The Forum > Article Comments > The problems with vilification legislation > Comments
The problems with vilification legislation : Comments
By Bill Muehlenberg, published 7/9/2005Bill Muehlenberg argues vilification laws are a threat to freedom of speech.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Page 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
-
- All
Posted by Philo, Wednesday, 14 September 2005 10:16:03 PM
| |
Fellow human, you started out by referring to religious literalism, then included non religion. Therefore I must agree.
Mother Teresa, was purely religious propaganda. You will always find many thousands of people from all backgrounds helping those in need. Philo, one feather does not a doona make. “I personally have been a political activist to retain our natural heritage in the Western Suburbs of Sydney.” "God will destroy those that damage the Earth [Revelation 11: 18]". If I was the resurrected christ, my posts have been to test you in regard to the creation given to you by my father. Your reaction would be exactly the same as it was, 2000 years ago. I have abused your religion, demeaned the writings you worship. Threw fact in your face, ridiculed all religions. Said, your wrong, so look beyond how you see your beliefs. You show no care, no understanding, no willingness to listen and learn. Telling you that your approach to life is wrong, falls on deaf ears. Your ridicule my beleifs, yet don't know them. All religious people would ridicule, and destroy me. You all wait for your christ to come, yet you didn't' recognise him in the past, because he came in the image of god, (human). So for all muslims, and christians you have failed in your faith for 2000 years . You will never recognise the resurrected one, because you won't change. That makes you wrong, inadequate, lacking knowledge, understanding or acceptance. So you are irrelevant to gods work, of no use to his son, because if he revealed himself and questioned your faith, you would deny, then destroy him. I can't recall any evidence where either the christ, or god directed anyone to follow books of words. But as to being a responsible part of his creation, you fail. You fail as true believers, as you do the opposite of what your god asks. Gods doctrine is within his works, not within the writings of others. You all fail. Conclusion, revelation 11: 18. Posted by The alchemist, Friday, 16 September 2005 8:07:28 AM
| |
Senor Duck....
I can’t type and often cannot spell. Regarding "you cannot believe anything a Muslims (sic.) says" I was referring specifically to matters of faith and religion. If asking about torture is your idea of hate, then you have a real problem. If I am ever “called into account” for my statements (sharia?), I will not back down or give an inch. I am very, very sure of my beliefs, and, unlike so many people here, I do not have to avoid simple questions and apply different standards to different people. Xena, I do condemn people because of the actions of “nutbags.” The nutbags are a consequence of the basic ideology of Islam and modern circumstances. I condemn people because they love and respect a man that was a slaver, murderer, torturer, and who made a lot of ‘exception’ rules for himself. I condemn them because they cannot be honest and answer my questions. I condemn them because they love and praise a man that did so many evil deeds. If Joe Anybody had done what Islam’s great prophet did, all of us would say Joe was not just a “dirty old man”, but scum. Except we are not talking Joe, are we? And why not judge everybody by the same standards? Name a person that tortured and I will condemn him or her. Xena, I don’t play games with serious issues. If Jesus or Buddha had done what Mohammed did, why would I not condemn them? Do you think that because Mohammed was “a man they (Muslims) regard as a prophet” that he should not be held accountable for his actions? Actually it can be argued that prophets, messiahs, presidents, teachers and clergy should be held to higher standards, but I do not accept this either. Yet, Muslims believe that no standards should apply to Mohammed. He cannot be criticized. This actually makes sense, because the minute a Muslim admits that his dear prophet was a murderer, slaver and torturer, not even the most fervent one can honestly stay in Islam. So the only recourse is denial. Kactuz Posted by kactuz, Saturday, 17 September 2005 7:56:53 AM
| |
My oh my, what happened to the religious (blanks), can't they stand truth. We now know the problem with religious vilification laws, there is nothing to vilify except fantasy.
So once again we have been conned by the brain dead meaningless politicians and religious (blanks), none of whom can sustain nor support their deluded fallacies. Maybe people should seriously start looking for alternative approaches to life and bypass these fools that continue to dump havoc, mayhem and confusion upon the world and its life forms. An idea would be to make politicians and the religious, prove and be responsible for what they say as well as their collusion in the detrimental outcomes they impose. If they won't, we can send them to their religious or political country of choice, so they can all live in fantasy land together. Let's ask them all to shut up or leave, and govern by consensus. With the technology we have, it wouldn't be hard to determine how people feel about ideas and policies and then implement them properly. By taking the direction, implementation and policies of our societies out of the hands of the minorities, (political parties, elite, religions, and beaurucrats) we have the chance to go forward and stop this country from becoming involved in a repeat of the religious and political destruction, that has been a major part of the history of this world. After all, without a godhead or ideological force controlling us, we can use our science to improve and save the people and the planet. Posted by The alchemist, Tuesday, 20 September 2005 12:11:17 PM
| |
Alchemist,
Thought you might be interested in this article of an atheist promoting faith in Jesus. Click here to see the story on-line: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,16654819%255E28737,00.html Posted by Philo, Tuesday, 20 September 2005 6:59:33 PM
| |
ALCHEMIST
most of what needed to be said has been. Your posts are becoming rather repetitious and devoid of significance points to debate on. You are long on 'woffle' and short on serious debating points :) I hate to be the one to inform you of this, but quantity does not equal quality in debate. In the beginning..... you just railed at everyone in joined sentences, but then we trained you to separate them a bit and be more legible, now we have to train you to actually 'say' something in your separated sentences. Why not pick an aspect of the issue, and support or negate it with some obvious research.. there's a good boy :) Posted by BOAZ_David, Tuesday, 20 September 2005 7:44:29 PM
|
The Bible gives due respect to the natural world as the first chapter relates all life and creatures to God, and makes man responsible to nurture the environment for his and all creatures sustainance. The praise of the Psalmist observes the events of the natural world and thanks God for it. The accountability at the judgment of man, holds each man accountable for his deeds on how he has treated the Earth. God will destroy those that damage the Earth [Revelation 11: 18].
So you are more religious than you imagined.
I personally have been a political activist to retain our natural heritage in the Western Suburbs of Sydney.