Slashdot Mirror
Jury Decides Artist's Gory Images On Website Are Art
New submitter wilbrod writes "A Quebec special effects artist charged with corrupting morals has been found not guilty in a case that tested the boundaries of creative expression and Canadian obscenity laws. He was charged with three counts of corrupting morals by distributing, possessing and producing obscene material. During the trial, Couture argued his gory works, roughly a thousand images and two short videos that appeared on Couture's website, Inner Depravity, should be considered art. The material in question depicts gruesome murders, torture, sexual abuse, assaults and necrophilia — all with young female victims."
Good thing he didn't get dragged to the US for an obscenity trial
When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
Thats Quebec for you.
His work was in line with movies like Saw.
While clearly not for everyone, it was indeed art.
Hopefully, his career as a makeup artist will pick up even more steam and will allow to recover his legal costs quickly.
And don't forget about watching all those Christians. They seem obsessed about the virtue of people dying on crosses and thereby absolving them of their sins. We wouldn't want them to decide to wash away some more sins.
Why do we even have obscenity laws? They're so incredibly ambiguous and wrong that they shouldn't exist to begin with. No, asshole, you don't and cannot "know it when you see it."
He was considering a series with male models but his career took off (he works in the television industry now) and he simply didn't have the time to follow-up
I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
You probably have a lot less to worry about an artist staging these sorts of scenes than the people on the internet sharing real video of these types of events, you know, the type of people that he's commenting on.
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
is not to give publicity to these attention whores.
I submitted this story yesterday.
It's really frustrating that it's still on roughly the first page of the "submissions" page, but a "dupe" was accepted.
Note, I don't bear any ill feelings towards user "wilbrod" for also submitting it, it's just that I feel I wasted my time bothering to. And it isn't the first time this has happened. And, IMHO, my submission was a bit lengthier and contained a bit more relevant info for the Slashdot crowd.
And, since I'm on a caffeine deficient rant-binge, where the hell are my mod points? I comment, submit stories, rate the submissions of others (to help relieve the deluge of spam, etc.), and not a single mod point in months and months, whereas before that I was getting 15 at a time(!) and they reappeared almost as soon as I used them up (sometimes even before).
*off to get some coffee and food into me*
Funny that nobody post a damn link to the website. Can I have one please? I'd like to see by myself what is it that caused a trial. You know, first hand experience instead of just reported.
I don't care if I'm wrong. I only care about everyone obtaining something from the discussion.
Either you're trolling or you misunderstand things completely.
Christians believe that Jesus made the ultimate sacrifice. Hence they should also believe that there is no need for more sacrifices to wash more sins.
Whether you believe that or not is a different matter.
You imply they're spreading misinformation, and yet you yourself spread misinformation in the process.
And "victims" is used in the sense of "models wearing makeup".
If you take this guty to court, how about all the Saw/Hostel/etc.; all the dozens of slasher/splatter movies made every year? See, e.g. http://bloody-disgusting.com/
Distasteful is not criminal.Dressing up is not crime.
The material in question depicts gruesome murders, torture, sexual abuse, assaults and necrophilia â" all with young female victims.
"Art" perhaps. But I'd keep an eye on this guy. Of course it's only my reactionary opinion, but I think people that have an obsession with this sort of thing have a problem, and I'd want to make sure they don't "jump" to exercising a more "real world" form of their entertainment.
"Opinion" perhaps. But I'd like someone to keep an eye on you. Of course it's only my reactionary opinion, but I think people that have an obsession with being concerned with what people do that doesn't harm anyone have a problem, and I'd want to make sure they don't "jump" to exercising a more "real world" form of their philosophy, like lobbying for laws that remove more of our freedoms.
You and I may find it disgusting, but that just means we don't need to go look at it. It doesn't mean this guy is going to go and hurt anyone, and I think it's dangerous for us to start assuming that anyone with a fantasy would want that fantasy to be reality. Let's look at less extreme forms of entertainment. I love James Bond movies. Would I really want to be James Bond? Let's see what happens when we turn that fantasy into reality. We have a man who constantly gets beaten up and tortured, constantly in danger of dying, and although getting laid like he does sounds great, think about all the STDs he must have. I'm a fan of Batman, but do you think that means that I would really want to see a vigilante out in the streets bypassing the court system?
Just because you enjoy a fantasy, doesn't mean you'd like to make it real.
Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.
So all the splatter horror movie creators and viewers? Just how many people are you planning on keeping an eye on?
I've never seen the art, I don't plan to see the art, and I don't care what it's about. It could have been anything. It could have been stock footage of pebbles of gravel for all I care (can't say that 'I couldn't care less if it was horribly violent looking', since that's evidently what it was... so a different example appears to be required)
But the fact that it's allowed makes me smile just a little bit at Canada (which has been getting pretty hard for me lately, with Harper destroying the shit out of this place).
Freedom of speech today just took slightly less of a beating than it's normally been getting. Mind you it's still getting beaten within an inch of its life... but being beaten within an inch of its life with softer gloves this time.
Just look at all those offended Christians...
Isn't the fact that his site is called "Inner Depravity" enough of a warning? I think you could make a pretty good argument that the "norms" that should be used to judge such a site should include only those people who would go to a site after seeing that name.
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
The material in question depicts gruesome murders, torture, sexual abuse, assaults and necrophilia â" all with young female victims.
"Art" perhaps. But I'd keep an eye on this guy. Of course it's only my reactionary opinion, but I think people that have an obsession with this sort of thing have a problem, and I'd want to make sure they don't "jump" to exercising a more "real world" form of their entertainment.
Probably best then to keep an eye on all those that pay to see gore-filled movies, since he was only trying to get work in the production of said movies.
i.e. Anyone watching CSI: watch 'em. Viewing Saw: watch 'em (ok, I might even agree with that one). The list is too long to enumerate.
Plus, Star Trek, etc.: sfx there too...
All of them, obviously. Kind of like some countries where you can't go a day without doing something illegal you didn't know about.
you failed to grasp the meaning of TFAFalcon's sarcastic comment. Consider Mel Gibson's "The Passion." Goriest, most horrifying move I've seen in a long time. A real sickfest if you ask me. It's one thing to commemorate the death of Jesus. It's quite another thing to make dwell on every sick, sadistic detail of his crucifixion. But it's considered art and it should be. If we were banning 'art' on the basis of how horrific it is, we'd have to ban that movie and countless others, along with crucifixes and many other kinds of religious art and that would be a loss.
I guess I'm still kind of ok with it. I'm just worried about the people who are drawn to this site.
Some of the research out there is starting to show that consuming pornography over time changes the reward centers in our brains and impacts our ability to have relationships with the opposite sex. Some of it even suggests that over time there is a need for kinkier pornography because the normal stuff no longer has as much of a dopamine release as it once did. This applies to both men and women, and not just with visual pornography (reading erotica can be an issue as well). I'm not trying to make a case for a blanket pornography ban, but those who imply that consuming explicit media "harms no one" are starting to slowly find themselves on the losing side of the science.
I guess I'm still kind of ok with it. I'm just worried about the people who are drawn to this site.
Why does the porn nature change your opinion of it? Isn't gruesome murder pretty high on the intolerable scale already?
In the US our FCC makes sure that producers can show babies being killed on TV, but babies being made is strictly forbidden. One school of thought says that this is entirely consistent with training a population to be 'at peace' with continual war.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
When I was younger, sexually frustrated, and jaded by readily-accessible Internet pornography, I had lots of fantasies that were extremely violent. I wouldn't have acted on them then, and I wouldn't act on them now. I still have fantasies that would turn my gut if I ever found out that they happened in real life.
There are certain people who are able to differentiate between fantasy and reality, and determine that what works in one may not work well in the other. We call those people "well-adjusted".
What if my fantasy is looking at naked under-aged girls doing sexy things (with or without gore)? Is that okay now? I mean, if it is staged art and not real, then it should be okay and making it or watching it should be legal.
Oh you mean the US.
It's nigh impossible to get an accurate count of the number of criminal laws on the books.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
As someone who creates art like this (in some cases) I've found it works best when both intelligence and emotion elevate this material from simply shock gore to artwork. Of course, I'm insane and admit it, but no one is keeping an eye on me besides my thousands of website visitors. - HEX
Horror & SciFi Erotic Nudes
Morally, yes, legally, no. Sadly, all the 5-12 year olds on The Gong Show (come on, is the "X" anything other than a gong?) is illegal child porn, according to many laws. It's just that the laws are so far divorced from reality that most wouldn't realize it unless they stopped and thought "would this excite a pedophile?" Though the general legal standard is "would this excite a normal person" but that is ignored in court, and it's all a question of "if you thought this was sexy, do you find this sexy?" So, by definition, anyone charged with child porn is guilty. Like the manga guy with so many movies that some of them included tentacle porn. He pled guilty because his lawyer let him in on the secret that anyone charged with child porn is guilty, even if the porn is fictional and completely impossible (tentacle porn). That it is part of a larger art collection is irrelevant.
The laws are so far divorced from reality it's insane. The problem is nobody wants to be seen as legalizing child porn, so they will only get more strict, and never less.
Learn to love Alaska
Elsewhere in the world, specificly The People's Republic of New Jersey, school officials cannot determine the difference between a real, and drawn automatic weapon. (wonder why the US has education problems)
Its good to see at least somewhere(Canada), the Enlightenment lives on, and people can continue to release that drawings don't come to life and hurt people.
Why don't you put him on a "list"
The "don't fly list"
The "sex offender list"
The "eats toejam and writes Free software list"
The (Charlie Sheen) "Winning" list
just to add to the previous "Security" and "Reserve" lists of US citizens that were actively spied on, for unspecified "crimes against the state" to be rounded up in case of an emergency.
What if my art is peeing in a jar containing a portrait of Stephen Harper? Surely I should be jailed if I offend enough people, eh? What if I paint a picture of the top 50 Canadian Industrialists crucified? If I offend you with such a painting I should be jailed, what? How about if I'm a journalist and I uncover atrocities committed in third world countries by those same industrialists and I then sell the rights to those news articles to said artist who commences a mural depicting those atrocities and they offend you? Surely I should be jailed for 50 years, yes?
Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
Ultimate sacrifice? Wasn't the death of every other person that died on a cross a much bigger sacrifice? After all, they didn't come back from the dead.
But the point of my comment was why persecute people creating images of torture, when the dominant religion in the country uses an implement of torture as it's symbol, and was founded on a person who had himself tortured to death. If creation of images of torture imply a desire to go on a killing spree then why restrict ourselves to 'keeping any eye on' just this artist? Shouldn't all the makers of crucifixes also be considered a danger? Shouldn't people who buy them?
As long as the actresses are of legal age and just look under-aged, then go for it.
The "ultimate" sacrifice? Jesus had a bad weekend for your sins.
Can anyone guess what we will hear in a few years about this "artist"?
Does Canada have something like the "SLAPS" test that U.S. law has? For background, in the U.S., we have a litmus test from Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973), that says that a work has to lack "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value" in order to be considered obscene. This standard is so broad that it's even been used to strike down some of our child pornography laws, Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 535 U.S. 234 (2002). Rarely does our government even bother trying to prosecute such speech any more because they know that virtually anything can pass this test.
Liberty in your lifetime
Mmm. You may have been watching too many movies. Just a thought, but in terms of classical psychoanalysis, couldn't de-repressing these sort of fantasies in the form of art actually be a safety valve, just as horror movies allow the public to safely blow off their unconscious sadosexual fantasies? In other words, he might be less likely to act on them than some severely repressed, puritanical accountant who one day pops his cork ....?
Whereas it's not a good thing for the artist himself to be victimized by the State like this, from a pragmatic perspective, prosecutions like this are a good thing for freedom of speech. All they do is popularize the "obscene" art. I had never heard of this guy. I'm sure the vast, vast majority of people have never heard of him, either. Now we have. Now he's a cause célèbre among free speech advocates. And now I'm going to check out the guy's website and see what kind of "art" this guy has produced, and I'm sure hundreds of others will, too. And some people will probably be inspired to create similar art. And so on and so on.
It's the Streisand effect with the entire Canadian government in the role of Streisand.
The best thing the State could do when people make art they don't like is to ignore it. But instead they try to suppress it, drawing an enormous spotlight to it, and they fail, leaving the art behind untouched---but now with a huge spotlight pointed at. Good job, guys.
Liberty in your lifetime
Than you are a sick indevidual.
Well, I don't really feel terribly insulted when a person who can't even spell "individual" and "then" properly calls me sick.
I got the wrong thread. Merry Christmas, everyone!
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
The 'point' of all the horrible gore in "The Passion" was to elicit pity and horror in the viewer, and to make them understand the sacrifice that was being made for Humanity's benefit.
Surely the 'point' had absolutely nothing to do with making a controversial movie even more controversial in an attempt to get more people to see it (read: make more money).
And surely a militant antisemite like Mel Gibson would never, ever, make this movie gory specifically to incite anger/hate against Jews, who are blamed for the crucifixion.
As long as the actresses are of legal age and just look under-aged, then go for it.
Wrong! Any depiction that *looks* like a minor is child pron in Australia and some other countries I believe. This is also in an extremely broad international treaty which also contains an extremely broad definition of child pron. The model's actual age is now irrelevant; she could be 50yo and photoshopped to just *look* 16yo. Brought to you by the New Puritan Fascists who run all things, in association with Think Of The Children Inc Productions.
Remember: you let these people pass these oppressive laws. We all did. And no judge has the guts to strike them down in court.
That reflects my thoughts as I was searching for a Christmas gift in a jewelry store yesterday. There were all these little gold and silver, jewel encrusted crosses in the store. I was thinking how peculiar anyone living at the time of Christ would have thought these little torture instruments. Had they peered into the future and seen these they might have concluded that it was the Romans we were holding in reverence. Also, I thought it was an interesting contrast, the expensive jewelry with a Christian symbol with pronouncements about the fate of the wealthy, "a rope through the eye of a needle" and so forth.
You're the only other person apart from myself I've known to state that it wasn't such a big sacrifice after all. Congrats and thankyou.
It'd be a far bigger sacrifice to give up for one's place in heaven to go to hell eternally. And that's something even I'd consider if I could save say 5 people, and consign myself for torture forever.
And that, if nothing else, is why I consider Christianity as pure garbage unfortunately.
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
The outside world doesn't know it but we Canadians are actually legally required to be nice. Eh! Ya didn' think we were nice because we liked you?
Splatter and horror? What about Jersey Shore? That is actual torture.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
All the puritans clearly think violence is absolutely fine while anything vaguely sexual will ruin the nation's morals, if it had any. This in a country (the US) with an enormous sex industry and where minors are routinely depicted as sexual beings in the fashion and advertising industries and in beauty competitions.
I find the hypocrisy simply astonishing. For the life of me I cannot understand how everyone doesn't see this. Are they all blind?
All those so-called Christians out there should remember: the only thing that ever made that Jesus of Nazareth totally lose his cool was *hypocrisy*. He despised hypocrites more than anything else. He much preferred socially-reviled sinners who were up front about it: prostitutes, tax collectors, lepers, persecutors ... If he were here today he would be hanging with pedophiles and Ponzi scheme administrators for example.
And there's Gilbert and George in the UK (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_%26_George) who like to photograph their anuses. That's been around since the 1980s and no-one rightly gives a shit. They are high profile artists in the UK.
But it's hard to define 'consensual' with children. If a parent/trusted adult tells a young child that something is good, the child will likely trust him/her and do it. So for example a girl could agree to have her genitals mutilated, since it would make look 'pretty'. Would that be considered consensual?
The 'legal age' is a bit arbitrarily set, but there has to be some way to protect children until they are old enough and have enough information about what they are consenting to.
It seems natural, at least to some, to recoil in horror at the notion of fantasizing about homicide or mass homicide. I am reminded of a scene from Inglourious Basterds
Spoiler Alert
Near the end of the film, it shows Hitler and a bunch of Reich VIPs watching a movie of the death camps and laughing, and we, the audience, are meant to recoil in horror (and we do). In the very next scene, the heroes slaughter Hitler and the VIPs and Tarantino frames it as a comic scene, and it made me laugh at the slaughter.
So there I was, whipsawed from moral outrage at someone for laughing at mass homicide on film to laughing at mass homicide on film in a matter of seconds. Now, obviously, we all prefer to see Hitler & Friends killed than innocent victims of genocide, but the laughing at mass homicide switchback remains. And it was all happening within a work of cinematic art.
Tarantino shot a scene of people laughing at holocaust victims, and it is art. He shot a scene that causes us to laugh at mass homicide, and it is art. He juxtaposes those scenes, and it is poignant, incisive art. If we can laugh at mass homicide, and see laughing at the holocaust as art, it would be very challenging to objectively define the moral limits of art.
Horrible things are a part of the human condition. If we are to be free to know ourselves, our artists must be free to explore the darkest corners of our beings.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
Damn right they weren't of equivalent value.
The others died, uncertain about what, if anything, awaited them.
Jesus chose to let himself be crucified, then rose from the dead and went on living, effectively giving up nothing.
It's like honoring a person for a charitable donation, even after he canceled the check.
Let me get this straight. You're saying that the torture depicted by Couture will give sick freaks a hard-on, but the torture depicted in Passion won't, and this is only because Mel Gibson's heart is pure, and Couture's isn't?
Do you think I just fell off a potato truck, or what?
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Erm, Christians apparently don't have to do much more than believe to get into Heaven, but I'd bet not many would few would give up their place, even if it would mean saving five from hell.
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
Funny we don't care about that when we're talking about guys. After I found out I was mutilated and the pain I experienced was not a normal part of being a man, I stopped giving a shit about FGM, because I realized everything that horrified me about the idea was something I was already living with no way to reverse it, ever.
You missed the point (whether intentionally or out of ignorance, I leave to the reader):
It isn't what something will do, but why it was made:
* "Couture" designed his movies specifically to give sick freaks a hard-on. Nothing more, nothing otherwise. I defy anyone to prove otherwise.
* Passion of The Christ was designed to be an un-filtered look at what Christ had to go through, and was engineered to emphasize the suffering and the resurrection, so that adherants (and potential adherants) would empathize with Christ, and know what He went through on your spiritual behalf. Whether you do appreciate/empathize or not is up to you, but that is the intent, as originally written in a ~2000-year-old story.
There's a big diff there. You cannot dismiss intent, either - otherwise you end up equating Renaissance artwork with a typical pr0n mag. Yeah they both have naked people, but only one of the two was designed to generate hard-ons. Used to be that it was a mark of mental maturity to know and appreciate the difference; I hope things haven't changed by too much by now.
As for TFA? This "Couture" guy may be a sick freak, but legally, he has the perfect right to portray whatever he wants within the bounds of Canadian speech laws. Since Canada isn't the US, shouting "First Amendment!!!11!!" won't apply.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Well, I don't really feel terribly insulted when a person who can't even spell "individual" and "then" properly calls me sick.
And an elitist spelling Nazi to boot! My guess is that you have a thing for pedophilia and necrophilia involving female pre-teens. Wow, are you a sick puppy. But I guess this is what comes from a 35 year old overweight Neck Beard like you spending all your time in your mom's basement wearing your dead sisters panties while looking at Japanese Tentacle Porn.
Sick. Simply sick. Seek help before it's too late.
Oooh. Transference. Better discuss this with your shrink. Things are getting serious. I sense an epiphany!
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Viably so, since intermixing these two has valid risk of significant social effects.
Thanks for the standard stupid troll on your part, though.
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
No, only if you channel Norman Rockwell. Now his stuff was disgusting.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Funny we don't care about that when we're talking about guys. After I found out I was mutilated and the pain I experienced was not a normal part of being a man, I stopped giving a shit about FGM, because I realized everything that horrified me about the idea was something I was already living with no way to reverse it, ever.
Funny, the rest of the circumcised world doesn't have your sorts of issues. Maybe it's just you.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
He wasn't giving up his life. There are people who survive worse every day in wars and car accidents.
He just took a couple of days off and popped back up in a tomb.
That's if you actually believe in these myths and that the guy even existed. There have been people calling themselves the christ/messiah for as long as the legend has been around. It's what keeps cults and mental hospitals in business.
The material in question depicts gruesome murders, torture, sexual abuse, assaults and necrophilia — all with young female victims.
Basically, a Wednesday afternoon on 4chan /b/.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
> The material in question depicts gruesome murders, torture, sexual abuse, assaults and necrophilia — all with young female victims.
I'm not a serious horror buff, but aren't most slasher films all of the above (save perhaps the necrophilia) directed mostly at young female victims? It's practically a definition of the genre.
I'm trying to imagine how it could be a crime for Couture to stage these scenes, and a multi-million-dollar enterprise for a studio in Los Angles to do exactly the same thing.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
You'd have to look pretty hard - crucifixion makes for a very slow and grisly death and was generally used to make an example of dangerous troublemakers by the powers that be, Jesus was hardly the first man to be thus killed. Basically you're restrained until you die of dehydration, which is a pretty bad way to go to begin with. To make matters worse any movement grinds the nails into your wounds so, unlike being shackled against a wall, you're going to have to be in pretty bad shape before you can lose consciousness, and you'll likely be constantly fighting to take the weight off the nails in your hands to reduce the pain, which will help keep you psychologically present and cause pain in your shoulders and back (try holding your arms straight out from your sides for even ten minutes, we're really not built to be able to do that). Meanwhile infection is burning its way in from the nail wounds, and you probably have a vicious sunburn after the first day or two, covering much of your body if you were partially stripped (if you've never had a sunburn so bad it turns purple you don't begin to understand how painful a sunburn can be). Night would give you respite from the sun, but in a desert you're then faced with rapidly falling temperatures which will become their own torture long before morning. If you're lucky it's over in a few days... if you're particularly hardy or are cursed with sympathetic guards/observers who sneak you water... well then he torture could last for weeks. Admittedly a more active torture likely hit higher peaks of pain, but it's also likely to be over *far* more quickly.
Still - we're talking about the purported Son of God here. It would seem only reasonable to assume that he could achieve the mental discipline separation of sensation and consciousness that permits a Buddhist master to calmly burn to death. Hell was presumably worse if you listen to the fire and brimstone sorts, or even just the absence of the light of God types (I believe hewas supposed to have spent his life up to that point ever-conscious of his tie to God, having that cut off could be a severe shock), but I still seem to recall that the story says he went in knowing it would be a brief visit, hardly seems like the ultimate sacrifice to me
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Perhaps you're not bothered, but many Christians really go OTT on that crucifixion thing. Calling it the "ultimate sacrifice" etc.
Moreover, hell is something I think relatively few really think about. I think getting Christians to think about their "wonderful time" in heaven whilst others roast in hell is a good thought exercise which can help them to be a bit more humble, and (shock), even question their beliefs, and the inconsistencies therein.
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
And to people that are into that shit they are BOTH torture porn, end of story. nobody gives a rat's ass about "intent" because if that's all the excuse you need there are plenty of sick shit in both the bible and the koran that i can start filming tomorrow that will be sicker than anything yet put to film, so just get over it.
Free speech is free speech, either you have it or you don't, and if you think because it was written ages ago gives it a pass? Well plenty of writings equally old that can let me make movies that will make Schizophreniac 2 look like an episode of the Teletubbies.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
In Canada the definition of child porn also includes actresses who appear to be or are depicted as being under 18 regardless of their actual age.
No one has a right to their *own* opinion. They have a right to the TRUTH.
Free speech is free speech, either you have it or you don't, and if you think because it was written ages ago gives it a pass? Well plenty of writings equally old that can let me make movies that will make Schizophreniac 2 look like an episode of the Teletubbies.
You missed the part where I said he had the perfect right to display it under Canadian law (since he was, you know, in Canada...)
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Because making sex 'no big deal' would also make it 'a lot less fun to fuck in the back seat of a car', or whatever floats your boat.
There are advantages to trivial things being 'taboo'.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
If you really believe what you believe, why are you posting as anon? And would you be kind enough to give up your place in heaven to five people from hell?
I am posting anon because I rather liked leaving the last post of my posting history what it was. Prefer this?
It makes not the slightest difference whether I'd be "kind" enough to give up my place, nor does it matter in the least that "kindness" is the most important thing to you personally. You may as well ask if I'd be "kind" enough to upgrade everyone to flying cars. It's irrelevant because reality doesn't work that way. Neither does the nature of Christian metaphysics work the way you argue for for the purposes of arguing against. Nor does it matter to seeking an idealized outcome that you propose it's necessary to break something to fix something else.
The distinction between you and I is that I actually know what God is doing with this. You are attempting to evaluate the purported ethics of the situation based on your personal feelings drawing from an entirely wrong notion of how things work. An uniformed conclusion based on a false premise, does not result in a useful opinion.
In short, I will not be cowering, nor complaining, simply appreciative of the ethical precision of a system including a "hell" you actually know nothing about.
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
But it's hard to define 'consensual' with children. If a parent/trusted adult tells a young child that something is good, the child will likely trust him/her and do it. So for example a girl could agree to have her genitals mutilated, since it would make look 'pretty'. Would that be considered consensual?
The 'legal age' is a bit arbitrarily set, but there has to be some way to protect children until they are old enough and have enough information about what they are consenting to.
Yes. but your analogy is terrible.
At what age do you think a woman is mature enough to choose to have her genitals mutilated in order to make herself look pretty? How about having her face mutilated? Would you EVER consider such consent to be valid?
No one has a right to their *own* opinion. They have a right to the TRUTH.
Except that Jesus is/was God or a part of God or whatever and presuming that God is immortal...well, even if he didn't know he would be de facto resurrected, he knew full well that he could trivially under his/God's power.
So because some religions or parts of a religion can serve many purposes, a specific example of a religion that could be said to really fail massively in one of its core messages--damnation for most of humanity to an eternity of torment--is someone *not* garbage? Seriously, though, the really sad part is precisely that the message of Christianity is often presented as Christ sort of cutting deal with God that amounts to Jesus suffering death by crucifixion once as being equivalent to all of humanity suffering in hell for all eternity with the small cavity that all people have to do is believe in Christ as the son of God. Of course, taken literally, that would seem to imply one could steal, rape, murder to one's hearts content--there's clearly a heavy dose of BS in the idea that believing in Christ as son of God == being a good person because, well, it obviously isn't true with Satan or most Christians who "falter".
In any case, the real issue is that once you start laying credence to anything and everything that as "good parts" you're left really accepting almost everything to some degree and that sort of acceptance is pretty useless. So, perhaps technically Christianity isn't "pure garbage", but then I don't think that was the GP's point anyways. It was mostly to note just how broken as an overall point it and honestly most religions are (I would say all, but I readily acknowledge I don't know all religions to go that far) in requiring you to accept a lot of garbage as canon to really get to any of the good parts. Why not just have the good parts de facto based on something a lot more substantial than myths and legends, especially those that nay condemn most of humanity?
Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
I hate to break it to you, but both things happen. Women have their genitals 'corrected', and you can see the results of too much plastic surgery in the media. And both are not just consensual, the women pay a lot of money for them.
Are the risks of mixing violence and religion any less severe? What about violence and politics?
and the remaining 0.001% would, and probably do, pay him quite a generous sum for commissioned work. i'm sure he'd have a comfortable life as long as he has the freedom to associate with certain aesthetes and like-minded individuals.
but don't worry! raving antisemites aren't left out in the cold; something like this might be more your style. there's plenty of that too.
"They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
Well, if the Bible is at all accurate on the point, sympathetic guards/observers tended to break a condemned persons legs to speed up the death--the downward hanging pressure would prevent them from breathing and they'd quickly suffocate; I do sort of wonder if that had more to do with the assembly line fashion the Romans were doing in crucifying people and needing the space. Anyways, as the story goes, Jesus died quickly enough to not have his legs broken which oddly implies he was either not hardy, the torture by the Romans up to that point was that severe, or he had some sort of divine intervention to speed up his death. The overall point being that presumably other people suffered worse.
Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
It still does involve tons of subjective valuation. What's not subjective about saying "I think Einstein was a greater sacrifice than the death of a convicted murderer because he had a great scientific mind that could have achieved more in his life given more time.", or saying "I think they were of equal value because I value all human life equally.", or saying "I think the inmate was a greater sacrifice because Einstein's death was natural and I don't believe the quality of the evidence in the case against the inmate was strong enough to warrant the death penalty."?
“If Jesus had been killed twenty years ago, Catholic school children would be wearing little electric chairs around their necks instead of crosses.”
Lenny Bruce
If your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd murder you in your sleep
Give all the ways the myriad of Saints died accordingly to christian beliefs and the relics preserved in all the churches around the world (fragments of bones, skin, blood and so on). I won't say christians haven't attraction for morbidity. Look at all the paintings and carvings of these guys who died in the most horrible ways you can imagine. Saturnin dragged by a bull until death, Sebastian riddled with arrows, etc. Look at the paintings of the doomsday, the judgment day, etc.
Achille Talon
Hop!
No, actually we're talking about Canada, which no more has free speech than any other place that has laws that can punish you for what you say, paint, sculpt, perform an imitation of, write, etc.
And yes, that absolutely implicates the USA as well. We're a long, long way from our 1st amendment guarantees because our "justice" system is manifestly corrupt.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Christian metaphysics don't work at all. It's superstition, nothing more. Precisely the same thing as myths of the Norse gods, or Quetzalcoatl, or banshees, ghosts, etc.
The function Christianity performs is not one of saving people, that's purest bunkum. It is strictly a social mechanism used to apply goat-age thinking to modern life. Some of that thinking still applies; but most of it doesn't.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
You missed the point entirely. He didn't actually die, if you believe the story, as Christians tend to say they do. Instead, he was brought back and taken into heaven. So some torture, three days of unconsciousness, then resurrection at God's right hand.
The contention is that the aggregate there doesn't meet the standard of a sacrifice that the actual death of a human being does. If you have a counter-argument, by all means, let fly. But don't compare the Christ story with death, because it doesn't describe the thing we know to be death.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
The Romans didn't actually nail people through the hands. They nailed them through the wrists, so the nails wouldn't tear out.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I had to videotape accident scenes (police work, contractor). By comparison this guy takes pictures of fluffy puppies.
...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
So this ethical system is above God, and he can't do anything to change it?
In any case, that system is utterly terrible. There's something called rehabilitation, which is a way to give someone another chance to change their ways and improve themself (ignoring it'd be cruel to send someone to hell even if they were 'wicked', or just simply didn't 'believe'). Would not such a 'perfect' system allow that mechanism? Instead Christianity turns "rehabilitation" into something you're more likely to find from the Idiocracy film.
Additionally, if a ticket into heaven is based on whether you believe in Jesus or not (or how good you are), well that's flawed, because there are different shades of grey, both in probability of believing something, and of someone's 'goodness'. So there's this black and white reward/punishment dichotomy for a person who is very complex and has feelings between definitely false or definitely true.
You still didn't answer whether you'd be fully happy in heaven knowing tons of people are roasting in hell. Would you sweep that thought under the carpet whilst you're up there? I'm not sure I could, or anyone with a degree of compassion.
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
Not posting anon can be useful because you receive an email when someone's replied to your post.
As for your post, there is justification in the scary fire/brimstone hell, especially since Jesus himself seems to like talking about it an awful lot.
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
But what is the point of 'sacrificing' yourself, when you're not sacrificing anything? The terrible thing about death for humans is that it's a one-way process. So why consider death a big sacrifice if it's most important feature is missing - you're just going to respawn later. Even the torture of the crucifixion becomes questionable, when the guy being tortured is omnipotent - if he can turn water to wine then blood to morphine shouldn't be much of a stretch. Did he even suffer, or did he just moan while being stoned?
As for the records, there are a few things to consider. First, how many records are there of most people not performing miracles? It's rare for people to record the fact that something unexpected did NOT happen that day. At the time Jesus was little more then the head of a Cult. So since his cult was not yet large or violent, why would you expect there to be extensive records about his actions. Most accounts of him would be by his followers. And just like the leaders of cults today, those followers would likely attribute special powers to their leaders.
Another thing that should be considered is that it was the christian church that was main organization which preserved the records of that time. Even some of the contents of the works of Josephus are likely to have been 'extended' by their christian keepers. So how likely would a work that proclaimed Jesus a fraud have been not just to escape destruction but to be actively preserved?
Damn right they weren't of equivalent value. The others died, uncertain about what, if anything, awaited them. Jesus chose to let himself be crucified, then rose from the dead and went on living, effectively giving up nothing. It's like honoring a person for a charitable donation, even after he canceled the check.
Eh. Not that I'm a believer, but it's a greater relative sacrifice.
If I'm a god, and don't have to experience any suffering at all, if I choose to allow myself to feel the pain of pricking my finger, that's a far greater sacrifice than a human dying. You can't help BUT die, eventually. I don't have to, but chose to experience the pain nevertheless.
Which is all moot, because an omnipotent god could just as easily ensure nobody had to suffer.
I agree with you in principle, but point 2 would be a nightmare. Imagine trying to compose a test that people would agree shows the maturity to consent to sex. Half the world would demand that one of the questions be: Do you think sex outside marriage is wrong?' and answering in the negative should mean an automatic fail. And don't even get me started on questions about disagreeing with your elders.
So, a couple things here.
That you consider (your understanding of) the situation "terrible", just doesn't matter at all. Your personal subjective opinion doesn't mean anything more than any other given person's subjective opinion, that is, essentially nothing, and you have no means by which you can present any objective validation for it. In fact, you contradict yourself on this very point, saying there are only "shades of gray" and yet, pertaining to (your misunderstanding of) hell, you can make an absolute judgment about its ethical status.
Secondly, "tons of people are roasting in hell" is your construct, and not a valid one. I suggest 1 Cor. 15:20-28 to begin correcting your misapprehension.
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
Jesus was scrourged quite vigorously,
He was likey physically intimidating, he was a carpenter after all, in an age when if you needed a board, you went out and cut down a tree and sawed out the board. The Romans couldn't allow this man to cause any ruckus on the way to his execution, just making to his execution alive was no mean feat.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
My brother had a nervous breakdown recently. He was agnostic before, but now believes in two gods, one female and one male. He's otherwise highly intelligent by the way. He 'knows' (just like you) God is real because he speaks to him/her, and 'feels' he's there, like some kind of spirit within his own mind. It's an illusion however.
This is of course where science comes in. The mind is susceptible to distortions, and misrepresentation of reality, especially when it comes to the supernatural. You sound like another victim unfortunately.
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
Catholics, who make up more than half of the world's Christians generally believe that suffering is one of the keys to understanding Christ and his suffering. While never going as far as deliberately injuring others for this reason, there are certain groups within the church that encourage its members to reduce their usage of painkillers.
There is some serious masochism in the Catholic faith, be it long term ascetic fasting and mortification of the flesh (self injury) or simply meditating on natural pain that one has received from sickness or injury. I do not however believe that any Christian church really condones enjoying the suffering of others though, which is what is sick and unhealthy.
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
Well, I can't speak to the specifics of your brother's experiences. And neither can you, with regards to his experiences nor mine--not that this stopped you from applying your apparent psychic powers to determine I've experienced things I stated nowhere. And there is no validation of "science" on this matter, other than it demonstrating your own claims here blatantly false.
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
GP might have subtly referenced the film, but he wrote Christians, so a hollywood flick defines Christians. That is trolling.
BTW I don`t care what is Art, show whatever you want on your site but first make sure the visitor, or the parent who is responsible for him, has an idea of what`s going to get.
Valid for Gibson, for this guy, for lemonparty-style trollsites, for the idiot who planted fake hung ppl on trees as a form of art.
They get into trials for such actions? good.
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
My kingdom (what little there is of it) for mod points. Couldn't agree more, feel heartened to see other people getting this idea out there.
-
You sound like a Christian idiot and you write like you belong on tumblr. Go back to your ``Keep Christ in Christmas'' campaign, fuckwit.
I actually don't see the slightest difference. Both christianity and what this guy does are fictional stories, filled with gore, and have the purpose of making money.
The difference is that this guy has a small audience, and he hasn't killed anyone or harmed any humans while making his videos, while christianism has fucked up society for 2000 years.
So, not the same at all. What this guy does is shitty art you might like or not. christianity is genocide.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Religion is a form of violence. It's violence against reason, against the human mind, against everything that is good and pure in humans. Religion is the worst kind of violence.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
No, you are right, it's not a movie that defines christians. It's an ~1800 year old book with poor grammar and little consistency/cohesion.
Damn, that's actually worse.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
It's even sadder, actually. There were a lot of psychotic idiots back then saying they where the messiah. Everyone just ignored them for the most part.
Sad story is, there never was even a historical jesus either, superpowers or not.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Well, most atheists just don't really go into the details of this superstitions, they stop at declaring them superstitions.
The only Atheist I can think of that put aside the fact that there is no god and went to the core, to how christianity is essentially wrong in every way, and it teaches bad lessons regardless of how fictional they might be was Nietzsche, in the Antichrist.
I usually insist on that stuff. I tell people "Well, for the sake of argument, let's say your god does exist. Then our biggest priority should be to murder him, to eliminate him completely. All religions are bullshit, but some, such as Buddhism are at least well written, teach good morals, and have actually interesting stories. Christianism doesn't even offer literary value.
It's the kind of shit I don't understand about Scientology. If you are going to believe a sci-fi book is the actual, hard truth, at least pick something by Asimov, or any other writer worth a fuck!
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Personally, if I'm going to be nailed to a cross I would want it to be so badly constructed it would fall apart.
Anyway, isn't nailing to a cross an easter discussion? We should be talking about God nailing Mary.
I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
He did exist. I've seen the documentary http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0311361/
I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
I'll reply to you, way down here, because the first half of the entire chain got eaten by the hijacked first post. (offtopic - ever wanna know how to Influence A Thread? Look at how many times the First Post title gets copied without being changed!)
I'm glad this case got settled "right", because any cheap 2-cent murder tale (meant in the fashion of the old days of pulp thrillers from 1920, not as an insult!) would have had this kind of thing, but because it's not *visual* it's suddenly against morals? Really?!
So at least y'all escaped one cheap trick of a trap that could have only turned out badly. If it had been in the US with Shooter CT Mania it might have gone the other way. : (
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
I'm glad this case got settled "right", because any cheap 2-cent murder tale (meant in the fashion of the old days of pulp thrillers from 1920, not as an insult!) would have had this kind of thing, but because it's not *visual* it's suddenly against morals? Really?!
The law actually covers everything. "written matter, picture, model, phonograph record or other thing whatever".
And I believe the current obscenity law is fairly recent. IIRC, it was inserted in 1985 by Mulroney and his "progressive" conservatives to buy favor with the anti-pornography lunatic fringe of the feminist movement.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
The science and reality based crowd drink from the fountain of knowledge. The superstitious just gargle and spit.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
If we were banning 'art' on the basis of how horrific it is, we'd have to ban that movie and countless others, along with crucifixes and many other kinds of religious art and that would be a loss.
No one is yet. Not one person advocating banning anything before you in the discussion. You're replying to an argument entirely constructed by yourself.
Nope, we should definitely be talking about the catholic clergy raping the pagans.
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
American Beauty ...
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
You missed the part where he's a special effects guy and this is his horror movie portfolio, that his work on the project slowed to a crawl because his special effects career started taking off. To defy anyone to prove otherwise, is to ignore the blatant facts of the case.
If your junk is getting infected then you're not cleaning or pissing correctly. When you piss you simply pull the fore skin back and wiggle a bit after your done to get all the fluid out (also helps your aim). When you take your shower you pull it back and clean all around it. Really these actions take no time at all so I don't see why I would want my commando cut because of "convenience".
Psychopathy as art? Rather than decide if it is "art" or not, question why it needs to exist.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
I prefer this one : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1958067/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Even the "Barely Legal" and "18 Only"-type genre usually means 25-30yo+ now.
At my age, a girl of 25 _is_ barely legal. Anything younger and I'm struggling to tell.
I danced with a girl for two years and the only clue she was under 20 was that she grew three inches in that time. Her mother told me a couple of weeks ago that she's now 18. That's how bad I am at guessing ages.
(She's now 6'2, and well proportioned. And intelligent. And pretty. She's going to have hell finding a nice bloke)
I'm curious. Have you ever had an infected dick?
I ask only because nobody mutilated me, and I've never had one. Never. Not "not on a regular basis" but never.
As opposed to the mutilated children, assaulted with no possibility of consent, a high proportion of whom need medical assistance as a result.
e.g. http://jpubhealth.oxfordjournals.org/content/33/2/280.abstract
Well, look on the positive side. If you ever go to bed with a woman, she won't run screaming from the bed when the crud from a nasty, sweaty, germ infested dickhead drops onto the sheets.
That happens? That's happened to you?
Sounds like FUD to me. Sounds like post-justification for the mutilation of a child to me.
Doesn't sound like anything I've ever encountered, myself or from my friends - female or male.
You have that right..
Paedophiles like looking at pictures of children and even babies being raped - but don't tell me, it "doesn't mean they'd like to make it real"... LOL. Idiot.
Your laughable comparison to watching a film is beyond contempt, is that your best argument? Nobody watches a James Bond film because they want to BE James Bond, it's just interesting and enjoyable to watch it.
You just contradicted yourself.
Anyway, the evidence is that porn doesn't lead to non-consensual sex:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2032762
http://reason.com/archives/2007/11/05/is-pornography-a-catalyst-of-s
Sorry, but the person you replied to doesn't seem to be an idiot. Just more informed, less reactionary, more considered.
Do you thing a guy that sweats blood while in prayer before getting arrested is going to suffer death like a normal man or not? Because if you think it was just a show, get your different version of the gospel and let's discuss that one instead.
And what do people give up when they are killed? the remaining years between that moment and a certain death, in a life they owe to the creator. It's partially paying a debt, not giving up anything.
What does a god give up when he incarnates? Nothing but he gets the "inconvenience" of suffering like us, but it was a voluntary act, the god owes you nothing.
And it is stupid to draw the line here and discuss the balance between some years and some "inconvenience" because part of the religion is about reward. Personally I think the reward shouldn't even bother people because religion is about having a perspective and act accordingly. But it's part of the religion so you must also take into account that any sacrifice by men is going to be rewarded.
Free to believe that the reward, wait, the whole story, is a scam, NOT FREE to remove things from your considerations, if I claim Porsches are shitty cars, they make a terrible noise and barely make 50mph, maybe I should consider what a gearbox does, right?
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
LOL but rly, a bad nothingness (what are three days for the eternal guy?) for a transcendent guy spent to save some nothingness (as we are in comparison to the galaxy, never mind the universe, never mind the creation).
Quantification is impossible.
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
Far more, I don't think so. If they are, that's irrelevant. The guy had to defeat death and let us (theologically speaking) choose how.
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
Flaying? Boiling alive?
Hmm, you know it suddenly occurred to me that there are a few naturally occurring substances that will induce a (hopefully) temporary comatose state that could easily be mistaken for death by people without modern medical technology. Now I don't know if any of those substances were known 2000 years ago in the Middle East, but they could certainly have made possible a dramatic escape from a slow death sentence. Add in the century or so of oral tradition between the crucifixion and the first recorded evidence of Jesus's existence and a mystic's dramatic "jailbreak" could easily have been embellished to become a tail of death and resurrection. For that matter there are Eastern mystics with enough control of their autonomic functions can enter such a state without chemical assistance. Even entering a deep trance to escape the pain might be mistaken for death by an ignorant guard who needed the space to hang the next prisoner.
No offense intended to the true believers, I'm just speculating on the reality that might underlie a strange twist to what are otherwise fairly standard embellishments to a hero myth.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Do you think a guy can act? Does saying that you're worried and acting like it mean you are worried, or just a good actor? Does screaming mean you are in pain? If it does, all those guys in Hollywood must be some serious masochists to keep their jobs.
When people die they give up something they have a finite supply of - life. Isn't that kind of the definition of sacrifice? Giving something valuable up? Is the time of an eternal omnipotent omnipresent entity limited? Does incarnation 'give something up'?
You ask me not to remove things from my consideration, so I'd like to ask you to do the same thing. Even if we assume that every record of the event was a truthful recollection, does that mean the record itself is completely accurate? Or were the writers just fallible people, which might have been fooled by tricks or misinterpreted things they saw?
One final point - find me one Jew of Jesus' time that says he didn't do the miracles, etc., that he did.
A little hard to do that with the lack of immortals these days. Would Jesus himself count? If so, he might possibly be a bit of a biased source. There's the immortal "Wandering Jew", cursed to immortal misery until the second coming by Jesus. That's out of christian mythology, not dogma, so I'm not sure if it counts. There's Cain, but that's pre-Abrahamic, so I'm not sure he would count as Jewish, and, even if he did, I think he would be considered excommunicated. Aside from that, I can't think of any other potential immortal Jews from Jesus' time that we could find and ask.
I don't care where in the west you are free speech should be considered one of the most basic of human rights and if you don't have it? Well then frankly you simply don't have a free society, end of story. The way those in the EU persecute those that dare speak out about the Koran would make me label those societies as non free regimes, which is why we should ALL stand up when anyone in the west tries to stifle free speech.
Never forget the words of the Great John F. Kennedy "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." and at the core of everything is free speech, if you don't have it then frankly everything else really isn't worth anything.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Definitely. He also seems to think he's telepathic.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Bloody Lucky or Prevent-it.ca? Those showed some rather graphic images posed as public service announcements? For a moment, I thought the article was about those and not some pervert with a snuff fetish.
Actually, it's not just the death that Christians are caring about. The torture is quite symbolic as well. For instance, many references to the crown of thornes are made. The body being broken and the blood being spilled are constantly reinforced imagery. The suffering matters too.
If I criticize A I must take A for granted and look for inconsistencies.
If I don't take A for granted I don't criticize it, I simply refuse it and don't need to justify my position until those who assert A come with proof.
You are asking me to consider "what if A is false/misreported"? then all considerations over A are irrelevant, why bother.
I was asking you to take everything into account when looking for inconsistencies.
Men who sacrifice themselves give up the most important thing they have, no doubt. But you still need to consider whom those lives come from, and that non-gods cannot tell what incarnation implied for a god. Then the assertion that one sacrifice is bigger than the other becomes very very thin.
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
But you are also making assertions - that incarnating and dying on a cross implies a sacrifice. If god can't be understood by mortals, then why give his acts such human labels?
Christianity demands that god is treated as a self sacrificing entity since it incarnated and let itself be killed - looking at god in the same was we'd look at a human (death is bad), while at the same time also looking at god as completely inhuman (sure he didn't let himself stay dead, but that's OK since he's god, so the sacrifice still counts).
So why not include your own words, that non-gods cannot tell what incarnation implied for a god, when considering the Bible? Why should any of it's texts dealing with the incarnation be considered anything more then guesswork?