JWs anti gay video reaches over 1,000,000 views on youtube (page 5)

OrphanCrow

cofty: I provided two examples from this thread of calls for greater restrictions on freedom of religion.
One from DJS and one from Orphan Crow.

Huh??????

I did that???

slimboyfat

Excellent question wizzstick. Shame about the non-answer.

I wonder if others know the facts surrounding the Mormon church abandoning their racist teachings? As I understand it until 1978 they taught that people are born black as a punishment for failings during their prehuman existence and they were not allowed to join the Mormon priesthood.

Did that racist teaching actually become illegal or did they abandon it because of social pressure? If a church wanted to continue teaching racist beliefs would that be allowed?

I am curious because I agree with wizzsrtick these situations are comparable.

My guess is that the Mormon church changed because of social pressure rather than actually be ruled illegal. I think a similar dynamic will play out with Watchtower bigotry. It won't be made illegal but it will become so socially unacceptable that they have to change.

The Watchtower says "people can change".

Well I say "bigots can change!"

cofty

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

So who do the Watchtower need permission from to say that they believe gay relationships are a sin?

cofty

Excellent question wizzstick. Shame about the non-answer. - SBF

I did answer. If wizzstick wants to make the question more specific I will do the same with the answer.

until 1978 they [the Mormons] taught that people are born black as a punishment for failings during their prehuman existence - SBF

Of course it should not be illegal to teach that sort of nonsense. People who teach it should be ridiculed mercilessly but they should have the freedom of speech to say it.

Does freedom of speech only apply to things you agree with?

wizzstick

My point is around the limits of freedom of speech.

For example, there have been some video's on social media post Brexit showing racist attitudes.

Are they utterly wrong?

Or do they fall under the bracket of freedom of speech?

Do you feel there are limits to freedom of speech Cofty?

When you write:

Telling them they will end up in hell if they don't accept certain superstitions is child abuse.

It feels like you do believe that there are limits.

Would you feel comfortable re-writting that statement to apply to a teenager like this:

Telling them they will die at Armageddon if they don't accept the Bible is right about condemning their sexuality, is abuse.

Therefore would you not agree that the WT (and other Christian groups) were wrong and pushing freedom of speech too far?

cofty

Do you feel there are limits to freedom of speech Cofty?

Direct incitement to violence is illegal as it should be. However it is a clause that is sometimes abused to limit all criticism of others. It should be applied cautiously.

Would you feel comfortable re-writting that statement to apply to a teenager like this: "Telling them they will die at Armageddon if they don't accept the Bible is right about condemning their sexuality, is abuse."

Yes it is mental abuse. Of course it is. No it should not be illegal. All versions of theism are abusive. The correct response is to dany all special privilege and respect to religion and oppose them with reason and education.

Therefore would you not agree that the WT (and other Christian groups) were wrong and pushing freedom of speech too far?

Yes of course wrong. I have 18 thousand posts explaining how wrong. Not one of those posts asks for stupidity to be made illegal.

pushing freedom of speech too far?

No. Are you seriously asking for the preaching of the christian gospel to be made illegal? If not then who gets to choose which harmful religious doctrines we should tolerate.

sparrowdown

I 'd hazard a guess that are plenty of people religious and otherwise who do not like/ agree/accept homosexuality but not one of those people come directly to my door to tell me what they believe.

Only JWs and the odd mormon has ever come directly to my door hoping to explain/ impose their beliefs to/on me in the hope that I would join them in believing what they believe.

I'm all for free speech, and everyones , including JW's right to believe whatever they want to believe.

What I don't agree with is WT pressuring children through manipulative animations to do their dirtywork/preaching for them at school to other children. Sophia's classmates have a rights aswell. The right to go to school and learn without a JW child telling them at recess that their mommies won't get into paradise...... for instance.

wizzstick

Thank-you for your response.

So, just to clarify, when you write this about a child:

Telling them they will end up in hell if they don't accept certain superstitions is child abuse.

You're saying that it is child abuse but acceptable under freedom of speech?

cofty

You're saying that it is child abuse but acceptable under freedom of speech?

I'm saying it should not be illegal for a christian parent to tell their children that those who do not accept Jesus will end up in hell.

By the way, Islam is even more obsessed with hell than any christian group. Shall we also ban Islam?

We should strip all religions of every privilege and expose their death cult with debate and education. We should ridicule such risible superstitions mercilessly. We should not ban stupid ideas even if they are harmful.

If you go down that route, who gets to choose?

wizzstick

You did previously say:

If we are asking for governments to get involved in limiting the rights of religions to state their beliefs I would suggest we start with mainline theism.

But you seem to have shifted a bit to:

We should not ban stupid ideas even if they are harmful.

You're right, you can't ban stupid ideas. You can't ban someone from believing that the earth is flat. But, as nuts as that idea is, by and large it doesn't harm people.

But should beliefs that cause harm be allowed to be preached?

As you stated above:

If we are asking for governments to get involved in limiting the rights of religions to state their beliefs...

If the teaching of hellfire to children warrants the 'limiting the rights of religion to state their beliefs' it's not unreasonable to apply that 'limiting...to state their beliefs' to teaching children that Gay people can change when that is a) not a view shared by the scientific community, and b) will cause a lot of harm to the children who will grow up gay or have gay parents.

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

Share this