No, the latter would commonly be referred to as a "fairytale".
Gay footballers | Czech Republic international Jakub Jankto comes out as gay
- Thread starter Pablo76
- Start date
The Caf is a private entity, so free speech doesn't apply.
As for what is and isn't hate speech: Hate speech is generally defined as speech that attacks or deameans a person or group of people on the basis of their race, religion, nationality, gender, sexual orientation and so on.
That's what he was doing with all his law of the jungle nonsense. Anyway, let's move on.
So, when people are talking about backwards views related to someone that has a religion view that is hate speech, right?
For example, saying someone is a bigot because in his religion views he doesnt "like" homosexuality than that is hate speech. How many more should have been banned here then?
(these examples have nothing to do with my views on the subject, just trying to understand where the line is drawn in hate speech)
Spouting homophobic claptrap under the guise of religion is hate speech. Calling this out as bigotry is not. Is that clear enough for you?
Not really. I think you just stated that because its what supports your views.
"As for what is and isn't hate speech: Hate speech is generally defined as speech that attacks or deameans a person or group of people on the basis of their race, religion, nationality, gender, sexual orientation and so on."
If you target all religious people for having bigotry views that come from their religious views then, that, by itself, it's hate speech by the definition that someone stated earlier.
That's why i have a problem when people ask for action against hate speech when hate speech is something so diferent to everyone
Bigotry is bigotry whether motivated by religious beliefs or not. Calling out that bigotry is never hate speech.
Many homophobes use religion as their excuse.
You replied exactly the same thing what means you are stuck in that definition. What i get is "hate speech is only hate speech when it's against my opinion or views"
I should probably have added that you also need intent. Calling a religious person a bigot for spouting homophobia isn't generally meant to attack nor demean them, it's meant to criticise. And while they may have gotten their views from their religion, they are personally responsible for holding them.
That's not to say that bigotry against religious people can't be disguised as criticism either, and that someone calling out a religious person for their views on homosexuality can't do so in a way that can be deemed bigoted.
That's why its really hard to have "hate speech" ruling. It's something that changes by interpretation and not always it's correlated to the intent someone said something. I dindt think that post was hate speech, it was just a stupid post.
To everyone i had interactions today i cant reply anymore. talk to you guys tomorrow
This made me laugh out loud on the train and is my new favourite fact. There we go, some good has come out of this otherwise disasterous thread. Thank you sir.
You sure about that?
100%
Never once have I said that they’re hiding.
They’re not scared. They’re in relationships.
They’re just irrelevant, jobbing professionals. The equivalent of Dave in accounting.
The debate everyone is actually having is ‘Elite footballers who are gay should come out and blaze a trail’.
It’s a huge departure from a discussion on ‘Gay footballers’ who are already out, having relationships, cohabitation within their communities and club changing rooms.
My brush strokes are far broader than those used by almost everyone else commenting. Also far more accurate.
When this earth is finally rid of the absurdity of religion, people of different walks of life will not feel so ostracized. It is the buffoonery of religion that helps to keep them marginalized.
I stopped believing in fairy tales when I was ten years old, thankfully.
I stopped believing in fairy tales when I was ten years old, thankfully.
Check mate! Atheists.
I think more people should come out. If they are not going to speak for themselves, who is going to speak for them? And nobody should hold a person's sexual orientation against him/her.
And frankly, I am surprised that people still find it difficult to come out in europe. Isn't the west supposed to be 'progressive'?
And frankly, I am surprised that people still find it difficult to come out in europe. Isn't the west supposed to be 'progressive'?
exactlyYour god, whichever one of that thousands that people have dreamed up over the years, does not exist. Therefore you have no basis to make claims about what is right/wrong based on your belief in something that evidently does not exist.
The idea that people choose to be homosexual, especially given that homosexuality/homosexual tendencies are seen throughout many species of animals, is just as preposterous as -
The idea that an (imaginary) god would make everyone in his perfect image. But unfortunately the omnipotent, all-knowing and loving god didn't see the fact that the angel he created in his own perfect image would actually turn bad. He didn't see that coming, even though he's all knowing, otherwise one would presume that the god would have just decided to not create Lucifer in the first place.
But never mind all that, because this all-loving and all-powerful god can obviously destroy the devil with one wave of his imaginary hand wherever he wanted to.
But he doesn't yet because he wants to see whether you choose to be homosexual or not before banishing you to an eternity of torture in hell, by Satan. Presumably this is something that Satan wants too - suggesting that god is actually doing what the devil wants. He's working for the devil. But he loves you because you're his perfect creation made in his perfect image, remember? Just don't be gay.
The idea that an (imaginary) god would make everyone in his perfect image. But unfortunately the omnipotent, all-knowing and loving god didn't see the fact that the angel he created in his own perfect image would actually turn bad. He didn't see that coming, even though he's all knowing, otherwise one would presume that the god would have just decided to not create Lucifer in the first place.
But never mind all that, because this all-loving and all-powerful god can obviously destroy the devil with one wave of his imaginary hand wherever he wanted to.
But he doesn't yet because he wants to see whether you choose to be homosexual or not before banishing you to an eternity of torture in hell, by Satan. Presumably this is something that Satan wants too - suggesting that god is actually doing what the devil wants. He's working for the devil. But he loves you because you're his perfect creation made in his perfect image, remember? Just don't be gay.
Born and grew up in a village of 200 people in Serbia, Racism and homophobia was in the DNA of the people living there, I have so many stories but I wont go there. Still managed to form my own opinion about everything, In the end it's up to each and every individual.
Check mate? There is nothing ‘Godly’ about the vile hatred posted above. The bible was written by human beings not god and is their interpretation with added bias, politics included. If Jesus really was the son of god then the central message was treat others as you would have them treat you. Therefore, you need to empathise with others. I am not sure whether you have the emotional intelligence to do this but you could try.
That poster was joking.
That's definitely not hate speech mate. It's not an attack to point out bigotry.
If the devil is punishing those who were bad,
Isn’t the devil good?
So god supposedly created gays, but it’s not natural? Free will? Well then god knows much about the future as anyone of us does, therefore he’s not all-powerful.
Nothing about religion makes sense.
If you want to believe in god do so, but keep it to yourself and don’t expect those who don’t share your belief to live according to your views.
If you think that those who act sinfull will end up in hell - well fine but that’s not your problem so bug-off.
Whereas previously
It seems you have changed your call out. Still it's pleasing to see that you have backed off from the idea that Ireland is less anti-gay than the UK. One of your own countrymen has also pointed this out.
attacking religious groups is classed as hate speech. Religion is mostly divine bigotry therefore.........
The existence of God is not provable or unprovable. this is your opinion. People can make claims about what is right or wrong if that is their beliefs. Here in England, one of our values is religious freedom of expression. Thus people are free to have these views based off religion.
All religion is bigotry. They just believe that their bigotry is divine. (Christopher Hitchens). with this in mind, as people are allowed religious freedom and in many countries, their divine bigotry is protected under law, you attacking their divine bigotry can be seen as hate speech.
Calling out bigotry is not an attack.
Criticising the concept of religion (as well as some of the writing within relevant holy books) isn’t bigotry for feck sake.
It can only be hate speech if you're calling them out in a manner that is intended to attack and demean them on the basis of their religion. And it wouldn't be the part where you called out their homophobia that could be considered hate speech, it would be the targeted insults you tacked on.
All forms of religion are bigotry. Would you publicly call out Islam in general and other practices from the Quran like those lot in Britain First? In doing so you could be seen as Islamophobic.
But you are attacking and demeaning them by calling their beliefs homophobic. This is an attempt to lower their public image. What are examples of attacking and demeaning someone on the basis of religion (outside of homophobic ones) and how does it differ to this? (I actually want to know).
In Islam their beliefs are that it is a sin for same sexes to act upon their sexual urges (homo sexuality is sinful) a moral aberration and that liberals are telling them what moral beliefs they can have, within Islam. I guess they think that we (westerners) cannot pick and choose for them what Islamic beliefs they can have.
I don't agree with their beliefs as I am agnostic but I cannot decide for other religious groups, what beliefs they can hold. If we were to call out the wearing of the burka, hijab, praying multiple times a day, religious courts and other Islamic practices etc, many would be labelled Islamophobic in today's society.
BF are a bunch of white supremacists masquerading as a bunch of patriots saving young white girls from the infidels who'd rape and pillage. Not sure it's quite the same as a reasoned debate on the absurdity of religion in general.
On the second part there is evidence to support that sex acts with young men/boys is ok as long as you are the penetrator. So not sure about the 'sin,' part.
first bold - what are more acceptable discussions on the absurdity of religion? would you make a public speech and say "Muslims are clueless. These people believe in an invisible man who will grant them paradise if they XYZ"
Second bold - I have never seen this evidence but I heard Milo say this. The idea behind a sin or in this case it is what is deemed "morally acceptable". Morals being the principles of right and wrong. there is significant amounts of evidence that exposing children to sexual contact from adults can lead to long term emotional issues, self harming and all kinds of fecked up shit so it is easy to prove this is morally wrong. Adults have a power dynamic over children and the older guardian has responsibility and this can be seen as abuse. Children are also emotionally immature, having not even gone through pubity yet so again I don't see why you used this example.
Could we leave the sexual abuse of children out of the silly debate about how best to tell homophobic muslims off.
Don't worry, we will find a way to be bigoted cnuts long after religion leaves our kind. It's an excuse, not the cause.
Because saying Islam has homophobic laws and views is exactly the same as Britain First or any of those. Give me a fecking break.
Yep.
completely agree.
What is your definition of homophobia? that's probably the best starting point.
Islam's views on homosexuality is based off what they regard as morally acceptable. The question is, what other aspects of Islamic morals can you or are you willing to "call out?" Britain First have gone after many aspects of it (often time making errors), but the premise of coming after Islam on their views as to whether homosexuality is morally acceptable in practice, should then be extended into any part of their religion you do not agree with. You might not like the idea of giving your daughter away, women covering up, male witnesses being worth more than a female's or the whole religion entirely.