Living in a theocracy

[LittleGrizzly]

In defence of Christians i would think that the type of politicians introducing these laws are trying to win cheap votes rather than believe that thier religion should suffer no insult.... maybe a mix of the two for some...

TBH this is guesswork on my part... but most christians i met/talked to seem happy for criticism to be legal...

[Fragony]

These are fundamentalists in our government we call them the polder-taliban. To give you an impression

http://www.speld.nl/wp-content/uploa...et_721694b.jpg

[LittleGrizzly]

Well he hasn't exactly got a winning smile... kind of has an evil stare too...

Definetly Christian evil incarnate!

[Louis VI the Fat]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

"to hold any opinion " The fact is it is not an opinion. It is a political statement in support of a regime (based on abhorrent values) which planned an extermination.
So, the real question is "do you want that every criminal regime/politic been free to do their propaganda ?".
Then, if yes, when do you will start to resist if they come on power (and by what means?), knowing that it will be most probably the last free election?...
Because if you accept the idea they have the right to expose their ideal, you accept the fact that they can be elected and their power would be a legitimate one. Evil, but legitimate. Then, will you accept as the will of the majority the extermination of all minorities, races, sexual, and others potential victims. Yes?
Because if you don't, it is a little bit hypocritical. OK, they have the right to think but they can't do what they think. I support the right of opinion until it doesn't challenge my opinion? Is it how you see things?

For me, they just have the right to shut-up and to stay in their bins. I know what they did, and in doing it they lost all their rights. They were the vanquish and by their own ideal that is the proof they didn't deserve power. They were beaten by the Judeo-Masonic-Bolshevik pact, so be it.
I will not wait to see if they change because the ones I met didn't change. As a potential victim, I won't wait to see if they have my names on their list. If somebody wants France to become the Etat Français, put a Frankish Axe on the monnaie and change for Travail Famille Patrie the Liberté Egalité Fraternité (and rename the police Milice) I know what they up to.
In France all parties have to respect the values of the Republic, the first one being to be a democracy. If you don't respect the French Constitution well, your organisation is illegal. Simple. The respect of others is one of theses values.
1st Constitution (1789) : "Les hommes naissent et demeurent libres et égaux en droits" All men born and stay free and equal in right."Le but de toute association politique est la conservation des droits naturels et imprescriptibles de l’homme. Ces droits sont la liberté, la propriété, la sûreté et la résistance à l’oppression." The goal of all political associations is the preservation of the natural and (don't know the translation: something like impossible to take from) rights of men. These rights are freedom, property, safety and resistance to oppression. "La liberté consiste à pouvoir faire tout ce qui ne nuit pas à autrui" Freedom is to be able to do all what doesn't harm others.
See, all is said.

Of course, some articles were modified (Resistance to oppression was a little bit too revolutionary, for instance)

I sleep better at night knowing that people like you and your family serve in the French forces. You do France proud.

I disagree though that nazi-propaganda should be prohibited. Because, if it were up to me, the military receives a license to kill nazis at sight. And how would we ever tell who's a nazi if they can't make themselves known?

[KukriKhan]

I sleep better at night knowing that people like you and your family serve in the French forces. You do France proud.

I disagree though that nazi-propaganda should be prohibited. Because, if it were up to me, the military receives a license to kill nazis at sight. And how would we ever tell who's a nazi if they can't make themselves known?

I feel the same way about 'net conversations: let the idiots talk, and let their opponents heap well-deserved scorn and ridicule upon them. It makes freedom stronger, IMO. Sadly, it also encourages the nut-cases, they thinking they have a partially respectful audience, for which they spew ad infinitum.

Still, let 'em talk. People are not as stupid as pretendant leaders think they are.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

I feel the same way about 'net conversations: let the idiots talk, and let their opponents heap well-deserved scorn and ridicule upon them. It makes freedom stronger, IMO. Sadly, it also encourages the nut-cases, they thinking they have a partially respectful audience, for which they spew ad infinitum.

That audience is mostly laughing at them though, so I don't think that it's really much of a problem. Better they get their anger out over the internet than through violence anyway.

[HoreTore]

I am really getting tired of these christians on our government, first they don't want to work on sundays in the middle of a crisis no the LORD says no, they try to introduce laws on blasphemy, and now they now they want creatism on public schools. Believe in fairytales fine, but just leave us alone.

You barbarians work on sundays...?

When do you have your hangovers?

[Brenus]

“I disagree though that nazi-propaganda should be prohibited. Because, if it were up to me, the military receives a license to kill nazis at sight. And how would we ever tell who's a nazi if they can't make themselves known?”
I agree.
However, what I was pointing out is the problem of free speech of openly criminal organisations, and some that did exist. Not just speeches, theories, but ones, which had power and did what they said.

Note: See how this debate was derailled just in speeking of Negationism... That is great Art...
The poor persecuted pro-nazi....

[Caius]

I disagree though that nazi-propaganda should be prohibited.

Would you allow to create a political party that will take the power of the State?

If you feed them, they'll bite your hand.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Would you allow to create a political party that will take the power of the State?

If you feed them, they'll bite your hand.

If neo-Nazis have enough political power to take over the state, you have more issues then just the legality of their political wing.

[Kralizec]

You barbarians work on sundays...?

When do you have your hangovers?

Frag is referring to a meeting between our ministers that was supposed to take place at a time when the banking crisis had pretty much reached its peak. The idea was to hold it on sunday, agree on some measures and announce them before the stock exchange opened for "maximum effect". Some politicians of the "Christen Unie" objected.

Because if you accept the idea they have the right to expose their ideal, you accept the fact that they can be elected and their power would be a legitimate one. Evil, but legitimate. Then, will you accept as the will of the majority the extermination of all minorities, races, sexual, and others potential victims. Yes?

I don't know enough about the Front National to judge their similarity to the "real" fascists, but do you think it should be deemed a criminal organisation?

[Brenus]

“I don't know enough about the Front National to judge their similarity to the "real" fascists, but do you think it should be deemed a criminal organisation?”
Hard question.
I would say no, even if some members I spoke with when I thought it was worth to try were potentially dangerous. Well, they were openly true Nazi to speak frankly (reproduction of SS poster on the wall, hate for others races, religions etc).
But the movement as such doesn’t openly want to destroy the regime. Jean Marie Le Pen did calculated “coup d’éclat” about the Holocaust (detail of history) but I would say that no, in my actual knowledge, the Front National is not a criminal organisation.

And having spoken to others groups, in fact Le Pen is Socialist Social traitor.

I remember an interview of French Basque Nationalists wondering who was Karadzic and who was Mladic…

[Jolt]

imprescriptibles(don't know the translation: something like impossible to take from)

Inalienable.

[rasoforos]

Blasphemy: irreverent behavior toward anything held sacred, priceless, etc...

Considering that I have received an infraction from you for blasphemy (not in those words I have to admit) I find your Thread a bit self-contradicting.

No offense, but if you yourself is willing to uphold such 'laws' then why is it such a big deal that these laws could be enforced upon you?

And, no I do not support blasphemy laws, which is why I really detest not being able to present my views on religion to the org.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Blasphemy: irreverent behavior toward anything held sacred, priceless, etc...

Considering that I have received an infraction from you for blasphemy (not in those words I have to admit) I find your Thread a bit self-contradicting.

No offense, but if you yourself is willing to uphold such 'laws' then why is it such a big deal that these laws could be enforced upon you?

And, no I do not support blasphemy laws, which is why I really detest not being able to present my views on religion to the org.

Sigh. The old freedom of speech argument. Very well.

First, this is a private forum with rules. On application for membership of this forum, you agree to observe those rules. You can choose to abide by those rules or leave. There is no right of free speech on a private forum.

Second, I am a volunteer tasked with upholding those rules. Not my own personal biases, but the forum rules. If I have an issue with those rules, I can leave.

Thirdly, no-one is preventing you from presenting your views on religion as long as it is done with respect for other members. What you may not do is bash, insult or otherwise vicariously offend other members who hold different - and sacred to them - opinions. Frankly, I fear we give anti-religionists too much leeway sometimes. As with political opinions, I know I am finding roughly the right line when my inbox is full of howls of indignation about my bias sent from both extremes.

The corollary to the above then, is that since there are plenty of fora where you can be as beastly as you like to other people, your freedom of speech is not infringed. You can merely go somewhere else to insult others. Here however, you will behave.

The original post referred to a national law. Other than the population of Ireland moving en masse to France, the proposal infringes on their rights.

[rasoforos]

Sigh. The old freedom of speech argument. Very well.

First, this is a private forum with rules. On application for membership of this forum, you agree to observe those rules. You can choose to abide by those rules or leave. There is no right of free speech on a private forum.

Second, I am a volunteer tasked with upholding those rules. Not my own personal biases, but the forum rules. If I have an issue with those rules, I can leave.

I think that upholding, let alone enforcing laws that are contrary to one's beliefs to be morally objectionable. This is not meant as an offence. It is merely the way I feel for myself.

You cannot allow yourself the privilege of double standards and yet deny it from your country.

The corollary to the above then, is that since there are plenty of fora where you can be as beastly as you like to other people, your freedom of speech is not infringed. You can merely go somewhere else to insult others. Here however, you will behave.

I will comment you on your good use of Latin plural

I, however, find that this paragraph is just a diversion. I am not questioning the system of the 'org' (if you read the forums carefully you will find that I am a fan of your rather 'heavy handed' approach and believe that it has made the backroom a better place).

I am trying to emphasize that you cannot be of two minds. To me, it does not matter if it is a forum or a country. A person should always uphold his views. You mentioned the old 'free speech' argument
yet you throw in the even older 'just doing my job' argument.

Afterall aren't forum rules a mirror of our perceived common sense of justice? The same way libel and slander are punishable both in a forum (...well some forums) and in a country (...well some countries) the same way blasphemy seems to be offensive to the public mind and is thus punishable. Of course your rights are infringed but human beings have a tendency to be willing to sacrifice their freedom if it will make their environment more safe. Moderated fora is a good example. We prefer the tavern even though we could go and rant freely on anti-religious or fundamentalist discussion groups

Anyway I will not tire you more, even though I really enjoy reading your posts. Let's have a beer and just accept we dissagree