You sir, are absolutely correct.
>> ^radx:

Blasphemy! The best joke is "Nice Beaver".

Blasphemy! The best joke is "Nice Beaver".

Emma Watson without her british accent?! BLASPHEMY!

I'm sorry... how exactly does one apologize for being a supporter of atrocious medieval practices? And how exactly did he apologize?

He posted a completely idiotic rant on his page, not apologizing mind you, but excusing himself. Completely diferent.

Here's what he said:

I never called for the death of Salman Rushdie; nor backed the Fatwa issued by the Ayatollah Khomeini--and still don’t. The book itself destroyed the harmony between peoples and created an unnecessary international crisis.
When asked about my opinion regarding blasphemy, I could not tell a lie and confirmed that--like both the Torah and the Gospel--the Qur’an considers it, without repentance, as a capital offense. The Bible is full of similar harsh laws if you’re looking for them.[10] However, the application of such Biblical and Qur’anic injunctions is not to be outside of due process of law, in a place or land where such law is accepted and applied by the society as a whole... [11]

So basically he's saying: "hey, I didn't ask for his head. But if a court thinks his head should be cut off, then I'm ok with it". He's a fucking worthless piece of shit, who tries to cover his stance on this subject. Oh, and please notice the line about how the book destroyed the harmony between peoples and bla bla bla... OH... so it's the books' fault that people like you are idiots?? Oh.. what a wonderful apology.

1) Muslims aren't a race. 2) It has absolutely nothing to do with not liking Muslims. It has everything to do with not liking governments that bend over backward for oppressive religions. Notice how this video is about a crazy American not realizing that government and religion are supposed to be separate in the US--well, that's not something you escape by going to Europe.



Even England still has blasphemy laws on the books from hundreds of years ago, but they're never enforced. Actual instances of people being prosecuted for blasphemy in Europe are very few and far between.



The UK is a surveillance state. I know it makes Brits sad when people say it, but they have more CCTV cameras per capita than any other country in the world.



Depends how the cameras are used. The mere existence of CCTV cameras on the streets is not necessarily a bad thing.



There is legislation that would allow the government to store every email and website you send/visit.



That would be very very bad, but the law hasn't actually been passed yet. It was just proposed. Surveilance of the internet is worse than surveilance of public streets because:



1. Nearly all internet crimes are victimless crimes except where people are using the internet to plan to do something IRL. There is no such thing as getting mugged on the internet, and viruses/hacking are nearly 100% avoidable as a matter of personal responsibility without much need for policing.



2. There is an expectation of privacy in your personal communications that does not exist when you're walking down a public street. If 1000 other people walking down that street can see it too, why are you worried about one more guy watching it on CCTV?



3. People can and will use encryption to circumvent any and all attempts at policing the internet, so don't even bother. Internet anarchy is inevitable so you might as well accept it.




Anyone charged with any sort of offense has his/her DNA stored permanently (England and Wales).



This is exactly the same in principle as fingerprinting. I've got no problem with it.


There are (different link) Sharia courts in the UK.
It's not my country, so they can do whatever they want with it, but I definitely wouldn't move there if I were upset about the Republicans' stance on religion, or the police, or either party's stance on wiretapping, or any of the other things we've generally been pissed off about in the United States. Except for the socialized medicine thing. I could go for that.




Separate courts for Sharia law are bad, but is that really much different from a corporation making employees agree to resolve all civil disputes with the employer via binding arbitration with a particular arbitrator? In the latter case there's sort of coercion/adhesion going on. If both sides were really free to choose and agreed upon using a particular arbitrator to resolve their civil disputes, then there'd be no problem. If e.g. Muslim women in abusive relationships are being forced my their husbands to use these separate courts, that's terrible, but I haven't seen anything to substantiate that or anything similar.

@jwray: 1) Muslims aren't a race. 2) It has absolutely nothing to do with not liking Muslims. It has everything to do with not liking governments that bend over backward for oppressive religions. Notice how this video is about a crazy American not realizing that government and religion are supposed to be separate in the US--well, that's not something you escape by going to Europe. There seem to be a lot of laws against blasphemy popping up.

I never said that the US was "more free" than the UK, or said that the US was better. I said that the UK was not better than the US, though. They're just fucked up in different ways.

The UK is a surveillance state. I know it makes Brits sad when people say it, but they have more CCTV cameras per capita than any other country in the world. There is legislation that would allow the government to store every email and website you send/visit. Anyone charged with any sort of offense has his/her DNA stored permanently (England and Wales).

There are (different link) Sharia courts in the UK.

It's not my country, so they can do whatever they want with it, but I definitely wouldn't move there if I were upset about the Republicans' stance on religion, or the police, or either party's stance on wiretapping, or any of the other things we've generally been pissed off about in the United States. Except for the socialized medicine thing. I could go for that.

no regrets??? blasphemy... It's Non, Je ne regrette rien, DAMN IT!

i don't mind covers, as there are pretty decent ones. But I fucking HATE translated songs.

But the old lady sang ok I guess.

I'm not the one making the claim a magical invisible sky god with a zombie for a son is real without a shred of evidence supporting said claim. I'm not the one claiming that a global flood caused by a vengeful universal overseer destroyed everything on the planet, but was saved by a 700 year old man. Somehow said old man managed to gather and save millions of species (in pairs mind you) to prevent them from going extinct. I'm not the one making the claim that the Earth is 6000 years old, and that all mankind descended from two humans... one of which was created from a rib-bone. Never mind the fact that their children would have had to participate in incest for at least a number of generations before there were enough individuals where one could 'convince' one's self that they were no longer participating in incestuous relations. I am not the one claiming that winged humanoids live in the sky, and that red horned cloven hoofed demonoids live below the ground. I am not the one claiming that if you don't bow down and be subservient to said jealous sky-god, that you will end up frying in a so-called 'lake of fire' in the underworld and suffer eternally.. somehow... long after your corporeal remains have long become worm shit.

I am not the one claiming any such nonsense. I am simply indicating that it is what it is. Nonsense. Mother goose stories have more consistency to them that the bunk spewed by the bible and the child molesting men that preach it.

It is not my duty to prove anything. It is yours.. as a so-called believer to prove it to us. To explain the inconsistencies and the hypocrisy in the bible. If the bible is 'God's true word', then it should be taken literally in it's entirety. By simply calling things metaphor, or discarding entire sections of the said 'holy book' out of convenience, or because you don't like it... doesn't help prove a religious persons point. Take it as it is. Literally. Then start enslaving people from neighboring states, and protest against the state to bring back stoning as a valid punishment for heretical behavior... like me.

Blasphemy: Is a victimless crime.

>> ^r10k:

Before trying to figure that side of things out, work on your basic theology some more (ie: learn about the bible properly). When you have it so completely out of whack, it makes your thoughts on that topic sound utterly confusing.
Ah wait, I just read the bit where you don't believe in any of it anyway. In that case, welcome to the "I have no idea about anything but I'll just dribble on with a bunch of pointless thoughts anyway" club.
>> ^honkeytonk73:
So.. if Jesus was the product of God impregnating a virgin to give birth to himself so that he could kill himself to make a point having something to do with sin.. that really didn't need to be done in the first place. When one hangs an image of tortured Jesus in a Church. Then one would certainly be depicting a graven image. Commandment #2 is now being broken in most every Christian church across the globe and around the necks of many Christians as well.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Blasphemy.

BLASPHEMY!!!

The second rainbow of a double rainbow should have the colors INVERTED, red to blue!!!

ITS WHY THEY'RE SO FULL-ON ALL-THE-WAY!!!

You mean like executions for heresy & blasphemy, or Indulgences? Like I said, the only difference is 10 to 15 centuries of establishment.

Yep, any religion still practicing or defending such practices can be thrown on the burn pile. Are you under the impression that your local christian churches are secretly practicing executions for blasphemy? If you are, stop wasting your time on this forum and report them to your local police, and they'll put the brakes on it asap.

Are you more moderately under the impression that your local churches are defending those practices? If so I'd strongly recommend double checking that belief before making the accusation, as I'm aware of many churches against which your accusations would be blatantly false.

If neither of those are true, and you don't believe the local churches are practicing or advocating executions for heresy, then I'd ask how your question has ANYTHING at all to do with what I said?

>> ^bcglorf:

^
Beautiful, you hate religion so much your willing to elevate something like Scientology into it's ranks.
When the Christians and Muslims start suing people for distributing copies of the Koran and Bible under copyright violation you can class them together.
When they start charging people thousands of dollars for private, closed doors viewings of small, select teachings from only parts of the Bible and Koran you can class them together.

You mean like executions for heresy & blasphemy, or Indulgences? Like I said, the only difference is 10 to 15 centuries of establishment.

But wait! GOD gave us this planet and it is our domain to be used as we see fit - the animals, plants, and resources are gifts to man... and we are made in his image, thus we ARE him, so anything we do is HOLY and justified, hence we really can't screw up, for our actions are blessed from upon high,....unless you happen to be muslim, then you are stupid, and sitteth upon our OIL. We cannot harm our god-bequeathed domain, for it is blasphemy to think otherwise. We are simply following HIS plan. For to believe that we are petty, arrogant, fucktards destroying the planet like a giant wrecking ball is to believe that HE is a giant fucktard as well, and this is dimming to GOD's pleasing light, shining forthwtih from his loins. Alas, for this planet is OURS and we must be fruitful, multiply, dominate all species, and spread the truth..., and enormous shit-piles, among the phillistines, for they are sinners. alackaday, alas, hallelujah, behold!

*homme - manly men doing manly things
*europe - or alternatively *europa (to include jupiter's moon as well )
*90s
*godless (or *atheism, or even *blasphemy)
*talks No touching!
*eew for things that are eew.
*evil
*good
*douche
*sad (opposed to * happy and to differentiate from * dark)
*tragedy (opposed to comedy and happy)
*cartoon (sorta already done with woohoo)
*supershort (videos under 20 seconds)
*fire since we got water now
*abuse (of power, of anything. Bound to depress you eventually)
*depressing (might be covered by dark)
*sifter (for videos with sifters )

Those are a few off the top of my head

Blasphemy! Everyone knows today's sound cards were created by Him, in the image of His soundcard.