Rethink over Christ 'porn' film ban

It sounds as if its going to be naff.
I'd much rather watch real pr0n.

The only religious film thats ever had m,uch of an effect on me, with its graphicness is "Passion of Christ" where he got whipped to bits.
It diddnt make me think so much about him suffering for me, but it did make me think that the poor guy had really gone through the mill.
 
aamirsaab said:
I hope they don't release this movie...but then someone would cry: freedom of speech.
Click to expand...

Id be the first one to do that. Very proudly and loudly.

If sensitivities of certain groups of people is accepted as a reason to curtail freedom of speech, then surely sensitivities of other groups of people should be accepted as a reason to curtail freedom of religion. Id imagine certain sexual minorities are quite offended with the idea of them having to be trialed and punished in a "perfect" society.

Unless everyones feelings, sensitivities, and what they hold important are taken into consideration regardless of ones gender, race, sexual orientation, religion etc. without favoring one group over another, I dont really see any basis for banning this film or anything other that criticises or even simply just tries to insult religions or religious people or religious feelings.
 
Suomipoika said:
Id be the first one to do that. Very proudly and loudly.

If sensitivities of certain groups of people is accepted as a reason to curtail freedom of speech, then surely sensitivities of other groups of people should be accepted as a reason to curtail freedom of religion. Id imagine certain sexual minorities are quite offended with the idea of them having to be trialed and punished in a "perfect" society.
Click to expand...

Indeed, well said. Muslims should be very careful about pushing for censorship in countries in which they do not form the majority. It's a slippery slope on which they will lose their balance quickly. They simply lack the public support to push through the censorship they want, while at the same time empowering those who disagree with their religious doctrine.
 
Very good point. You call for a ban on blasphemy against mohammed, and you wind up with a headscarf ban.
 
Y'know Blasphemy was only changed as regards the UK law last month or so.
before that, you could be jailed for it.

Of course that would mean jailing the whole blinking country!
 
KAding said:
Indeed, well said. Muslims should be very careful about pushing for censorship in countries in which they do not form the majority. It's a slippery slope on which they will lose their balance quickly. They simply lack the public support to push through the censorship they want, while at the same time empowering those who disagree with their religious doctrine.
Click to expand...
And this has what to do with the British Board of Film Classification rethinking a Christ 'porn' film ban?

Peeps, there are plenty of other threads facilitating Muslim-bashing/criticism.
 
Last edited:
:sl: and Hello
Suomipoika said:
Id be the first one to do that. Very proudly and loudly.
Click to expand...
I thought you might! :D

Ok here's my reasoning for my comments. I personally believe that freedom of speech should be used to speak out against injustice - not to create/aid injustice (which constitutes as lies, hatred etc). Also, true freedom of speech doesn't exist (e.g. gagging orders on employees of say coca cola, so they don't blab out the secret recipie; also, slander/liable claims preventing verbal harrasment). What we do have is the ability to say what we feel about a number of things but not everything - in other words we have a limited form of freedom of speech (it does have limits).

If you have true freedom of speech, you'd end up with an unproductive and very angry society. I'll give you an example: I know of people who complain about other people. All they do is complain and backbite. Now, under freedom of speech that'd be allowed. When you're sitting down and listening (not participating) in on this stuff, it is not a nice place to be in. It's dishonourable and completely unproductive to anything (since it is not constructive criticism - it is destructive!). But, some would say : who gives a rat's ass, it's my freedom isn't it! -------> It is not easy to communicate with people who have that attitude and mind set; those guys/gals do not get far in life. Basically, there are things that you should say and there are things that you shouldn't. Having true freedom of speech means you can say whatever the hell you feel like, whenever you feel like.


Still, what does it matter now? Society is concentrating so heavily on the inidividual aspect that it cares very little for the wider community aspects. Oh well, I can live with it.
 
aamirsaab said:
I thought you might! :D
Click to expand...

:D

I dont see anyway fairly limit hateful and unproductive speech, the scale what people find negative varies so widely from person to person. Who will be the judge of what will be banned? I also think there is one important positive aspect in allowing negative speech, it acts as safeguard againts slippery slope where someone thinks speaking against injustice is hateful and unproductive.

The difference between wanting to ban hateful speech and libel/slander laws is that the latter can be easily and uniformly applied to everyone. I dont think voluntarily accepting gagging order when accepting a job as limiting freedom of speech, like I dont see Hijab ban at work place limiting freedom of religion. The solution again is really simple, find another job.

But you are right, we have some limits on freedom of speech, most of which I oppose. I guess I believe apart from libel/slander laws and incitement to violence, everything should be allowed to be said.

Personally Im not overly concerned about any "unproductiveness" freedom of speech might cause, simply because countries and societies with more freedoms seem to be on top of the list by any productivity standard.
 
Last edited:

Similar Threads

Back
Top