence of Muslims, but what about The Satanic Verses?

[Cirque du So-What]

34. The Satanic Verses

is a far cry from the recent film which deliberately ridicules Mohammad. I am convinced that Salman Rushdie had no intention of insulting either Mohammad or Islam; I cannot say the same for the rash of cartoons and caricatures that drive the extremists to murder, however. Any attempt to conflate the two is disingenuous as well.

Can you give a plausible explanation for publishing cartoons and producing films that the makers KNOW will produce murder and mayhem that is NOT sociopathic?

[cali]

36. Sure. I don't agree with it but

I don't think it's sociopathic to publish materials you know are offensive to others, even knowing that they may be used to justify violence. One of those reasons, quite simply, could simply be the wish to not be silenced.

[Cirque du So-What]

42. So this 'wish not to be silenced'

is somehow more important to those who make such 'art' that the lives of innocents? If that's not sociopathic, then it's certainly narcissistic.

[cali]

44. you seem to leave out of the equation those who actually perpetrate the violence

they're at least equally sociopathic.

And sociopathic or not, it's protected speech and should be protected speech.

[Cirque du So-What]

52. Yes, it's quite obvious that you don't think it's sociopathic

and that if I posted my assertion that it IS, you'd post a rebuttal 1,001 times. On my part, I'll end this potentially endless back-and-forth by noting that your defense of the caricaturists & cartoonists - that their right 'not to be silenced' is ludicrous on its face. After all, the 1st Amendment guarantees the right to say it; any effort to 'silence' them is futile from the beginning. Furthermore, I remain steadfast in my belief that anyone who places a higher value upon their own 'creativity' than that of the lives of others is a sociopath.

[Fumesucker]

26. So The Onion cartoon with multiple deities engaged in porno style sex was not sociopathic?

But it would have been sociopathic if Mohammed was included in the cartoon?

http://www.theonion.com/articles/no-one-murdered-because-of-this-image,29553/

[Cirque du So-What]

40. Are Buddhists going on a murderous rampage

at the sight of Siddhartha receiving oral gratification? Don't think so. Equally unlikely is the prospect of you convincing me that producing 'art' that provokes violence is NOT sociopathic.

[Fumesucker]

73. Evidently your answer to the question was "yes"..

Which deity is satirically depicted determines whether or not a given piece of religious satire is sociopathic.

[cthulu2016]

27. The Influence of Sea Power Upon History: 1660-1783

Now there's a book that a lot of people died as a result of. But I don't consider Alfred Thayer Mahan a sociopath or think that he was obliged to keep his historical analysis under wraps for fear of how it might influence German naval policy 25 years later.

Or The Great Illusion by British economist Norman Angell... a book that argued that a big war like WWI was impossible in the modern era. It was very influential and affected British military preparedness. Again, many probably dies as a result of it publication.


Every day in this country women break off relationships with men who then act out violently. Sometimes these guys don't just shoot the estranged wife/girlfriend. Sometimes they shoot up their workplace too.

Were the women morally required to stay in the relationship? They probably knew the guy wouldn't take it well, right? Do they have blood on their hands?

[4th law of robotics]

29. Anyone who would riot and kill over this needs to out themselves

so they can be removed from the gene pool.

Such baiting is deliberately targeting a tiny minority of extremists who will lash out mindlessly to seek revenge, and while it may be perfectly 'legal,' it's undoubtedly sociopathic.

Clearly the people making jokes are the sociopaths. Not the people murdering over those jokes.

We should censor ourselves based on the actions of people who are by definition insane? Why, because they will respond to reason?

/flouride is government mind-control juice! Anyone who puts it in our drinking water or advocates such a use is responsible when I fly off the handle and do something crazy. JUST STOP IT! APPEASE ME AND MY CRAZY BELIEFS!!!!!!!!

[Cirque du So-What]

43. There's pathology aplenty

and it would be nice if the extremists would voluntarily leave the planet. Problem is, they have a penchant for taking others along with them.

For the record, I'm against censorship, but I think it's a shame that some are compelled to create 'art' that they know will result in death. Is that not sociopathic? Is their refusal to practice self-censorship more important than the lives of innocents?

[4th law of robotics]

45. Perhaps they realize that social change

only comes about via confrontation and often bloodshed.

Protesting for blacks to be treated like humans was guaranteed to lead to deaths. Not so?

I think it was ok.

Perhaps shining a light on the horrors of fundamentalist islam will lead to some deaths. It may also lead to reform.

Either way coddling them and refusing to criticize them when they throw acid in some girls face because they might do something worse is not going to provide the motivation needed to change.

[Cirque du So-What]

57. I can't take such a cavalier attitude toward the lives of others

Besides, the tactic of lampooning Mohammad is not going to win hearts and minds among the vast majority of Muslims around the world. If anything, it may even provide the extremists with some fresh recruits.

I have no problem with criticizing the abuses of fundamentalist Islam, but lampooning Mohammad is not the correct way to do it.

[4th law of robotics]

62. Well you're going to have to take it

this is a free country, I can say what I wish.

And I'm not "cavalier" about their deaths. I simply don't blame the people doing the talking for the actions of the people doing the killing.

Besides, the tactic of lampooning Mohammad is not going to win hearts and minds among the vast majority of Muslims around the world. If anything, it may even provide the extremists with some fresh recruits.

What will convince them not to kill over their fairy tales?

Because outlawing blasphemy doesn't seem to work (since these riots are occurring mostly in places where those laws are in effect).

I have no problem with criticizing the abuses of fundamentalist Islam, but lampooning Mohammad is not the correct way to do it.

How else will they learn to be adult human beings? If you can't take the thought of someone else laughing at your beliefs without killing them then you don't deserve to share this planet with the rest of us.

[Cirque du So-What]

65. You misunderstand my use of the word 'take'

I didn't mean it in the sense of Twisted Sister's 'We're not gonna take it.' I meant it in the sense of a sea captain telling the helmsman to 'take' a southerly tack. Besides, I've already expressed my acknowledgement of 1st Amendment rights.

As for the rest, we'll just disagree. If one were truly interested in reforming the abuses of fundamentalist Islam, one would focus upon those abuses instead of calling a religion with over 1 billion adherents 'fairy tales' and publishing childish cartoons. I shit upon the notion that 'reform' is on the minds of these so-called 'artists.'

[dmallind]

90. Do Islamist extremists never kill anyone *unless* Muhammed is lampooned

I think on an aggregate scale we'd be hard-pressed to show a clear causal correlation either way.

And what else should we be too scared to say lest medieval loonies get mad at us?

[on point]

23. Pointing out they live in a fantasy built on ignorance is not hate speech

If their little minds cannot handle it so be it. They need to get in touch with reality, and reality feedback says they are fools.

[4th law of robotics]

28. All fundamentalist beliefs are pretty silly

A kind and benevolent god that watches over you and gives order to the universe?

HA!

The ancient gods slumber and will bring nothing but chaos and madness in their wake should they ever arise.

It's our job to keep them slumbering.

[valerief]

31. Magic thinking was made to be laughed at.

[KG]

32. i gotta respect fairey tales? as if.

[MattBaggins]

33. No, no and no with a side order of hell no.

None of the above.

I do not have to respect any of silly fables like Noah's Ark.

[treestar]

38. It should not be illegal

Not at all.

There is a difference between making something illegal and just saying it's not nice, polite, or a good idea.

[sakabatou]

41. There is an old addage: The truth hurts

As for it being illegal, ever hear of the 1st Amendment?

[cali]

46. ever hear of SATIRE?

[sakabatou]

48. -_-

How about the sarcasm tag? Ach, screw it.

[redqueen]

67. But if you do it that way, you don't get as much outragey attention. nt

[sakabatou]

69. ...

[Edweird]

47. I'm sorry for making you hit me because of my speech.

[Herlong]

49. Resolved

Get over it!

[L0oniX]

50. Oh bullshit!

First it was political correctness and now what... fuck all religions especially the fundie ones ...anyone is welcome to go kiss Warren Jeffs ass and his several wives too ...do we really need to elevate stupidity to the point of making it the norm so we won't offend the anti-intellectual religious stupid? Some of these stupid fucks think that getting a masters degree turns you into a liberal Democrat too ...so don't get too schooled. I won't ever respect stupidity I and don't expect many others will either.

[bhikkhu]

51. Stupidity in the furtherance of evil...

If someone has been brainwashed into believing [whatever boneheaded zero-evidence crackpot bogus mumbo-jumbo idea], usually it is for a reason. Usually that reason is not "good", not in the best interests of the brainwashed person, and not in the best interests of society in general - hence, objectively evil.

I'd agree with you to the extent of finding it tragic rather than comic, but I wouldn't ever pretend that its normal or useful in any way to live in a state of perpetual delusion, as a proxy in someone else's control.

The first step in brainwashing, btw, is disabling the mind's normal mechanisms of "will" and decision making. Organized religions are not usually very effective at it, but some are definitely moreso than others.

[Warpy]

54. Oh, screw that

If they want to spout rubbish, they can take the consequences just like the rest of us.

You want to experience hurt, go through life as an atheist.

We can't even run for office in some places. That's real persecution, cowboy, not having people giggle at you.

All religions are damned silly to outsiders. Only a theocracy can make people take them seriously enough to react violently to satire.

Fundies don't have their theocracy. Yet. Our job is to make sure they never get it and ridicule is part of that.

[rock]

55. Richard Dawkins has already addressed this issue

I agree with his assessment (paraphrased): why would we exclude the bunch that deserves criticizm the most from that criticizm?

[aquart]

56. Not in this lifetime. What a bloody, stupid idea.

That is exactly the same as allowing bigoted pharmacists and employers to decide if a woman can have legal birth control.

Screw their hurt feelings. They want to put a lock on my tongue because their faith is so shallow it can't stand disagreement? If their "faith" says they have to burn me at the stake, it would be insensitive of me to object?

Bull flaming cookies.

[trouble.smith]

58. yeah, fuck that plan.

[ruffburr]

60. Resolve this My friend

The hateful dogma that your fundamentalist beliefs espouse as God's word To the uneducated and innocent children is beyond any gall i can think of as you take wide stances in bathrooms and are convicted of pedophilia work your followers for pittance as they are expected to grovel at your feet IN THE NAME OF GOD!!!
All i can say is UP YOURS!!!

[Arugula Latte]

61. cthulu2016, apparently you needed a 25-point SARCASM tag in flashing neon.

[panzerfaust]

63. When the fundies were in charge, they did not denigrate and ridicule scientists and their beliefs ..

Instead these devout Christians tortured those who disagreed with the Holy Teachings, and then burned them to death.



No, not just the Holy Mother Church of the Roman Catholics, but the Protestants did also. I have no doubt than when/if they seize power, they will continue to do the same.

For while I do not recall if it was Calvin or Luther who, when asked why the torture of heretics continued when this had been one of the Protestant complaints about the Holy Mother Church, chillingly replied with words to the effect "If the Catholic Church was so harsh in defense of Error, how then can we be any less stringent in the defense of Truth?"

There ain't no end to defending The Truth.

I do not have the reference to hand, and it is too beautiful a day to think any more of the dark and murderous history of religion in general, and Christianity in particular - so I am going back to struggling with an amorphous green blob, which is supposed to be tree on a pastel I am working on.



I do, however, appreciate your underlying humor.

[joeybee12]

64. Did you forget?

[longship]

66. You must be confusing the USA with a theocracy.

I have respect for many religious beliefs, but not fundementalists who would use legislative fiat to shove their iron and bronze age beliefs on the people of our country.

I have no respect for people who claim that this is a Christian country. I have no respect for people who use fake faith healing to enrichen themselves at the cost of people's health and savings. I have no respect for people who think that Jesus will return and save the world when WW III happens. I have no respect for people who think the Bible is a science book to be shoved down our children's throats. And don't get me started about the haters of women, gays, immigrants, or other beliefs.

I could go on here, but I presume you get my meaning.

My resolution is to ridicule and expose these people's chicanery. And also to rigorously oppose any attempt to make such opposition illegal, like your proposed resolution. That is my right under our republic. I intend to retain that right, and so should you.

Sorry for the rant. As you can see, I feel strongly about this.

Best regards to you.

[meow2u3]

68. Personally, I think it should be illegal to HAVE fundamentalist beliefs

and act on them accordingly. I know we'd have prisons full of right-wing fundies, but the country would be better for it.

[backscatter712]

70. A couple points:

1. You can criticize the beliefs without denigrating the believers. And I think that's absolutely necessary.

2. You shouldn't criticize one particular faith any more than others. I'd like to think that as an atheist, I uphold this point.

[dmallind]

91. 1. Not in their minds you can't. 2. Why should I waste time on, say, Sikhism that is no threat

Nobody's noticeably trying to make the Granth the supreme arbiter of the laws under which I live. A huge number of very politically influential and very wealthy people are trying to do that for the Bible. Shouldn't I be more vocal about why the latter would be a stupid idea?

[banned from Kos]

71. I despise backwards retrograde religions and the worst two offenders are

Islam and Southern Baptists.

[intaglio]

72. A-a-a-nd if the fundamentalist beliefs are hateful?

Like considering gays as condemned sinners? What of excusing the beating of a wife and child as long as you use a rod no thicker than your thumb?

Fundamentalist beliefs should be denigrated and laughed at because they are foolish and laughable. To be fundamentalist requires a presumption that the Bible an inerrant text despite the forgeries, the falsehoods and the multiple edits. Fundamentalists have to suspend all critical faculties and deny all evidence that contradicts the fables of the primitive and racist societies that spawned the words they believe in.

Why should I or any democrat (small d intended) value beliefs that teach authoritarianism and an unswerving, unquestioning obedience to authorities whether spiritual or temporal?

[Occulus]

74. Thr sheer number of people who took this seriously is utterly breathtaking. n/t

[cthulu2016]

82. Works for me.

I didn't write to OP to prank people, but only to provide a vivid example of how it would feel to be yold that mocking religion is criminal.

And it seems to have been vivid.

[crazyjoe]

75. just don't say anything bad about the prophet Muhammad, you will get your head cut off.

[banned from Kos]

80. Fuck that bastard.

I like our Freedom of Speech more than I fear assholes.

[dmallind]

92. Muhammed suggested equally baseless and pointless superstitious claptrap as Smith or Hubbard

I'll let you know when the decapitators arrive.

[Indpndnt]

76. Agreed!

As in, I agree that you have relentlessly tickled my funny bone!



Do you know how painful all that laughing is?!



Well done!

[on point]

77. It is not nice to laugh at stone age thinking..

[WinkyDink]

79. Resolved: More satire needs to be taught in school!!

[SILVER__FOX52]

83. Whatever..............

[sadbear]

84. Close enough.

I rec'ed.

[sadbear]

85. Damn...you've made a lot of people look silly.

Was that your intention?

[cthulu2016]

86. No. I was not looking to make anyone look silly.

People who responded with "that's a bad idea" were correct to do so. It is, in fact, a very bad idea whether I believe it or not.

[B Calm]

88. It hurts me that people are

that fucking stupid that they'll believe the earth is only 4 thousand years old. Egads, we have to share the planet with these morons!

[Quantess]

89. As an agnostic / atheist,

religious people are annoying to me in that they feel entitled to have their beliefs taken seriously. I don't have to take their stupid beliefs seriously!

Mind you, I won't go around making fun of people's religion as long as they keep it to themselves. I am a polite person, but that could change if their stupid beliefs infringe on my life.

[slackmaster]

93. Hmmmmmmmmmm