Thursday, April 06, 2006

There they go again...


When it rains it pours and when one Christian group of bigots get riled up other groups of Christian bigots get riled up. As I said I honestly thought that they were over with the issue of Brokeback Mountain. Clearly not.

Now I read that the film is banned in the Bahamas because some outfit called the Bahamas Christian Council filed a request to have the film banned. Now let us be very clear what this means. It means that showing this film is against the law.

And what does "against the law" mean. It means that something nasty will be done to you. At the core it means violence. Every law is a threat of violence. If one does not obey the law then men who are allowed to use violence against you will come visit you. If you assert your rights as a human being and resist them they are allowed to hurt you. If you defend yourself they are allowed to shot you or even kill you. Of course this does not apply to real crimes. One is allowed to use violence to prevent rape. But there is no real crime here. There is no victim.

So the Bahamas Christian Council is saying that they are willing, if necessary, to use deadly force to stop a film. Now these bigots may think they are removed from the violence because they get someone else to do it for them. But the man who hires a thug is as guilty as is the thug. In this case the Bahamas Christian Council hired the thug to ban a film. Yet if someone attempted to ban them they would whine like pigs at the slaughterhouse. Shame on them. It is actions like this that help show that Christianity differs from radical Islam only in degree not in kind.

That these people are driven by hate is clear. Bishop Sam Greene, head of this Christianist group, has previously engaged in open hatred of gays. His group said they didn't even want tour ships with gay passangers visiting their country. And he said that if the Bahamas ever passed marriage equality for gay couples that he would blow up parliament. Oddly this old fart said it even though no such measure was even being considered. I guess this means he is not just happy to have others use violence for his moral agenda. Apparently he is quite willing to do it as well.

When a cruise with gay passangers showed up the Christianists there got employees from hotels there to go on strike. Some even claimed that gays were having sex on the beaches in full view of everyone but that turned out to be a lie. And the hotels there did the right thing to the bigots who went on strike. They fired them.

Now the question I have is this: if a specific group refuses to recognize the human rights of others then why should others recognize the rights of the this group? I'll be interested to hear what they have to say on the matter.

6 Comments:

Blogger Derreck said...

As usual disgusting, why can't people just accept other people, regardless of private life, and sexual preferances?... but I can't agree with you on this;

"But the man who hires a thug is as guilty as is the thug. "

This is not true. The thug, is dumb, poor he, but the man who hires him, isn't. So the thug does the deed as he knows nothing else, and is probably not much of moral man/woman, but the man hiring him, is the only guilty one here, he knows what terror he releases on, well, us. So the man who hires the thug, commits the crime. It is like pulling the trigger of a gun, you don't thrust the bullet in the flesh, the gun does, but you have control over it.

Get my point? The thug is just stupid, bless him, but the real evil lies with the man who hired him.

April 10, 2006

 
Blogger Derreck said...

BTW, what happened to pirate? Have you banned him!?!?

April 10, 2006

 
Blogger GodlessZone said...

In reverse order: No I have not banned him so I can't tell you where he is. Your first comment's analogy does not work. True you control the gun but the gun has no will. The human does. You say the hired thug is not responsible because he knows nothing. He knows enough. And you assume the hirer is smarter. Often that is not the case. If the hirer is not smarter then are you saying no one has committed the crime? There are many people just as dumb as some thugs who never committ crimes. Why? Because even a person who is retarded is smart enough to know what hurts others and can choice to avoid it. It is the choice, the will, which is the key factor not the intelligence.

April 10, 2006

 
Blogger Derreck said...

One can be dumb in one way, and samrt in the other.

Anyway, I've got your point, but whaty I emant is; The thug is merely used as an extantion of the sicko's mind, similar to the gun. And I do believe you are dumb to accept such a task from some priest or whatever.

April 11, 2006

 
Blogger Derreck said...

It's all about the word "dumb" here, ain't it?

Dumb to me is dumb in the sense of lack of rational thinking, and lack of moral. Which you (I guess) do not include here.

But let's not start a discussion on that okay?

April 11, 2006

 
Blogger Derreck said...

And the thug can be easily manipulated, otherwise it wouldn't be in that position in the first place. (Couldn't resist)

April 11, 2006

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

 

Web Counters Religion Blog Top Sites