jesus is a c**t

[Que-Ever]

Wait, then what did I... brb.

 

[Hellrider]

and since when are female boobs "indecent"? what the hell crazy society do we live in that says a part of the human anatomy is indecent?

In a society that is full of idiots and led by idiots.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Stern, you are olddddd.

So I hear there's a lot of this "abstinence" going around these days. Young man aid to me today that he wasn't planning to have sex before he got married! Why, when I was a lad, the fellow would have been horse-whipped! Is there no end to the depravity of today's youth? In my day we fought hard for our sexual liberation and we damn well used it, and if we're not careful, it'll be up to us old folks to keep these deviant youngsters off the straight and narrow.

 

[Mr Stabby]

it is the case ..you even admitted that without jesus there's no story

The 'story' was that Christian standards of morality were being imposed on the kid (blasphemy). This is untrue. The actual story is that a kid was arrested for wearing an obscene T-shirt which broke Australian obscenity laws, that's not a news worthy story.

for the arresting officer perhaps but you cant deny that christians are offended by this ...and I'm not twisting anything you read far too much into something that isnt there

There is a massive difference between Christians personally finding it offensive, which they have every right to do so, and Christians imposing there views of blasphemy on the law, which is not what happened.

 

[99.vikram]

and since when are female boobs "indecent"? what the hell crazy society do we live in that says a part of the human anatomy is indecent?

Fine. Then let's all let our cocks dangle proudly in the open.

WTF is wrong with you?! Boobies and masturbation aren't allowed in public because kids could see it. It may look natural to adults, but to a 5 year old it only raises questions about things he can't understand for many years to come.

 

[Absinthe]

it's relative to who you are. would you argue that a cartoon depicting mohammed as a terrorist is offensive? no? well there's plenty of people who would find it offensive

There are lots of things I can find offensive. You could show me a picture of a liberal-atheist sodomy party with Noam Chomsky sucking Dawkins' cock, with a big capped heading exclaiming "****ING QUEERS" at the top. Hell, you can even put it on a shirt.

But when you start wearing it in public, then tough shit when the law goes down on you. We have laws against these kinds of things because nobody wants to be walking out of the supermarket and have their kids see graphic anal sex on some dipshit's t-shirt. In fact, nobody wants to see it. And as much as you may want to argue that this is due to puritanical ideals overstepping their boundaries (which I believe would have some merit), these kinds of laws have been long-standing and obvious. It is ridiculously easy to, y'know, not wear a shirt that depicts these kinds of things when you go out.

There's more here than just the blasphemy angle. I don't have any inherent objection to the image or the wording. But I don't think it has any place in public.

 

[CptStern]

Fine. Then let's all let our cocks dangle proudly in the open.

yes because that's exactly the same thing :upstare:

WTF is wrong with you?! Boobies and masturbation aren't allowed in public because kids could see it. It may look natural to adults, but to a 5 year old it only raises questions about things he can't understand for many years to come.

there is no masterbation, it's just suggested, a 5 year old wouldnt get it. Kids are not damaged because they see boobs; they see boobs for the first year of their lives; no long lasting ill effects ..the more we stigmatise a part of the human anatomy the less we understand it

 

[CptStern]

There are lots of things I can find offensive. You could show me a picture of liberal-atheist sodomy party Noam Chomsky sucking Dawkins' cock, with a big capped heading exclaiming "****ING QUEERS" at the top. Hell, you can even put it on a shirt.

But when you start wearing it in public, then tough shit when the law goes down on you. We have laws against these kinds of things because nobody wants to be walking out of the supermarket and have their kids see graphic anal sex on some dipshit's t-shirt.

of course not ..but there's no graphic sex on the t-shirt therefore your point is moot ..jesus is a **** is the problem, not graphic sex

In fact, nobody wants to see it. And as much as you may want to argue that this is due to puritanical ideals overstepping their boundaries (which I believe would have some merit), these kinds of laws have been long-standing and obvious. It is ridiculously easy to, y'know, not wear a shirt that depicts these kinds of things when you go out.

that doesnt stop people from wearing pants that clearly show their ass cracks ..it's not my place to tell people what to wear ..and it isnt yours or anyones elses ..it may be a collective thing but it's not based on individual tastes

There's more here than just the blasphemy angle. I don't have any inherent objection to the image or the wording. But I don't think it has any place in public.

but what you think is immaterial ..the teen obviously thinks it's ok to wear ..I personally wouldnt wear it because a. it's stupid and b. I dont feel like arguing with everyone who's personally outraged over a stupid t-shirt

 

[Hellrider]

OH NOE TEH KID WILL SEE A BOOB OH MY ****ING GOD ARE YOU ****ING INSANE MAN YOU SHOULD BE IN JAIL


banana

 

[Acepilotf14]

 

[Krynn72]

You know what I think about this?

Spoiler

 

[Que-Ever]

That's so disturbing.

 

[Absinthe]

of course not ..but there's no graphic sex on the t-shirt therefore your point is moot ..jesus is a **** is the problem, not graphic sex

Then your comparison to one that's offensive to Muslims is equally pointless.

that doesnt stop people from wearing pants that clearly show their ass cracks ..it's not my place to tell people what to wear ..and it isnt yours or anyones elses ..it may be a collective thing but it's not based on individual tastes

You're right. It is a collective thing. And so long as the collective doesn't want to see this stupid, crude, bullshit in public, then people better abide. We don't have swearing or sex on daytime TV, on the radio, or wherever unless one willingly seeks it out. It is up to your own discretion and use of your privacy. The shirt oversteps that and makes it a public affair.

I don't expect to be able to walk around with a shirt saying "N*ggers are dumb". But I guess this would be perfectly acceptable to you? After all, it's my taste. Not yours. Your opinion is immaterial.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

You know what I think about this?

Spoiler

Thats pretty terrifying.

Also, lolblasphemy.

 

[Laivasse]

Have to agree with Stern here. I'm not disputing the fact that the word 'c*nt' breaches some retarded Australian obscenity laws, but it is just a cold fact that those laws are very rarely used enforced to how often they are breached. Do you think Australians are arrested for swearing in public most of the time? I find it hard to believe that the kid would have been arrested if the t-shirt was just the word 'c*nt' in the same size lettering on the back, and the same picture on the front.

I've seen countless t-shirts with expletives on them, and I personally have worn a shirt that shows a topless woman on it (it was artsy ), but the only time I have ever heard of anyone getting arrested for wearing a shirt is for people wearing THIS shirt, which happens to have a religious angle - and I have now heard of no less that 3 instances (in different countries) where it has happened. You have to be extremely naive to think that religious sensitivity plays no part in making people extra sensitive to stuff which might otherwise slip under the radar. The fact that the cop said he isn't religious is irrelevant - the fact that many secular people came out in criticism of the Mohammed cartoons is an example of the above principle.

And the image is just a model with bare tatas, being paid to put her hand between her legs and close her eyes. Nothing about it is explicit. It should be offensive to no one but a total prude (or a Christian, offended that it's supposedly a nun) and to my knowledge the Summary Offences Act doesn't really apply to it either.

Having said all that, I could be wrong and Australia just could be retardedly hypersensitive to a degree that I've never seen in any other country; here are some examples of other people who were prosecuted for being a 'public nuisance':

Two people, one in Brisbane and one in Townsville, were found guilty of public nuisance for vomiting in a public place. And a further two defendants were found guilty of offensive behaviour under s 7 [the earlier version of the act] for swinging their arms around in public.

(source)

However in the two other cases I know of where someone was arrested for wearing this shirt - one in the UK and one in the Vatican - the deciding factor was religious sensitivity.

 

[Krynn72]

lol @ being found guilty for swinging arms around.

 

[Mr Stabby]

To some people c*nt is the evilest word on the planet though.

 

[ríomhaire]

Only in ****

 

[Krynn72]

To some people c*nt is the evilest word on the planet though.

Truf. I remember watching one of the Blade movies with my cousin and his girlfriend. One of the guys said the c-word and my cousin's girlfriend sounded really disgusted. I just lol'd.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Here is me agreeing with Laivasse.

 

[ríomhaire]

Two people, one in Brisbane and one in Townsville, were found guilty of public nuisance for vomiting in a public place. And a further two defendants were found guilty of offensive behaviour under s 7 [the earlier version of the act] for swinging their arms around in public.

Two people, one in Brisbane and one in Townsville

Two people, one in Brisbane and one in Townsville

one in Townsville

Townsville

 

[Mr Stabby]

Considering that there are probably more than 3 of those T-shirts in existence but it has only been a legal issue 3 times, would imply it came down to police discretion, and in this case the discretion of a non religious cop, people just don't like the word c*nt.

 

[PvtRyan]

Absinthe, for once I must disagree with you entirely. Yes, you can wear a "niggers are dumb" shirt for all I care, just expect private institutions (shops, restaurants) to remove you and probably a good beating on the streets, but I don't think its any business of the government. What you're essentially saying is that the government should enforce niceness and make being an asshole punishable by law. Besides, where does it end? Here, there's right wing shitheads who wear shirts by Lonsdale because - if they zip up their jacket right - it spells NSDA[P], the nazi party of Hitler. That's racist, but should it be any business of the law? And yes, you can wear a shirt of anal sex because I don't think it would ever pose a problem: people will sort it out amongst themselves long before it should be a problem for the government. Besides, what is the real threat here? "Oh noes, think of the childrens!!11"? Kids will do what you did when you were a kid: "haha, naked people!".

 

[Acepilotf14]

Seriously?
Shit, I'm buying some lonsdale shirts.

 

[Absinthe]

Indeed, "c*nt" arouses a special kind of ire.

If the police in these incidents are singling out the shirts because of their inane religious commentary, then that's definitely something I don't agree with. All I'm saying is that there is more objectionable content on the shirt than just the Jesus reference. Perhaps I'm simply more used to witnessing people getting busted for these things in the United States. But the running dialogue in this topic would make it seem like everything would be daisies and sunshine if it showed anything but a nun. And while the article itself plays up the religious angle, I don't see any evidence that it was the foremost reason the officer confronted the kid.

 

[CptStern]

Then your comparison to one that's offensive to Muslims is equally pointless.

no, my comparison parrells the t-shirt, yours depicts graphic sex (cock sucking)

You're right. It is a collective thing. And so long as the collective doesn't want to see this stupid, crude, bullshit in public, then people better abide.

no, not in how you put it ..people dont have to abide by collective morality so long as it's not against the law. the collective may influence how laws are written but societal morals and values changes from generation to generation. I remember when this t-shirt was deemed offensive by the moraliyt police:

nipples

as was this

satanic

same moral outrage as this jesus is a ****

how many people find this offensive?

it's relative to the individual

We don't have swearing or sex on daytime TV, on the radio, or wherever unless one willingly seeks it out. It is up to your own discretion and use of your privacy. The shirt oversteps that and makes it a public affair.

tv is regulated by the FCC/radio (in the US' case) ..it has clear cut guidelines that are based on christian morality because it's publically broadcast. It too changes with the times ..I remember when it was a big deal when someone said "hell" on tv

also full frontal nudity has been broadcast in canada at prime time on regular cable without comment. You can watch softcore porn on publically broadcast tv at 10pm on fridays in canada, also swearing isnt taboo and is left up to individual service providers

I don't expect to be able to walk around with a shirt saying "N*ggers are dumb".

that's a bit of a grey area because it's also racist ..again not sure about the legality in the US ..in any event we're talking abut australia

besides, it's already out there:

http://hiphop.popcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/nas.jpg

same goes with c*nt t-shirts

http://prickwear.com/productcart/pc/catalog/****_thumb.jpg
http://offkeyclothing.com/images/everyone thinks youre a ****.jpg
http://img.printfection.com/1/2647/3263482/lNcRB.jpg
http://images.cafepress.com/product/106807472v10_240x240_Front_Color-Black.jpg
http://www.classixshop.com/acatalog/900701_t.jpg
http://jblaque.livejournal.com/362652.html
http://www.chaunt.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/****.jpg


yet there's no outrage ..the only difference is jesus

But I guess this would be perfectly acceptable to you?
After all, it's my taste. Not yours. Your opinion is immaterial.

and? I never said I couldnt find it distasteful/offensive, it doesnt mean I have a right to tell them not to wear it ..I hate the whole flat-billed baseball cap sitting on someones' head on a precarious angle ..I just want to knock that shit off everytime I see it ..however I dont because it's not my business .same thing if I see a 2 year old wearing tradional hasidic attire complete with kipa and peyos or someone who drives a tricked out ricer with the silouette of a reclining woman cut into the tinted windows ..none of my business




wonder why no one has gone after the manufactuers of the T-shirt ..seems like they're missing the point by going after the user rather than the dealer ..now where have I heard that before

 

[Hellrider]

HOLY FUK DID U SEE DAT ITS A NIPPLE ?!/!?!?1??!!/ BAN HIM !!!!#!#!#



aaaaasssssss

 

[Dalamari]

Anyone else laugh after seeing a thread titled "Jesus is a ****" and then 8 pages of replies?

 

[CptStern]

did you think we were debating whether jesus is actually a **** or not? ..I think the "Aye"'s have it atm

 

[Acepilotf14]

And I think you are a fag.

 

[CptStern]

that's not very christian of you .. jesus would disapprove

 

[Krynn72]

And I think you are a fag.

omg lol gud 1!!!

 

[Acepilotf14]

I'm defending my religion. With obscenities.

 

[CptStern]

you're supposed to turn the other cheek so I can slap it


what is it that you're defendig anyways?

 

[Acepilotf14]

Truly rational thinking.
It's harder to believe that we came from an infinite loop of universes than it is for there to be a God.

 

[CptStern]

Truly rational thinking.
It's harder to believe that we came from an infinite loop of universes than it is for there to be a God.

pardon? is that in response to my question?



anyways not that I went to derail into creationism but I cant fathom how such an oversimplistic explanation of the creation of the universe could have survived till this day ..we should have left superstition behind centuries ago

 

[Acepilotf14]

Well I guess that's where you failed, huh?
Romans tried to persecute us, but we lived on and eventually became the state Roman religion.

 

[Tagaziel]

anyways not that I went to derail into creationism but I cant fathom how such an oversimplistic explanation of the creation of the universe could have survived till this day ..we should have left superstition behind centuries ago

Sorry Stern, it isn't meant to explain HOW the universe was created but WHY.

Why do atheists insist on taking everything at face value?

 

[Sulkdodds]

Sorry Stern, it isn't meant to explain HOW the universe was created but WHY.

As long as you ignore all those really explicit bits about how the universe was created.

 

[Geogaddi]

Sorry Stern, it isn't meant to explain HOW the universe was created but WHY.

Why do atheists insist on taking everything at face value?

What? Please explain to me how creationism answers a "WHY" question and not "HOW" the universe came to be.


ONTOPIC: Kid should not be arrested for wearing a stupid shirt.