Irish Blasphemy Referendum 2018

[Vassenor]

Wouldn't share that opinion with anyone from Ireland if I were you. People hate condescending foreigners with no understanding of the country telling them how to vote and how to feel, and trying to meddle in elections. In fact, I don't think that that was an insignificant factor in the last referendum.

The mainstream media/government consortium is fighting hard against Christianity in their Agenda 2030/New World Order plan. Look at all the BS in the media defacing Christianity, at all these subliminal messages in movies.

If nothing is done now, you will find yourself celebrating a satanic mass with child sacrifice this day in twenty years.

Jesus that's a lot of kool-aid in one post.

[A m e n r i a]

If blasphemy is illegal in Christianity and/or Catholicism, then this law should stay in place and should be enforced on Christians/Catholics.

It is not the business of the state to inquire into the opinions of persons upon something that which may or may not exist.

It's totally the business of the state to keep its people from commiting sins and bringing the wrath of an omnipotent entity that exists.

[Dahon]

Wouldn't share that opinion with anyone from Ireland if I were you. People hate condescending foreigners with no understanding of the country telling them how to vote and how to feel, and trying to meddle in elections. In fact, I don't think that that was an insignificant factor in the last referendum.

The mainstream media/government consortium is fighting hard against Christianity in their Agenda 2030/New World Order plan. Look at all the BS in the media defacing Christianity, at all these subliminal messages in movies.

If nothing is done now, you will find yourself celebrating a satanic mass with child sacrifice this day in twenty years.

Oh Jesus bloody Christ. Name me a majority-Christian country that got rid of its blasphemy laws and then commenced to offer children to Moloch. I dare you.

[Medwedian Democratic Federation]

I feel like many people here are under the impression that authorizing blasphemy enables people to freely insult the Church or any other religion/religious institutions.
Erm, hate speech and defamation laws still exist, y'know. Authorizing blasphemy doesn't give people free reign to insult you or your religion. It just prevents them from being charged for criticizing or makig fun of it, which is entirely different.

The modern “free speech/hate speech” laws encourage the insult of Christianity and Conservatism, while disproportionaley protecting all other religions and leftist politics.

Go out, yell an anti-Christian slur loudly. Then yell an anti-Islamic slur loudly. See the difference in reaction? The people have been conditioned...

And if you are really brave, yell an anti-Jewish slur.

[Isilanka]

I feel like many people here are under the impression that authorizing blasphemy enables people to freely insult the Church or any other religion/religious institutions.
Erm, hate speech and defamation laws still exist, y'know. Authorizing blasphemy doesn't give people free reign to insult you or your religion. It just prevents them from being charged for criticizing or makig fun of it, which is entirely different.

The modern “free speech/hate speech” laws encourage the insult of Christianity and Conservatism, while disproportionaley protecting all other religions and leftist politics.

Go out, yell an anti-Christian slur loudly. Then yell an anti-Islamic slur loudly. See the difference in reaction? The people have been conditioned...

And if you are really brave, yell an anti-Jewish slur.

People who find amusing to yell anti-Jewish slurs are usually attacking both the religion and the ethnicity. No wonder they get targeted by hate speech laws.

[Dahon]

It is not the business of the state to inquire into the opinions of persons upon something that which may or may not exist.

It's totally the business of the state to keep its people from commiting sins and bringing the wrath of an omnipotent entity that exists.

It is up to the all-too-real conscience of the apparent sinner whether he wants to court the apparent wrath of this apparent entity -- and the all-too-real wrath of the enraged pious -- or not.

[Dahon]

"Varadkar" ripping Ireland's national identity apart one by one I see.

Is there something in Varadkar's surname that you don't like, Tony?

[Oil exporting People]

If blasphemy is illegal in Christianity and/or Catholicism, then this law should stay in place and should be enforced on Christians/Catholics.

It is not the business of the state to inquire into the opinions of persons upon something that which may or may not exist.

Really? Because for almost the entirety of human exist such was entirely the business of the state and in many cases the entire purpose of the state.

[The Huskar Social Union]

Scrap it, its a load of fucking outdated nonsense.

If blasphemy is illegal in Christianity and/or Catholicism, then this law should stay in place and should be enforced on Christians/Catholics.

No because Blasphemy laws are fucking retarded.

"Varadkar" ripping Ireland's national identity apart one by one I see.

Is there something in Varadkar's surname that you don't like, Tony?

Not a true irishman obviously

[Dahon]

It is not the business of the state to inquire into the opinions of persons upon something that which may or may not exist.

Really? Because for almost the entirety of human exist such was entirely the business of the state and in many cases the entire purpose of the state.

Of course that wasn't what I intended to say, but as I'd have to clarify and explicate and make out sentences and paragraphs to humor you when this kind of thing does not sit with me well, I'd rather not.

[Oil exporting People]

Really? Because for almost the entirety of human exist such was entirely the business of the state and in many cases the entire purpose of the state.

Of course that wasn't what I intended to say, but as I'd have to clarify and explicate and make out sentences and paragraphs to humor you when this kind of thing does not sit with me well, I'd rather not.

Ah, the good ole "I can't defend the post I made" argument.

[Ifreann]

Well let's see. The last referendum we legalised abortion. The one before that we legalised gay marriage. So...yeah. Much more dramatic than this, actually.

Feels odd to legalize Abortion and Gay Marriage before this, seems to contradict, but alright. Confusing though.

Those actually impact people's lives, so obviously they were given a higher priority.

---

"Varadkar" ripping Ireland's national identity apart one by one I see.

What's with the scare quotes? Varadkar is his name.

---

Ireland is falling as one of thr last bastions of truly Christian law and moral decency. This is a great shame.

Why are they doing it?

If Ireland is Catholic, people should accept it. If I am not allowed to insult Islam in Saudi Arabia (such a law is perfectly fine, because Islam is the dominant and historic religion of that country), I should not be allowed to insult Christianity in Ireland, either (such a law is also perfectly fine). Or in Italy. Or in Germany. Or in Russia. Or in the USA.

Governments giving in to the demands of few SJW snowflakes make me sick.

Ireland, stop the referendum. And revoke the abortion one (because you legalized child murder).

As always, it’s not a minority giving in to a majority whose feelings it hurt but a majority giving in to a minority whose feelings it hurt.

Leftism will never take us anywhere but Hell.

I'm fine with being taken to Hell for building a better republic.

---

It is not the business of the state to inquire into the opinions of persons upon something that which may or may not exist.

It's totally the business of the state to keep its people from commiting sins and bringing the wrath of an omnipotent entity that exists.

That's not the business of this state.

[Isilanka]

It is not the business of the state to inquire into the opinions of persons upon something that which may or may not exist.

Really? Because for almost the entirety of human exist such was entirely the business of the state and in many cases the entire purpose of the state.

So ? "For almost the entirety of human existence" is not in any way, shape or form an argument to justify something on any level, moral or otherwise. "We've always been doing that, hence it's good" is litteraly level 0 of argumentation. Even in a high school exam it doesn't work. Unless you have a more elaborate point about the essential nature of all states, or something like that, this aint' a working argument.

[Dahon]

Of course that wasn't what I intended to say, but as I'd have to clarify and explicate and make out sentences and paragraphs to humor you when this kind of thing does not sit with me well, I'd rather not.

Ah, the good ole "I can't defend the post I made" argument.

Think what you want, dude -- that's, like, your beer.

[Oil exporting People]

Really? Because for almost the entirety of human exist such was entirely the business of the state and in many cases the entire purpose of the state.

So ? "For almost the entirety of human existence" is not in any way, shape or form an argument to justify something on any level, moral or otherwise. "We've always been doing that, hence it's good" is litteraly level 0 of argumentation. Even in a high school exam it doesn't work. Unless you have a more elaborate point about the essential nature of all states, or something like that, this aint' a working argument.

If you had bothered to read the posts in question and applied high school level logical reasoning, you might be able to discern what I was getting at. Instead, you exposed that you did neither of these. You might wish to avoid that in the future.

[New haven america]

Ah, the good ole "I can't defend the post I made" argument.

Think what you want, dude -- that's, like, your beer.

He's not really one to argue either, considering most of his arguments are just Appeals to Tradition.

[Vassenor]

It is not the business of the state to inquire into the opinions of persons upon something that which may or may not exist.

Really? Because for almost the entirety of human exist such was entirely the business of the state and in many cases the entire purpose of the state.

"We should do it this way because that's how we've always done it" is pretty hilariously bad logic.

[Dahon]

Really? Because for almost the entirety of human exist such was entirely the business of the state and in many cases the entire purpose of the state.

So ? "For almost the entirety of human existence" is not in any way, shape or form an argument to justify something on any level, moral or otherwise. "We've always been doing that, hence it's good" is litteraly level 0 of argumentation. Even in a high school exam it doesn't work. Unless you have a more elaborate point about the essential nature of all states, or something like that, this aint' a working argument.

For context: OEP took my words literally when I meant something else (as my short spat with Amenria can help make clear), and as I thought clarifying it would take time and patience I didn't extend that courtesy to him.

But so long as you have the bile for that take, go for it.

[New haven america]

Really? Because for almost the entirety of human exist such was entirely the business of the state and in many cases the entire purpose of the state.

"We should do it this way because that's how we've always done it" is pretty hilariously bad logic.

It's almost as if there's an entire fallacy based around that idea...

[Isilanka]

So ? "For almost the entirety of human existence" is not in any way, shape or form an argument to justify something on any level, moral or otherwise. "We've always been doing that, hence it's good" is litteraly level 0 of argumentation. Even in a high school exam it doesn't work. Unless you have a more elaborate point about the essential nature of all states, or something like that, this aint' a working argument.

If you had bothered to read the posts in question and applied high school level logical reasoning, you might be able to discern what I was getting at. Instead, you exposed that you did neither of these. You might wish to avoid that in the future.

And you might wanna drop the arrogance a level or two.
Dahon argued against Ameria, on the grounds that it wasn't the business of the state to regulate what people think or say about hypothetical deities. He was talking about a modern, current state - the state of Ireland in this case as this is, y'know, the topic of the thread.
You chimed in by claiming there was a contradiction in what they said, as according to you it has always been the business of the state in history. The logical problem here is that Dahon was talking about a modern state, and your argument is very much an historical one, "for the entirety of human existence", use of the past tense and so on.

"States have always been regulating people's opinions, and have to do that because of their very purpose, hence Dahon is wrong to claim that it isn't the business of the state" might have been a valid argument. "They've always been doing that in history, hence you're wrong to claim modern states shouldn't", which is very much what you're saying here, isn't. Maybe the first argument is what you wanted to say, but in this case you should have said it more clearly.

I get that you desperately want to be right, but if you want your posts to be understood the way you want to, you might wanna elaborate a bit more instead of dropping one-liners and then claiming people are stupid.

Anyway, i'm done with this. It was one line, and not a particularily good argument at that.

[Chestaan]

As far as I am aware, even the Catholic Church is fine with removing the blasphemy laws. I think some Irish Muslim groups have come out in favour of the laws, but that is it.

http://www.thejournal.ie/irish-council- ... 8-Nov2013/

Anyway, long overdue.

[Kubumba Tribe]

"It's not the state's business to enforce religion"
Says who?

[Hammer Britannia]

"It's not the state's business to enforce religion"
Says who?

Says every human who values freedom in some form.

Imagine if Israel enforced Jewish Laws on everyone in Israel, including West Bank and the Gaza Strip. That would just be unfair bullshit to the Islamic Minority there no?

[The Huskar Social Union]

"It's not the state's business to enforce religion"
Says who?

Says every human who values freedom in some form.

Imagine if Israel enforced Jewish Laws on everyone in Israel, including West Bank and the Gaza Strip. That would just be unfair bullshit to the Islamic Minority there no?

Says who?

[The New California Republic]

Good on Ireland if this passes. It is surprising that any Western democracies still have the crime of blasphemy on the statute books. I'm aware that Greece still does.