Poll: is blasphemy a victim-less crime?
yes
no
[Show Results]
Note: This is a public poll, other users will be able to see what you voted for.
Blasphemy is a victim-less crime
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-03-2011, 09:28 AM
 
RE: Blasphemy is a victim-less crime
Some Antics, I'm always up to someantics!
Quote this message in a reply
28-03-2011, 09:37 AM
 
RE: Blasphemy is a victim-less crime
(28-03-2011 09:28 AM)blainesgirl Wrote:  Some Antics, I'm always up to someantics!

Ohhh sure, but didn't that get you arrested in Georgia? [Image: 12.gif]
Quote this message in a reply
28-03-2011, 10:05 AM
 
RE: Blasphemy is a victim-less crime
I wasn't arrested in GA, just firmly talked to.
Quote this message in a reply
28-03-2011, 10:37 AM (This post was last modified: 28-03-2011 10:56 AM by TrainWreck.)
RE: Blasphemy is a victim-less crime
(27-03-2011 07:33 PM)GassyKitten Wrote:  Actually, if we go with the supposition that there does exist an infinite supreme creator, then it remains impossible to blaspheme and thus offend that which is omniscient and omnipresent.
Good point, but the term,"blasphemy," exists and has a meaning that does not coincide with that line of reasoning.

(27-03-2011 07:33 PM)GassyKitten Wrote:  As for blasphemy making the faithful in an infinite supreme creator a victim to blasphemy, the faithful can't be made victim to an insult hurled at something else.
I am quite certain that the definition of blasphemy goes beyond just insulting the god, which is all-encompassing of the religion's ideology and practices. As I have stated previously, atheists, for some reason, avoid recognizing that gods are metaphor representatives of ideological systems - theists are not responsible for understanding that, but atheists should be (new discussion). And what I am getting at, is that a person will be accused of blasphemy if he denigrates the ideology or practices of the religion.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-03-2011, 01:32 PM
RE: Blasphemy is a victim-less crime
If blasphemy is a crime, it is up to god to teach us about it and do any punishing because of it. So let us sit here and wait for god to decide this matter, for as mortals we cannot know the thinking of an omni-potent, all knowing being. Until god speaks, we truly don't know.

PS. Nobody can speak for god, so let's just wait.

When I find myself in times of trouble, Richard Dawkins comes to me, speaking words of reason, now I see, now I see.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-03-2011, 01:44 PM
 
RE: Blasphemy is a victim-less crime
(28-03-2011 10:37 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  
(27-03-2011 07:33 PM)GassyKitten Wrote:  Actually, if we go with the supposition that there does exist an infinite supreme creator, then it remains impossible to blaspheme and thus offend that which is omniscient and omnipresent. Good point, but the term,"blasphemy," exists and has a meaning that does not coincide with that line of reasoning.
Oh, but you're wrong. Blasphemy is traditionally understood also as committing an offense that would offend God. So my prior good point, stands.
Maybe this will help you. Smile (*LINK*)





(27-03-2011 07:33 PM)GassyKitten Wrote:  As for blasphemy making the faithful in an infinite supreme creator a victim to blasphemy, the faithful can't be made victim to an insult hurled at something else.
I am quite certain that the definition of blasphemy goes beyond just insulting the god, which is all-encompassing of the religion's ideology and practices. As I have stated previously, atheists, for some reason, avoid recognizing that gods are metaphor representatives of ideological systems - theists are not responsible for understanding that, but atheists should be (new discussion). And what I am getting at, is that a person will be accused of blasphemy if he denigrates the ideology or practices of the religion.
Firstly, I would observe it's a mistake of ignorance to make the blanket statement, as you've stated previously: "atheists, for some reason, avoid recognizing that gods are metaphor(should be metaphorical) representatives of ideological systems."
Many atheists understand that. While many Theists do not. Many Theists, not just those in the Abrahamic faiths, believe in anthropomorphic deities.
TW Said: And what I am getting at, is that a person will be accused of blasphemy if he denigrates the ideology or practices of the religion. That's part of what constitutes a charge of having committed blasphemy. I thought you were aware most respondents in this thread knew that.
Quote this message in a reply
01-04-2011, 02:35 PM (This post was last modified: 01-04-2011 04:17 PM by TrainWreck.)
please learn to manipulate the html
(28-03-2011 01:44 PM)GassyKitten Wrote:  
(28-03-2011 10:37 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  
(27-03-2011 07:33 PM)GassyKitten Wrote:  Actually, if we go with the supposition that there does exist an infinite supreme creator, then it remains impossible to blaspheme and thus offend that which is omniscient and omnipresent.
Good point, but the term,"blasphemy," exists and has a meaning that does not coincide with that line of reasoning.
Oh, but you're wrong. Blasphemy is traditionally understood also as committing an offense that would offend God. So my prior good point, stands.
Theists are not responsible for understanding your good example reasoning. And, I do not understand why you would want to try to hold them to understanding it, unless you want to dismantle theism. Do you want to dismantle theism?

(28-03-2011 01:44 PM)GassyKitten Wrote:  
(28-03-2011 10:37 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  
(27-03-2011 07:33 PM)GassyKitten Wrote:  As for blasphemy making the faithful in an infinite supreme creator a victim to blasphemy, the faithful can't be made victim to an insult hurled at something else.
I am quite certain that the definition of blasphemy goes beyond just insulting the god, which is all-encompassing of the religion's ideology and practices. As I have stated previously, atheists, for some reason, avoid recognizing that gods are metaphor representatives of ideological systems - theists are not responsible for understanding that, but atheists should be. And what I am getting at, is that a person will be accused of blasphemy if he denigrates the ideology or practices of the religion.
Firstly, I would observe it's a mistake of ignorance to make the blanket statement, as you've stated previously: "atheists, for some reason, avoid recognizing that gods are metaphor(should be metaphorical) representatives of ideological systems."
Many atheists understand that.
Atheists do not understand it that way, otherwise, their arguments concerning separation of church and state would be using it. For example, it would be obviously appalling to suggest that currency be marked with the slogan,"In Democrats We Trust." Where we understand, except for the few corrupt politicians, that "Democrats," represents Democratic political ideology, which good true Democrats understand to be an all good ideology. Why be a Democrat if you do not truly believe the ideology to be for the betterment of society, and better than any individual representative who is subject to violating the ideology for selfish reasons???

Or, the Pledge, . . . "One Nation, committed to Benevolence . . ."

See how it works? Atheists would then describe the ideology of the god(s) to the theists; but as it is, atheists, do not bother, except to otherwise, raise Cain about the contradictions of the narratives - which is a contradiction of the ideology from the atheists' reasoning. But theists are not responsible for understanding these contradictions and can easily dismiss the atheists' reasoning as a logical fallacy rendering of the narrative - the legend of Jesus suggests this in social evolutionary form with the "eye for an eye - offer the other cheek" transition of logic and morality. Theists can also claim that their religion has changed to accommodate social evolution, and that the contradictions are just a part of the archive system of marking the changes. Because ultimately, the theists are doing well, and can be attributed to how their ideology has been flexible enough to allow them to maintain control of society, and society is progressing; and atheists are not in control.

There is one other discrepancy that indicates that atheists do not understand gods as allegories for ideologies, and that is their definition of religion. If atheists recognized that gods are allegorical, then they would not be so accepting of the definition,"belief and worship of gods." It would be something along the lines of belief and worship of theist ideologies, so as to make a pronounced distinction, just like many atheists make pronounced distinctions about how they define atheism.

. . . Or, courthouses having plaques quoting Asimov's, "Robot's Rules of Order."
(28-03-2011 01:44 PM)GassyKitten Wrote:  While many Theists do not. Many Theists, not just those in the Abrahamic faiths, believe in anthropomorphic deities.
Theists are not responsible for understanding the allegorical correlations to ideology.

(28-03-2011 01:44 PM)GassyKitten Wrote:  TW Said: And what I am getting at, is that a person will be accused of blasphemy if he denigrates the ideology or practices of the religion. That's part of what constitutes a charge of having committed blasphemy. I thought you were aware most respondents in this thread knew that.
That is not true - most respondents in this thread were not reasoning based on such knowledge, just as I pointed out with the separation arguments. In this discussion the overwhelming reasoning reflected that blasphemy is exclusively the denigration of the god, as an existent being.


(28-03-2011 01:32 PM)No J. Wrote:  If blasphemy is a crime, it is up to god to teach us about it and do any punishing because of it. . .


(26-03-2011 08:33 AM)GassyKitten Wrote:  One can not offend that which does not exist. Nor commit a crime against that which does not exist.

Oh my, this is you. No wonder you are confusing it all up here with the html.

You see, you would have clarified that the god is an allegory for an ideological system.

(27-03-2011 10:02 PM)Buddy Christ Wrote:  Since there is no God to react to blasphemy, the believer takes it upon themselves and acts upon God's behalf via accusation, even though it was really only in their own fragile belief system that the "crime" took place.
See, he's close, but just like the typical atheist, he has used, "belief system," which maintains a similarity to theism and a distance from the generality of ideology. It's kind of like one of the pages around here at TTA suggesting that atheists do believe in things, but does not elaborate on what those things are - ideological systems supported by others to form cohesive understanding of reality. Right - isn't that what you believe in?

What We Believe
TTA - What We Believe Wrote:It's untrue that atheists 'believe in nothing'

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Detaining someone for having done something somewhere else that isn`t a crime???? The Germans are coming 13 299 07-01-2014 08:16 PM
Last Post: WeAreTheCosmos
  India Makes Gay Sex a Crime TheBear 25 948 02-01-2014 09:58 PM
Last Post: TheBear
  Dutch senate votes to overturn law against blasphemy. Caveman 3 195 03-12-2013 09:58 AM
Last Post: Minimalist
  Blasphemy laws almost out the window! Janus 3 302 28-11-2012 08:34 AM
Last Post: Humakt
  Why Is Being Successful A Crime? Hughsie 117 3,461 02-11-2012 05:15 AM
Last Post: earmuffs
  Holocaust Denial ........ A Crime? Hughsie 91 4,926 23-03-2012 03:46 PM
Last Post: TheArcticSage
  Burning holy books is a victim-less crime TrainWreck 9 948 23-04-2011 09:54 PM
Last Post: No J.
Forum Jump: