jesus is a c**t

[BabyHeadCrab]

I rather like the shirt, can't say much for the band though they pretty much sound like ass and nails on a chalkboard. I have a friend who has posters and shirts like this and I couldn't really give two shits. It's a style and I think the nun is pretty hilarious. But then again, I love it when people get worked up over things. Like, if I could offend as many people as possible per day for a living I would.

 

[CptStern]

Why?

because the law doesnt have to have an outcome to be enforced

if I'm caught lighting a house on fire but it goes out before it does any damage I'm still charged with arson



here read this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech#Restrictions_on_free_speech

 

[Mr Stabby]

You're arguing what the law is, I'm arguing what I think the law should be.

if I'm caught lighting a house on fire but it goes out before it does any damage I'm still charged with arson

It would be very hard to light a house on fire, without damaging it, and you shouldn't interfere wit another person property without their consent

 

[Sheepo]

For ****sake lock this please.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

I'd like a shirt with a topless nun and "Jesus is a ****" without the cradle of filth or cheesy border, please. Though I probably wouldn't have the stones to wear it in public.

Just to clarify it's not because I necessarily agree with the message, I just think it's absolutely hilarious.

I would definitely wear that shirt if it didn't have "Cradle of Filth" on it. Man those guys suck.

Mmhmm. Wow, just read the entire thread. What exactly are you people debating? Do certain members express antitheistic views? Certainly. Do those people sound just as ridiculous as the other extreme? Almost always.

 

[Sulkdodds]

I personally don't think the state should legislate against any form of speech. A cinema is private property, so if the cinema company don't want people screaming fire in their cinemas, they have every right to kick them out, and sue them for any loss of revenue. Similarly with a bomb threat, that would shut down a city centre or other building and waste the police/ emergencies services time, would allow the business to sue for loss of revenue and wasting police/ emergency services time should be illegal. I don't think the panic caused to an individual is really grounds for criminalization, unless it causes a heart attack or severe inconvenience, then a civil suite could be brought for inconvenience and reckless endangerment of life for a heart attack.

But the scare principle is already in law: one of the primary conditions of the crime of 'assault' is that someone be put in genuine fear for their life or livelihood. That's why you can be charged with assault even if you never touch anyone, and why if you do touch someone you are usually charged with assault and battery. Meanwhile, when you waste the time of the emergency services, this is not only defrauding the state, but also endangering the lives of people who are depending on those services. I'd say this is reasonable grounds for the designation of a crime - although in practicality it might actually be better to get money from the culprit than to spend money by punishing them.

Read this carefully: I don't care.

Infraction for trolling.

 

[Saturos]

what? are you kidding me? since when do words on a t-shirt justify arrest? this is why religion is constantly ridiculed because the religious feel ENTITLED to put their ****ing morals on the rest of us ..the arresting cop should be beaten on the soles of his feet with a lead pipe for wasting time and tax payer money ..I cant believe some of you people support this taliban style crap

What's wrong with public order? If a Christian (or so-called Christian anyways) wore a shirt that said, "Darwin is a douchbag c**ksucker" I wouldn't see any problem with fining that individual either tbh. This sort of behaviour in anybody provokes unrest and causes uprisings. Courtesy for other people's opinions in public places should be made a law.

There's a fine line between, "freedom of speech" and, "total douchbaggery" imo.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

What's wrong with public order? If a Christian wore a shirt that said, "Darwin is a douchbag c**ksucker" I wouldn't see any problem with fining that individual either tbh.

I would. If (s)he wants to insult someone far smarter than him/her, then so be it. I wouldn't demand that he/she get fined.

 

[PvtRyan]

What's wrong with public order? If a Christian (or so-called Christian anyways) wore a shirt that said, "Darwin is a douchbag c**ksucker" I wouldn't see any problem with fining that individual either tbh. This sort of behaviour in anybody provokes unrest and causes uprisings. Courtesy for other people's opinions in public places should be made a law.

There's a fine line between, "freedom of speech" and, "total douchbaggery" imo.

Really? Mind giving me a clear, unambiguous definition of "total douchbaggery"?

 

[Saturos]

I would. If (s)he wants to insult someone far smarter than him/her, then so be it. I wouldn't demand that he/she get fined.

Hmm...somehow, that philosophy doesn't seem to apply on HL2.net though. We'd get infractioned for calling someone an idiot here. Are you calling the mods who agree with you hypocrites? :|

Really? Mind giving me a clear, unambiguous definition of "total douchbaggery"?

I don't feel like looking it up on Urban Dictionary right now. I'm sure your a smart enough lad to figure it out on your own.

 

[Acepilotf14]

If he had never worn that shirt, we would all be doing something much more meaningful right now.

 

[Mr Stabby]

But the scare principle is already in law: one of the primary conditions of the crime of 'assault' is that someone be put in genuine fear for their life or livelihood. That's why you can be charged with assault even if you never touch anyone, and why if you do touch someone you are usually charged with assault and battery. Meanwhile, when you waste the time of the emergency services, this is not only defrauding the state, but also endangering the lives of people who are depending on those services. I'd say this is reasonable grounds for the designation of a crime - although in practicality it might actually be better to get money from the culprit than to spend money by punishing them.

I agree with you about the emergency services, fraud should certainly be illegal, but I don't see how deliberate misleading of others, is a free speech issue. Free speech applies to public expression, fraud applies to stealing another individual's/organization's time, money, property.

In regards to scaring others, to legislate against 'scare' speech, seems ridiculous to me. If no one believes the 'scare' speech then there is no victim. In cases of threatening or abusive speech, then I would consider it assault, or infringement of liberty, so there would be grounds for an individual to sue another over infringement of there personal liberty or if the victim consented the state could prosecute the person for assault.

Perhaps there is some confusion when I say speech shouldn't be banned. There are crimes in which speech is used to commit the crime. I don't think the state should ever legislate what can and cannot be said, however if through saying something, an individual can cause another individual a loss of money,time, property, liberty etc. then that is what should be prosecuted.

 

[CptStern]

What's wrong with public order? If a Christian (or so-called Christian anyways) wore a shirt that said, "Darwin is a douchbag c**ksucker" I wouldn't see any problem with fining that individual either tbh. This sort of behaviour in anybody provokes unrest and causes uprisings. Courtesy for other people's opinions in public places should be made a law.

it's not the publics perogative to write law. And I wouldnt find the darwin t-shirt as being offensive; I'd just chalk it up to the person being stupid ..why cant this be the same for the jesus is a c*nt t-shirt? why bbecause a certain religion likes to tell the rest of us what to do at every opportunity

There's a fine line between, "freedom of speech" and, "total douchbaggery" imo.

it's all relative ..I mean I could find this offensive, should it be outlawed?

this too:

what you find offensive others do not

 

[PvtRyan]

Hmm...somehow, that philosophy doesn't seem to apply on HL2.net though. We'd get infractioned for calling someone an idiot here. Are you calling the mods who agree with you hypocrites? :|

There's a difference between a private institution and the government. A church would've had every right to deny the guy access, but that doesn't mean the government should be able to prosecute him. If the mods here wanna infraction us for using the letter 'q' in our posts, then they have every right to do so.

I don't feel like looking it up on Urban Dictionary right now. I'm sure your a smart enough lad to figure it out on your own.

I know what douchbaggery means, but I don't know a clear definition of douchebaggery that would separate it from free speech. When is something douchebaggery and can you give me a clear definition of it that could be used by the law?

 

[Hectic Glenn]

Oh for the love of god Mikael, I don't know what to say, we'll pick up on this another time...