JWs anti gay video reaches over 1,000,000 views on youtube (page 3)

LoveUniHateExams

How a person acts out their beliefs is based upon individual choice, not upon belief itself - this may be true in lots of instances but I'm still not totally convinced by this. For example, JWs refuse blood transfusions based upon the belief itself (taking blood into one's body is wrong), not upon individual choice or interpretation. There's only one way that JWs can interpret their 'no blood' doctrine.

Returning to homosexuality, there's only one way JWs can interpret their beliefs about homosexuality.

This should be a matter for Honourable Members of Parliament.

DJS

This should be a matter of society in general and those specifically harmed by such hateful views, beliefs, teachings and verbiage.

Thank god for the world wide web, the Dislike button and capitalism with a soul.

Ame SF

Okay that video is likely the most bigoted and hateful video I have ever seen.

What Sofia stated about how everyone should be allowed to love anyone they want and not be judged is a mind set that should be encouraged... But instead the mother pulls out the same old card JW parents use today,"People have their own ideas about what is right and wrong." I would say back,"That includes you mom."

But on the other hand, I'd probably get bopped in the head by her.

cofty

Disappointed by people's contempt for freedom of belief and freedom of speech.

There is no "permission" involved in what people think. But there is permission involved in what they say - OC

Really? A religion is not allowed to voice its sincerely held opinion about sexuality?

Will respond later.

Coded Logic

Crofty, allow me to help you out here. I think there's a fundamental disconnect between your position on what people have a legal right to say vs. most others on this forum who are addressing what's socially acceptable to say.

Freedom of speech is the right to honestly express your opinions without fear of being censured, fined, imprisoned or killed by the State. But freedom of speech is NOT freedom from criticism or contrary views.

The Society is free to preach their hate - and the rest of us are free to call them out on their bigotry.

cofty

I think there's a fundamental disconnect between your position on what people have a legal right to say vs. most others on this forum who are addressing what's socially acceptable to say.

Orphan Crow said the opposite.

The Society is free to preach their hate

7 people "disliked" my comment that religions should be free to say what they believed. These 7 people are enemies of a free society.

Political correctness must not be used as a cover for the suppression of freedom of speech.

Coded Logic

Well I very nearly disliked your comment as well. Not because I don't think people should have a right to freedom of speech but because I felt you we causing confusion between what a person has a right to say vs. what people should say. SBF was in no way suggesting that that the WT's rights should be trodden upon. Rather, they were correctly noting that people will no longer have an apatite for such bigotry.

And I don't think people were "disliking" your comment because they're against religious freedom of speech. I think they were "disliking" a perceived down talking to SBF.

slimboyfat

I support free speech. It's not the assertion of free speech in itself that is objectionable about your comment, but the sneering irrelevance of the comment, taken at face value. Who is suggesting JWs should be locked up? What I actually said was that their views are increasingly unacceptable and they will probably disown them within ten years. How do you get from that to denying free speech?

Whenever there's a thread about shunning I don't see you declaring they have a perfect right to shun.

Whenever there's a thread about blood I don't see you declaring they've a perfect right to oppose blood transfusion.

Maybe you think those things, yet for some reason don't feel the need to say them all the time.

Yet whenever there is a thread about how bigoted the Watchotwer's statements are you feel compelled to declare that, while you oppose bigotry, JWs nevertheless have a perfect right to state bigoted beliefs.

Why is that?

Coded Logic

Omg, SBF and I agree on something!

cofty

Who is suggesting JWs should be locked up? - SBF

Nobody. Why do you ask?

What I actually said was that their views are increasingly unacceptable and they will probably disown them within ten years. How do you get from that to denying free speech? - SBF

I didn't get that from it at all. I joined in the conversation with the comment - "I disagree with the Watchtower's opposition to gay relationships but anybody who cares about freedom should defend their right to say it."

It wasn't about you.

Seven people disagree that they have a right to state their beliefs about sexuality. Those seven people are enemies of a free society.

Whenever there's a thread about shunning I don't see you declaring they have a perfect right to shun.

They do.

Whenever there's a thread about blood I don't see you declaring they've a perfect right to oppose blood transfusion.

They do.

Maybe you think those things, yet for some reason don't feel the need to say them all the time.

Why should I? I have responded to the issues of shunning and blood the only way that is logical. By exposing why their views are wrong. The same applies to this issue. They have a perfect right to state that they are opposed to gay marriage. Calls to restrain that freedom of religion is illiberal.

5 people, the US Cinstitution, The SCOTUS, Russia extremist laws, Switzerland acclimation laws, The Hate Speech laws in many countries all say the same thing. You can believe whatever you wish. Practicing those beliefs, which includes speech, videos, etc. , otoh, has limits. - DJS

There is no "permission" involved in what people think. But there is permission involved in what they say and do. - OC

JWs anti gay video reaches over 1,000,000 views on youtube

Share this