It’s also a political & moral term.
No; because the definition you are using is both illogical and not what is actually practiced. Again; is condemning the Aztec practice of human sacrifice hate speech?
It’s also a political & moral term.
No; because the definition you are using is both illogical and not what is actually practiced. Again; is condemning the Aztec practice of human sacrifice hate speech?
Monkey, if you had even bothered to read your own link you’d see that “condemning a religion” does not even remotely meet the legal standard of hate speech in Canada (nor, to my knowledge, of anywhere else either.)
What in the world would make you think that condemning a religion amounts to hate speech anywhere? That is totally impossible to square with actual hate speech laws anywhere. Don’t you know anything at all about the subject you’re “debating”?
How embarrassing this must be for you. And Der Trish, shame on you for not noticing this and pointing it out yourself.
“Moslem” is hate speech now, because there is a racist difference between the “short O” and the “short U?”
Just to flesh-out hierophant’s post for those to busy to click on the damned link (in AMWaG’s post, the part in red),
Doesn’t sound to me like condemning a religion is hate speech according to Canadian law.
But I can understand missing that the law is about “Hate propaganda” which means “any writing, sign or visible representation that advocates or promotes genocide …” and “incit(ing) hatred against any identifiable group” given that your A Monkey With a Gun and not A Monkey With a Nominal Level of Reading Comprehension.
CMC fnord!
Oh, for Chrissake, people! Who cares about “hate speech” laws??? We’re supposed to be mocking the idiocy of people who think that Halloween is about virgin sacrifices and shit!
MOCK MOCK MOCK!!! Where’s the mocking???
Damn. :o
I hadn’t been paying much attention to who was posting here. This was obviously an oxycontin joke, and not a jab at A Monkey With a Gun. I apologize, and hope no one took offense.
Hate speech is directed against people, rather than against ideas. You should probably ensure you have your definitions straight before castigating others for ignoring them.
Hoo boy. In my 7 years as a practicing Wiccan, I don’t remember ever praying over candy. Wicca, like any religion, is a matter of free will: you can’t be forced to join. Sounds like some people need to spend some time in the others shoes before they open their yaps.
Oh, and our kids did go trick or treating this year, with full support of their Christian parents.
The closest I can think of is Devil’s Night.
I notice you didn’t deny dedicating Hallowe’en candy. What have you got to hide, eh? :dubious:
Just so I’m clear on this, if someone wicked prayed over my candy, can I get it ‘unprayed’ by having someone nice pray over it?
Damnit man, there’s candy at stake here!
I know you are joking, but there is an answer to that question: Yes. You can call down the strongholds. Or you can just be a Christian, as they can drink poison and not be harmed. (Few believe this is literal. referring instead to supernatural poison.)
What I don’t get is why so many Christians are so totally afraid of the Devil. They have an Almighty God on their side.
As for hate speech: yes it has to be against a person, not the idea, the same way Christianity is supposed to condemn sin, not the sinner. But I’ve seen posts where Der Trihs does not make this distinction.
He also seems to be incapable of realizing that not all Christians (or religious people in general) are the type he seems to hate. I almost wonder if he’s paranoid. He’s always screaming that religious people are out to get him.
Because in Christian tradition God has given the Devil permission to tempt, torment and try humans, just as with Job. If you get into a tussle with Satan you’re on your own unless and until the Big Guy steps in. A test of your faith, doncha know, all part of God’s plan, BS like that.
The upshot is that Christians can’t count on God to rescue them from the Devil.
Right here: My Name is Mok