What a pusillanimous abandonment of the principles of Western Civilization!
1 posted on
02/14/2006 2:07:25 PM PST by
steve-b
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
To: steve-b
2 posted on
02/14/2006 2:09:19 PM PST by
BenLurkin
(O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
To: steve-b
A Liberal outfit obviously...translation:...."you have right to free speech as long as noone objects to what you say."
Geez, it must be embarassing to be a Catholic.
3 posted on
02/14/2006 2:09:39 PM PST by
OldArmy52
(Jesus loves you.....Everyone else thinks you are an a--hole.)
To: steve-b
I wonder what they plan on doing about these images:
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/euro_medi_ren/
![]()
From a church in Italy!
I'm completely disappointed with this statement.
To: steve-b
Oh nonsense, reminding people to be polite in regards to certain topics is an abandonment of nothing!
Now, if the Vatican would just call on Islamic leaders to renounce violence, you could certainly accuse them of calling on someone to abandon their principles.
9 posted on
02/14/2006 2:14:17 PM PST by
FormerLib
(Kosova: "land stolen from Serbs and given to terrorist killers in a futile attempt to appease them.")
To: steve-b
The Vatican must be ignorant of the virulent antisemitism that is everyday fare in Muslim countries and being propagated in Saudi funded Muslim schools worldwide. Not to mention being ignorant of the hate speech and discrimination against Christians in Muslim dominated countries
10 posted on
02/14/2006 2:14:59 PM PST by
The Great RJ
("Mir wölle bleiwen wat mir sin" or "We want to remain what we are." ..Luxembourg motto)
To: steve-b
At the same time, the Vatican said, violent reactions are equally deplorable. Equally? So writing/publishing satirical religious cartoons is on equal footing with burning embassies, committing murder, threatening holocausts, etc.?
12 posted on
02/14/2006 2:18:42 PM PST by
Mr. Mojo
To: steve-b
Wait a minute--that means if I'm offended by this, I'm not supposed to burn down a cathedral?!?
Shoot. All dressed up and nowhere to go.
13 posted on
02/14/2006 2:19:55 PM PST by
pillut48
(CJ in TX)
To: steve-b
The Vatican was never very into freedom of expression.
To: steve-b
Sounds like the Vatican is just dropping its pants and getting ready to bend over.
"We shouldn't diminish the love and respect Muslims have for their prophet Mohammed. This is very important for them and therefore cannot be the object of derision or ridicule," he said.
The archbishop added that violent reactions to such offenses are not justified.
This just in Cardinal, Allah's not real. Since your own Bible tells you that there is no other God but the Living, i.e. Biblical God, Allah must be a false god. But hey, far be it for a laymen to tell you what your religious underpinnings are, eh.
Cardinal Achille Silvestrini is either an idiot or insane.
16 posted on
02/14/2006 2:22:24 PM PST by
Fruitbat
To: steve-b
"freedom of expression does not include the right to offend religious sentiments"
Actually, your Holiness (or whomever), it includes exactly that.
17 posted on
02/14/2006 2:22:53 PM PST by
Right Cal Gal
(Conservatives know the names of Tookie's VICTIMS!!)
To: steve-b
"Vatican Says Freedom Of Expression Does Not Mean Offending Religions"Sure it does, I can laugh at anything I find laughable. Others are free to take offense and insult right back at me. That's the healthy give-and-take of a free society. We have many rights but we don't have the right to never be offended.
Sorry if I've offended anyone but if you're going to pass for a grownup, grow a thick skin and learn to laugh at yourself.
21 posted on
02/14/2006 2:35:55 PM PST by
muir_redwoods
(Free Sirhan Sirhan, after all, the bastard who killed Mary Jo Kopechne is walking around free)
To: steve-b
I think the world's population is more deeply offended by their violent reaction. What do they have to say about that?
To: steve-b
"freedom of thought or expression ... cannot imply a right to offend the religious sentiments of believers," If you replace "cannot imply" with "should not promote" then I agree.
"Cannot" implies that the force of government will ensure the prohibition.
"Should not promote" implies the moral force of the church and the wisdom of its leadership should make people think twice about unwisely causing offence.
Even the Catholic Church should (as opposed to "must") accept that there is freedom to do minor evils (causing offense) when prohibiting them creates a major evil (restricting freedom of conscience).
26 posted on
02/14/2006 2:57:51 PM PST by
Uncle Miltie
(The Prophet Muhammed, Piss Be Upon Him)
To: steve-b
Perhaps this is more in the vein of smack-down on the war-on-Christianity than a war on free speech.
28 posted on
02/14/2006 3:09:32 PM PST by
newzjunkey
(In 2006: Reelect Arnold; Get GOP Elected in CA; Halt W's Amnesty for Illegals. Win in Iraq.)
To: steve-b
Philippines -- 95% plus Roman Catholic population. Article 133 of the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines establishes a maximum sentence of 4 years and six months for "Offending the Religious Feelings."
I am intimately familiar with this because in January of 2003 I along with three others were criminally indicted under Article 133, and we have been battling this in court in the Philippines ever since. The complaint under which the prosecutor filed the charges was from a cult called Ang Dating Daan, not Roman Catholic people. Members of that cult were most angry that we displayed a placard with the words, "Jesus said, I am the Way, the Truth and the Life, no man cometh unto the Father but by me (John 14:6)."
The Philippines Justice Department informed us that Article 133 was from old Spanish law, and had originally been written to protect Roman Catholic priests from being harassed during public events like pilgrimages, funerals, etc.
As time goes on, all anyone has to do to offend someone's religious feelings is quote the Bible.
To: steve-b
The Vatican, commenting on a series of satirical newspaper cartoons that have outraged Muslims, said freedom of expression does not include the right to offend religious sentiments.
Gee, my understanding of freedom of expression does include the right to offend religious sentiments. Otherwise, it wouldn't be called freedom. It seems that everyone advocates freedom until faced with a point of view they don't agree with...
To: steve-b
Islam was made up my a nut in order to recruit fighters, so in my book it doesn't even count as a valid religion.
To: steve-b
The Vatican is feeling a twinge in their spines too.
Too bad. Too bad.
To: steve-b
Vatican Says Freedom Of Expression Does Not Mean Offending Religions Not exactly a disinterested source.
36 posted on
02/14/2006 4:05:36 PM PST by
Oztrich Boy
(Religions are just advertising agencies for a product that doesn't exist. = Clive James)
To: steve-b
Yeah, yeah, yeah. We know you hate the Catholic Church. Same stuff, different day.
As soon as Catholics start burning down the embassies of countries where anti-Catholic art has been shown (that would be all of them, practically), let me know, ok?
45 posted on
02/15/2006 6:20:08 PM PST by
Antoninus
(The only reason you're alive today is because your parents were pro-life.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson