Posted by
chrisd
on from the one-nation-under-god dept.
ross.w writes "Italian authorities have shut down five Internet sites which reportedly carried blasphemies against God and the Virgin Mary, following a complaint by the Vatican's newspaper.
The story is in this item on Australia's ABC News."
As it seems speaking your mind is less and less accepted. Ones again the church is at the frontier of squelzing ideas and expressions they don't like. And more and more I get the idea the world is on a one-way road to new dark-ages..
Re:Another example of ignorance
by
yatest5
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Snipped rant saying everything should be allowed apart from this one thing you find offensive
Have you thought that maybe the Vatican finds these sites as offensive as you find those with child porn?
On the other hand, they might want to keep quiet about paedophilia;-). Uh oh, maybe the vatican will take down this post...
--
Mod parent up! [a] by Anonymous Coward (Score:5) Thurs, June 31, @13:37
Re:Another example of ignorance
by
SerpentMage
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
And yet again another reason why the Founding Fathers of the US knew what they were talking about when they created the constitution. I am not American, but I keep seeing the "old establishment" trying to take over.
This reminds me of the times when Catholic leaders tried to stop Copernicus and other thinkers, etc.
I am not saying that the websites are in good taste or even right. But to say the sites are blasphemous and restrict the right to make up one's own mind is thinking straight from 1200's.
--
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
Re:If anyone ever sued me for Blasphemy
by
h4mmer5tein
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Actually they wouldnt. They'd just prosecute you under whatever blasphemy laws applied. The existance of god is moot in this instance. It was a legal issue not a religeous one.
However the fact that the Vatican is seemingly able to lean on the Italian police sufficiently to get them to take such drastic action tells us something about the power of religeon in an otherwise secular society.
The Vatican is killing thousands of Africans
by
FreeUser
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Seriously... how long would you last wearing a 'FUCK AMERICA - UBL FOR PRESIDENT' T-shirt in the US? Its the same with 'blasphemous' T-shirts in the Vatican -- except the Vatican doens't kill people who try that anymore.
First, you won't get killed in America for wearing such a T-shirt either (unless you go out of your way to get out to some obscure redneck bar on the ass of the world, somewhere in the deep south or Texas, but then, you're endangering yourself if you go hang out with such yahoos regardless, where people have been hassled for wearing a FreeBSD T-shirt because "it has the devil on it." Kind of like going to South-Central LA dressed as a Klansman, and I would warrant that if you go looking for trouble deliberately like this, you'll have similiar results in just about any country in the world. Try wearing Nazi regalia into a bar in Germany, or France, or the Netherlands, or a T-shirt with a pakistani flag on it in Delhi, etc.).
And don't be so sure and self righteous in making the claim that the vatican isn't killing people. If you talk someone into jumping off a cliff, and they reluctantly take your advice, you are most certainly a party to murder (Dr. Kavorkian in contrast never talked anyone into suicide, he just lent a hand to those who'd already decided, but I digress). The Vatican has actively been discouraging suckers^H^H^H^H^H^H^H believers in Africa not to use condoms, even to prevent the spread of AIDS (with the Vatican knowing full well that without condoms the disease would spread faster and wider than otherwise), threatening those poor men and women with an eternity of torment by fire if they take that small precaution against the spread of AIDS (and those poor people believe that nonsense and take the Vatican's admonitions to heart). This influence, with the full weight and authority of the church behind it, has helped fuel an epidemic which has killed millions, and as far as I'm concerned much of that blood is on the Vatican's hands. I won't go into the racial component of this atrocity, except to say that it wouldn't surprise me if some of the old, white men in the upper echelons of the Vatican weren't secretly pleased with the results of their policies.
So the Vatican may not kill you for beshmirching the name of a legendary, likely never-having-existed woman who sired the bastard Christian demigod Jesus (though they do apparently think nothing of violating your basic right of free expression for doing so), but they'll certainly encourage you to kill yourself via unsafe sex, especially if you're an African.
Re:The Vatican is killing thousands of Africans
by
SDF-7
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
Seems to me that if these people were taking the Vatican's teachings to heart as you say, the epidemic would be over in a generation or two.
Or did you forget that HUGE chunk on no sex until marriage and stay faithful after that? Yes, it won't solve everything (transmission via blood banks, mother/child transmission, etc.) but that's definately going to put a big crimp in things -- and makes the contraception issue much more reasonable.
Re:The Vatican is killing thousands of Africans
by
Nomad128
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
This comment holds weight if and only if people *must* have sex. *Must* they? No, sex is never a necessity for individual survival.
Rest assured that the same Church that teaches the African people the moral dangers of using condoms also teaches them about the morTal danger, to themselves and to the rest of their community, of having sex outside of wedlock. The people who willingly violate the teachings of the Church are not "poor people" who don't know any better; they know why their people are dying, and they know how they can stop it, the same way it is in the US.
Want hard data to back up the Church's teaching on sex? Try http://marriage.rutgers.edu
Re:The Vatican is killing thousands of Africans
by
smashr
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Wow! I am impressed, you really managed to distort the truth on that one. What the vatican says is, "Don't have premarital sex" which is what would cause the MASSIVE spread of AIDS in africa. You managed to twist "dont have premartial sex, and dont use contraceptives" into "the vatican is making people get AIDS by forbidding contraceptives" Ummm.... i think you missed a few things in between. If these people werent having premartial sex in the FIRST place, then they wouldnt get AIDS, now would they, and you couldnt accuse the vatican of killing people. Doesnt anyone else think it is more than a tad absurd that the vatican is being accused of killing people? I mean, sure censoring web sites is questionable. I am not 100% familiar with the laws in Italy and the content and activities of the site, so I cant make a judgement... but killing people?
Re:well... i'm american...
by
TheAJofOZ
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
i would hope any american could wear a FUCK AMERICA tshirt every day of their lives and live free
You would hope that but it only happens to an extent. Yes they can live "free" but they sure as heck would be persecuted at every opportunity.
Also note that if you'd gone around New York on Sept 11 supporting Allah, you probably would have been locked up just to keep the peace. There are limits to free speech and just because it's in the constitution in America doesn't mean it's a sure thing there.
Whether all this is good and bad is left to your right to free choice - something notably absent in the American constitution, directly anyhow.
Re:Offensive speech
by
2g3-598hX
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
1. website != billboard.
2. offensive to you == interesting to me
I find a lot of Catholic belief particularly offensive, such as their medieval attitudes towards science, their anti-contraceptive stance and their denial of female reproductive rights. But I wouldn't ever want to censor them. Voltaire always sez it best...
"I might not agree with what you say, but I'll die defending your right to say it."
Freedom of Speech
by
Innomi
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Freedom of speech is not the right to say whatever you want as long as you don't bother anyone, Freedom of speech is the right to say something ESPECIALLY if it offends someone.
It's not ok to put up that billboard, but if you really want to put up the money to do it, you have every right to.
Rights (Was: Offensive speech)
by
andrew+cooke
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
there have to be limits
Why? Speaking and acting are two different things. Theres an old saying "sticks and bones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" that makes the difference clear.
More importantly, free speech is considered a right because it is useful - because the advantages of people being able to say what they want is more important that the disadvantages. Ant the whole idea of rights is that they let you do things that would otherwise be illegal.
In other words, a right is a permission to do something without limits. This is obvious if you think about it - who needs a right to free speech to say things everyone agrees about? You can say things like that anyway, without the need for the protection from prosecution that a right gives.
Why? Speaking and acting are two different things. Theres an old saying "sticks and bones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" that makes the difference clear.
So libel laws shouldn't exist then? You think it's ok if I take out a full-page ad in the NYTimes saying that I believe you're a child molester?
In other words, a right is a permission to do something without limits.
Um. No it isn't. You have a right to carry a gun, but not a nuclear bomb. If you have a drivers licence then you have a right to drive on the highway, but only if you stay within the speed limit.
A good example of how things can get taken way out of context, but as to how well it pertains in this particular situation is up for debate since the pages in question seem to have been taken down. And while it seems you have a particular beef with Christians in general, I feel obligated to point out (as a Christian) that the story is about the Catholic church, which is very different in practice to the rest of Christianity. Feel converted yet?
Re:Maybe it's just me but....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0, Insightful
since when have americans held back from matters just because it wasnt their business?
alessandro from italy mind you. Long live www.porcamadonna.com!
Re:Another example of ignorance
by
TheWickedKingJeremy
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Those who would take away our liberty for a little temporary safety are just fine by us! - the American majority.
Not sure I can speak for the majority, but I certainly do not feel that my liberty has been taken away...
Making it easier to approve wiretaps, etc is perfectly acceptable IMHO given the challenges imposed by our enemies... If you disagree, then you are thankfully also provided for - A new administration could easily "undo" said changes in the future should they not be needed anymore.
--
my religion lies somewhere between buddhism and super monkey ball - pamphlet?
You will believe in God!
by
Rupert
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
> Which one?
Any god. We don't care, just don't be an atheist.
> How about Satan? Can I be a Satanist?
No. Satan is a fallen angel, not a god. Try again.
> Can I be a Jedi?
No. No god, you see. There may be a church, but there isn't a god.
> How about Hinduism? They've got lots of gods.
That's fine. Just don't be going to the US. They only allow one.
--
-- E_NOSIG
Slashdot crowd...
by
gaspyy
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
I have no karma to lose, so I don't really care if I get modded down.
So far, most posts are along the lines of "free speech is great especially if offensive" when it comes to anti-Catholic messages.
However, the same crowd would be outraged if I said that "Bin Laden is a hero" or that "the WTC people deserved to die for being ignorant/arrogant americans." (By looking at the US media, even showing the twin towers or mentioning them seems offending to many).
The truth is that sometimes words hurt. And sometimes they hurt even more than physical abuse.
I usually enjoy reading/. , but whenever we're discussing social issues (as opposed to tech. ones) I can't help feeling disgusted by some of the expressed opinions.
BTW, how do Italians feel about this?
Re:Exactly what I was wondering...
by
Riskable
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
At the very least, there should be limits to how much information an ISP can give a foreign government about an account holder.
I've been pushing for this for a long time now (yes, I've written my representatives). It has less to do with governments, but anyone in general.
Who can call up and ISP and ask for information on one of their customers? ANYONE. Who decides whether or not to give them the information? THE ISP.
If the government REALLY wants to push laws about the Internet, this should be one of their top priorities. They could make a great anti-spam law and at the same time protect the privacy of their citizens in the same bill!
A warrant should be required for information from an ISP, period. The same should go for accusations of abuse, copyright violation, etc. There's no excuse for terminating an account just because it was ACCUSED of violating some law, somewhere. Due process needs to take place. The current setup of various coporations shutting down websites works because, to the ISP (to avoid getting into a legal battle), you're guilty until proven innocent.
This needs to change
-- -Riskable
"Those who choose proprietary software will pay for their decision!"
I think your logic and some of your facts are just plain wrong.
Firstly, Africa is not dominated by the Catholic church. Most countries in Africa are listed between 30-60 percent Catholic, and in my experience these numbers have been inflated. Most tribes have indigenous beliefs that supercede Christian/Muslim doctrine; you've been there and you should know this.
Secondly, let's assume your premise is correct, that Catholicism is dominant. If the people of Africa wouldn't use condoms for fear of eternal damnation, why ON EARTH would they have premarital sex with multiple partners? If they have such strong religious beliefs in terms of sexual practice, who left out this latter core belief in their indoctrination? It just doesn't add up. If this logic was consistent, the Republic of Ireland would have 99% of their population infected.
Lastly, don't forget that the church pours big time and money into African AIDS relief efforts. And unlike many other religions, Catholic relief efforts do not necessarily mean proselytizing missions.
I respect your opinion that Catholics have a job ahead of them in terms of reform, but you're just making some mean, inaccurate conjectures to support an anti-religion stance.
Slashdot Mirror
The URL doesn't seem to work. this one does.
As it seems speaking your mind is less and less accepted. Ones again the church is at the frontier of squelzing ideas and expressions they don't like.
And more and more I get the idea the world is on a one-way road to new dark-ages..
Nobody expects the spanish inquisition!
Wonder how Italy squares this with the fact that they are a signatory to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which should protect 'freedom of thought, conscience and religion' as well as 'freedom of expression'.
ho hum.
<fnord>OBEY</fnord>
Snipped rant saying everything should be allowed apart from this one thing you find offensive
;-). Uh oh, maybe the vatican will take down this post...
Have you thought that maybe the Vatican finds these sites as offensive as you find those with child porn?
On the other hand, they might want to keep quiet about paedophilia
And yet again another reason why the Founding Fathers of the US knew what they were talking about when they created the constitution. I am not American, but I keep seeing the "old establishment" trying to take over.
This reminds me of the times when Catholic leaders tried to stop Copernicus and other thinkers, etc.
I am not saying that the websites are in good taste or even right. But to say the sites are blasphemous and restrict the right to make up one's own mind is thinking straight from 1200's.
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
However the fact that the Vatican is seemingly able to lean on the Italian police sufficiently to get them to take such drastic action tells us something about the power of religeon in an otherwise secular society.
Seriously... how long would you last wearing a 'FUCK AMERICA - UBL FOR PRESIDENT' T-shirt in the US? Its the same with 'blasphemous' T-shirts in the Vatican -- except the Vatican doens't kill people who try that anymore.
First, you won't get killed in America for wearing such a T-shirt either (unless you go out of your way to get out to some obscure redneck bar on the ass of the world, somewhere in the deep south or Texas, but then, you're endangering yourself if you go hang out with such yahoos regardless, where people have been hassled for wearing a FreeBSD T-shirt because "it has the devil on it." Kind of like going to South-Central LA dressed as a Klansman, and I would warrant that if you go looking for trouble deliberately like this, you'll have similiar results in just about any country in the world. Try wearing Nazi regalia into a bar in Germany, or France, or the Netherlands, or a T-shirt with a pakistani flag on it in Delhi, etc.).
And don't be so sure and self righteous in making the claim that the vatican isn't killing people. If you talk someone into jumping off a cliff, and they reluctantly take your advice, you are most certainly a party to murder (Dr. Kavorkian in contrast never talked anyone into suicide, he just lent a hand to those who'd already decided, but I digress). The Vatican has actively been discouraging suckers^H^H^H^H^H^H^H believers in Africa not to use condoms, even to prevent the spread of AIDS (with the Vatican knowing full well that without condoms the disease would spread faster and wider than otherwise), threatening those poor men and women with an eternity of torment by fire if they take that small precaution against the spread of AIDS (and those poor people believe that nonsense and take the Vatican's admonitions to heart). This influence, with the full weight and authority of the church behind it, has helped fuel an epidemic which has killed millions, and as far as I'm concerned much of that blood is on the Vatican's hands. I won't go into the racial component of this atrocity, except to say that it wouldn't surprise me if some of the old, white men in the upper echelons of the Vatican weren't secretly pleased with the results of their policies.
So the Vatican may not kill you for beshmirching the name of a legendary, likely never-having-existed woman who sired the bastard Christian demigod Jesus (though they do apparently think nothing of violating your basic right of free expression for doing so), but they'll certainly encourage you to kill yourself via unsafe sex, especially if you're an African.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
You would hope that but it only happens to an extent. Yes they can live "free" but they sure as heck would be persecuted at every opportunity.
Also note that if you'd gone around New York on Sept 11 supporting Allah, you probably would have been locked up just to keep the peace. There are limits to free speech and just because it's in the constitution in America doesn't mean it's a sure thing there.
Whether all this is good and bad is left to your right to free choice - something notably absent in the American constitution, directly anyhow.
1. website != billboard.
2. offensive to you == interesting to me
I find a lot of Catholic belief particularly offensive, such as their medieval attitudes towards science, their anti-contraceptive stance and their denial of female reproductive rights. But I wouldn't ever want to censor them. Voltaire always sez it best...
"I might not agree with what you say, but I'll die defending your right to say it."
Freedom of speech is not the right to say whatever you want as long as you don't bother anyone, Freedom of speech is the right to say something ESPECIALLY if it offends someone. It's not ok to put up that billboard, but if you really want to put up the money to do it, you have every right to.
there have to be limits
Why? Speaking and acting are two different things. Theres an old saying "sticks and bones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" that makes the difference clear.
More importantly, free speech is considered a right because it is useful - because the advantages of people being able to say what they want is more important that the disadvantages. Ant the whole idea of rights is that they let you do things that would otherwise be illegal.
In other words, a right is a permission to do something without limits. This is obvious if you think about it - who needs a right to free speech to say things everyone agrees about? You can say things like that anyway, without the need for the protection from prosecution that a right gives.
http://www.acooke.org
A good example of how things can get taken way out of context, but as to how well it pertains in this particular situation is up for debate since the pages in question seem to have been taken down. And while it seems you have a particular beef with Christians in general, I feel obligated to point out (as a Christian) that the story is about the Catholic church, which is very different in practice to the rest of Christianity. Feel converted yet?
You need a FREE iPod Nano
since when have americans held back from matters just because it wasnt their business?
alessandro
from italy mind you. Long live www.porcamadonna.com!
Those who would take away our liberty for a little temporary safety are just fine by us! - the American majority.
Not sure I can speak for the majority, but I certainly do not feel that my liberty has been taken away...
Making it easier to approve wiretaps, etc is perfectly acceptable IMHO given the challenges imposed by our enemies... If you disagree, then you are thankfully also provided for - A new administration could easily "undo" said changes in the future should they not be needed anymore.
my religion lies somewhere between buddhism and super monkey ball - pamphlet?
> Which one?
Any god. We don't care, just don't be an atheist.
> How about Satan? Can I be a Satanist?
No. Satan is a fallen angel, not a god. Try again.
> Can I be a Jedi?
No. No god, you see. There may be a church, but there isn't a god.
> How about Hinduism? They've got lots of gods.
That's fine. Just don't be going to the US. They only allow one.
--
E_NOSIG
I have no karma to lose, so I don't really care if I get modded down.
/. , but whenever we're discussing social issues (as opposed to tech. ones) I can't help feeling disgusted by some of the expressed opinions.
So far, most posts are along the lines of "free speech is great especially if offensive" when it comes to anti-Catholic messages.
However, the same crowd would be outraged if I said that "Bin Laden is a hero" or that "the WTC people deserved to die for being ignorant/arrogant americans." (By looking at the US media, even showing the twin towers or mentioning them seems offending to many).
The truth is that sometimes words hurt. And sometimes they hurt even more than physical abuse.
I usually enjoy reading
BTW, how do Italians feel about this?
At the very least, there should be limits to how much information an ISP can give a foreign government about an account holder.
I've been pushing for this for a long time now (yes, I've written my representatives). It has less to do with governments, but anyone in general.
Who can call up and ISP and ask for information on one of their customers? ANYONE. Who decides whether or not to give them the information? THE ISP.
If the government REALLY wants to push laws about the Internet, this should be one of their top priorities. They could make a great anti-spam law and at the same time protect the privacy of their citizens in the same bill!
A warrant should be required for information from an ISP, period. The same should go for accusations of abuse, copyright violation, etc. There's no excuse for terminating an account just because it was ACCUSED of violating some law, somewhere. Due process needs to take place. The current setup of various coporations shutting down websites works because, to the ISP (to avoid getting into a legal battle), you're guilty until proven innocent.
This needs to change
-Riskable
"Those who choose proprietary software will pay for their decision!"
I think your logic and some of your facts are just plain wrong.
Firstly, Africa is not dominated by the Catholic church. Most countries in Africa are listed between 30-60 percent Catholic, and in my experience these numbers have been inflated. Most tribes have indigenous beliefs that supercede Christian/Muslim doctrine; you've been there and you should know this.
Secondly, let's assume your premise is correct, that Catholicism is dominant. If the people of Africa wouldn't use condoms for fear of eternal damnation, why ON EARTH would they have premarital sex with multiple partners? If they have such strong religious beliefs in terms of sexual practice, who left out this latter core belief in their indoctrination? It just doesn't add up. If this logic was consistent, the Republic of Ireland would have 99% of their population infected.
Lastly, don't forget that the church pours big time and money into African AIDS relief efforts. And unlike many other religions, Catholic relief efforts do not necessarily mean proselytizing missions.
I respect your opinion that Catholics have a job ahead of them in terms of reform, but you're just making some mean, inaccurate conjectures to support an anti-religion stance.