Page 28 of 76 FirstFirst ...
18
26
27
28
29
30
38
... LastLast
  1. #541
    Quote Originally Posted by Christan View Post
    i am just saying it should be a hate crime, not a...blasphemy crime.
    Or heh...maybe even both, religions deserve as much protections as anything else.
    That doesn't make sense. Hate speech and blasphemy would be more protection than everything else gets because they are only covered by hate speech.

  2. #542
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Kenji87 View Post
    Maybe it's just me, but I don't see the problem!
    Since when is it illegal to burn a book?
    Since the west started importing people from places where that is the case, for this particular book.

  3. #543
    I am Murloc!
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark, Europe
    Posts
    5,077
    Quote Originally Posted by GoblinP View Post
    Since the west started importing people from places where that is the case, for this particular book.
    If my google serves.. since 1866, paragraph 140 in the danish penal code. Was that the time we started importing these people? Or are you just making things up?

  4. #544
    Banned Nitro Fun's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Born in USA, currently living in Taipei
    Posts
    1,760
    Quote Originally Posted by Christan View Post
    stop baiting people.
    Quote Originally Posted by Christan View Post
    Btw, when i say he should be charged, not saying he should serve time, maybe community service/ having to take a sensitivity class for the emotionally ignorant.
    lol

    10chars

  5. #545
    Quote Originally Posted by procne View Post
    I'm not getting your point here. Are they going to prosecute you if you say that horrible thing, but not in the name of religion? As in the court?
    What kind of law allows that? From what I know blasphemy laws are centered around disallowing people to deface religious symbols with the purpose of offending said religion. How does that apply to the situation you presented?
    The point is it's biased.

    You are allowed to say certain bad things in the name of religion that you are not allowed to say against religion. Because... muh religious freedom!

  6. #546
    As an atheist, how can I be blasphemic if I don't believe in the content I burn?
    I level warriors, I have 48 max level warriors.

  7. #547
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Xarkan View Post
    If my google serves.. since 1866, paragraph 140 in the danish penal code. Was that the time we started importing these people? Or are you just making things up?
    I hate to break it to you, but that wasn't a specific reference to the law, but to the mindset.

  8. #548
    The Lightbringer Christan's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    ATX
    Posts
    3,143
    Quote Originally Posted by Minifie View Post
    Once again, you are using emotion in a situation that is easily resolved by logic. Burning the Quran should be protected in a modern nation, laws are not created to protect feelings, and should not be created as such.
    Actually that is exactly what they are for, murder by itself may lessen strain on society, and the murdered person isnt a living victim.
    It is illegal to give meaning to the moral implications of the living relatives/friends having to go through..emotional pain.

    A sex video is fine to post, unless it is a ....revenge posting, if your partner doesnt care in most states at least in the us no charges will be brought up,

    Again someone 'feels' violated by having their 'video' posted, they have their emotions protected by laws.

    Every law can be distilled down to protecting emotion in some form or manner.
    a rich altruistic person may not give a damn if theyre robbed because the robber likely needs the cash, most people will be emotionally hurt and file a report

    Laws - the written moral code for your region, as morals are designed specifically to what makes people in a region feel violated


    So yes, emotion plays a HUGE roll in whether something is legal or not....or corporations...thats another topic though.
    Still I cry, tears like pouring rain, Innocent is my lurid pain.

  9. #549
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Xarkan View Post
    No (?) but in the context of this thread

    In Denmark you can paint pictures of Muhammed with explosives and mass distribute them insinuating all muslims are terrorists

    I may not be in favor of this particular law but lets not paint this thing as something it is not, Denmark is not how this thread present it
    Does Denmark have hate speech laws?
    Yes/no.
    Beyond that, this tangent does not interest me.

  10. #550
    I am Murloc!
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Baden-Wuerttemberg
    Posts
    5,367
    Quote Originally Posted by DesMephisto View Post
    As an atheist, how can I be blasphemic if I don't believe in the content I burn?
    baah, you're doing it wrong. only the opinion of religion followers count, silly you.

    /s

    yup, it's sad.

  11. #551
    Quote Originally Posted by zorkuus View Post
    The point is it's biased.

    You are allowed to say certain bad things in the name of religion that you are not allowed to say against religion. Because... muh religious freedom!
    But you're still mixing 2 separate things - hate speech and blasphemy laws. Also, "saying certain bad things" is not a hate speech right away.

    Blasphemy laws simply disallow to deface religious symbols to offend followers of said religion. It doesn't even have to be hate speech.
    I have enough of EA ruining great franchises and studios, forcing DRM and Origin on their games, releasing incomplete games only to sell day-1 DLCs or spill dozens of DLCs, and then saying it, and microtransactions, is what players want, stopping players from giving EA games poor reviews, as well as deflecting complaints with cheap PR tricks.

    I'm not going to buy any game by EA as long as they continue those practices.

  12. #552
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Christan View Post
    Actually that is exactly what they are for, murder by itself may lessen strain on society, and the murdered person isnt a living victim.
    It is illegal to give meaning to the moral implications of the living relatives/friends having to go through..emotional pain.

    A sex video is fine to post, unless it is a ....revenge posting, if your partner doesnt care in most states at least in the us no charges will be brought up,

    Again someone 'feels' violated by having their 'video' posted, they have their emotions protected by laws.

    Every law can be distilled down to protecting emotion in some form or manner.
    a rich altruistic person may not give a damn if theyre robbed because the robber likely needs the cash, most people will be emotionally hurt and file a report

    Laws - the written moral code for your region, as morals are designed specifically to what makes people in a region feel violated


    So yes, emotion plays a HUGE roll in whether something is legal or not....or corporations...thats another topic though.
    Have to disagree with everything you said. Laws dont serve emotion and are basically a F.. off or else thing. If you go mess with someone else, doesnt matter why, what your problem is, why that person irritates you emotionally, you get punished and you should be.

    If you go rob someone, youre the one doing the robbing, thus guilty. if you kill someone, youre doing the killing. Basically, you interfere with someones freedom. Someone burning a garbage book however doesnt interfere with your freedoms in any way.

  13. #553
    Quote Originally Posted by Boomzy View Post
    This is why people who call America a "Free Country" are still right. :P
    Agreed. America takes the cake in this regard.

    A country like Denmark is among the freest in Europe, but there is still much work to be done.

    Paragraph 266 (racism-paragraph) and paragraf 144 (Blasphemy-paragram) both need to go, and once they're gone, it is my impression that we will be pretty close to the US in this regard. Criticism of Islam will remain dangerous, however, as we have hundred of thousands of poorly integrated, fundamentalist muslims in Scandinavia alone and borders that are still quite open. So while we will soon have legal freedom to criticize Islam (paragraph 144 will probably go...), we will not have de-facto freedom because our government have not only tolerated, but downright celebrated, the presence of so many islamic fundamentalists around here.
    They have only recently begun to turn, but they came too late. And with too little.
    Last edited by Pengekaer; 2017-02-25 at 10:59 PM.

  14. #554
    Quote Originally Posted by rym View Post
    Actually, every basic law and every western constitution protects the right for religion. Which includes protecting its temples and holy books.

    I dont see anything wrong about that.
    These laws are meant to protect from the government.

  15. #555
    Quote Originally Posted by procne View Post
    But you're still mixing 2 separate things - hate speech and blasphemy laws. Also, "saying certain bad things" is not a hate speech right away.
    Anything included in hate speech laws already cover the important stuff in blasphemy laws, making blasphemy laws redundant. the only reason they exist is because religious people aren't fine with hate speech laws only covering the important stuff, they also want special privaledges for the other stuff. To the point that blasphemy laws are often so vague that mere criticism of religion can be interpreted (and charged?) as blasphemy.
    Blasphemy laws simply disallow to deface religious symbols to offend followers of said religion.
    Errr nope? They also disallow speech.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law

    I can't believe this has to be defended when our own politicians largely agree such laws are archaic.
    Last edited by zorkuus; 2017-02-25 at 11:00 PM.

  16. #556
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by rym View Post
    Actually, every basic law and every western constitution protects the right for religion. Which includes protecting its temples and holy books.

    I dont see anything wrong about that.
    A LOT of people died and went to prison in Europe thanks to blasphemy laws.

  17. #557
    Religious freedom means freedom from government oppression. Individuals should be able to do whatever they like as long as it doesn't violate other laws, such as those against murder and assault. Beyond that, people should be able to say what they want and burn what they want as protected by freedom of speech and expression. This should also, in my opinion, include the freedom of a private business to hire who they want.

  18. #558
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Boomzy View Post
    This is why people who call America a "Free Country" are still right.
    And this is why as an American, Im gonna print out that garbage book and burn it on the 4th of July (too cheap to actually buy it).

  19. #559
    Quote Originally Posted by Baikalsan View Post
    A LOT of people died and went to prison in Europe thanks to blasphemy laws.
    The use of threads and reprisal to make people conform is a very German thing in general. Berufsverbot serves as a nice post-WW2 example of the German way of governing and dealing with people who do not conform.

    This hasn't changed since the nazi-days in principle, the germans still use reprisals and threads to bring dissidents in line. Only the reprisals have gotten much less severe, which is a step forward, to be fair.
    Last edited by Pengekaer; 2017-02-25 at 11:07 PM.

  20. #560
    I am Murloc!
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark, Europe
    Posts
    5,077
    Quote Originally Posted by GoblinP View Post
    Does Denmark have hate speech laws?
    Yes/no.
    Beyond that, this tangent does not interest me.
    The tangent proves the point though, the existance of hate speech laws in themselves does not show how they apply. You can express a rather wide variety of opinions before they apply.

    This is not to say the laws should exist (Though they do for a reason unlike the blasphemy one, we saw what was going on in Germany and acted with law, refer to probably a november 9th to 10th 1938ish.. it is germany so the date is probably right)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •