Well Holy God
This latest “blasphemy” farce has me annoyed, confused and highly amused all at the same time.
Annoyed, because the whole escapade is a farce, a waste of time and a waste of resources.
Confused, because according to this ridiculous law a person has to intentionally cause outrage among a substantial number of adherents of that religion. What the bind fuck does that mean? What is outrage? What is a substantial number? And when does a personal opinion become an intent to outrage?
Amused, because it is such a farce. A bloke comes onto a television programme which about personal beliefs and states his belief. Some cunt then decides two years later that he wasn’t offended, but some other people might be.
The only conclusion I can come to is that this anonymous personage “down the country” brought the case solely to show up our constitution and the law for the farce that it is; something I might add he has achieved in spectacular fashion.
I hope it goes to court.
I can’t wait to see if God appears as a witness.
I already commented on this here: https://thelastfurlong.wordpress.com/2017/05/07/utter-maniacs-22000-worth/
But here is what I said to save everyone, desperate to read my words of sage wisdom, rushing over to LF’s and crashing her site:
Iâm quite a fan of Steven Fry (he comes from the next village along from me) and I think he is an incredibly gifted actor, he plays the best Steven Fry ever. So Iâd hope on that day where he meets his Maker , God will reply with the following (in a Bob Hoskins type voice because My Gawd is pure Beffnall Gween):
âSteve, me Olâ china, you Olâ iron, did you never watch your âMatrixâ? What do you think wouldâve âappened âad Hâi made the World a bleeding paradise, with no pain nor deaff no nuffink bad? Cos thatâs hâexactly what I did and then that bloody girl mucked it hâall up, didnât she? I know she was as fick as two short ribs butâ¦.come on. âDonât talk to bleeding serpents!â âardly difficult.
Nah, look seriously now, Steve-o, the whole point of the exercise is that âoomanity realises that all the hâevil, all the pain and hâall the sufferen is due to âumanity itself innit. You âalf inch some poor bastards credit card and he misses his train, so the guy doesnât read an article in the newspaper he found in the carriage and doesnât realise what the cause of infant bone cancer is. â
As to the Blasphemy I have always taken the view that Jahwe, Omnipotent, Omnipresent Lord Of The Heavenly Hosts, Maker Of Heaven And Earth, The Numero Uno is quite capable of handling his own affairs and dealing with anyone what âdissesâ him. He doesnât need our help.
PS, for any Gays reading, I use the term ‘iron’ (cockney for ‘poof’ -‘iron hoof’) affectionately.
I would imagine that God [if he exists] is having a right old laugh. He must have a sense of humour – who else could have invented an elephant or a male with his balls on the outside?
Heh! Yes, very true! He’s probably still chuckling now.
And only a God with a sense of humour could possibly have thought to design a human body where the nursery sits right between the two major sewage outlets …
If somebody stands on a soapbox or stepladder on a popular shopping street and condemns passersby for being sinners, he shouldn’t be surprised if somebody tosses a soft tomato in the air and it accidentally lands on his face. My stance on distasteful utterances on television: I got rid of my TV set years ago.
If I come across someone who addresses me as a sinner I just ignore them. People are entitled to their own beliefs, and provided they don’t demand that I follow them then I’m fine with that.
I’m a self confessed blasphemer… I don’t believe in the religion spouted by the Church of Warble Gloaming. I will probably be condemned to death by snowballs!
I wonder if any of this applies to Jedi?
We already know Fry is clever; why need he go out of his way to upset people? Once upon a time you’d simply have said these things to your friends over dinner.
But wasn’t he being asked his opinion? Which he gave? What was he supposed to say? He didn’t go out of his way at all. He merely answered the question. Honestly.
Precisely! It was a programme where people were interviewed about their personal beliefs. If he personally thinks God is a pernicious toe-rag then he is just following the programme’s brief.
Or should RTE not have broadcast it? In which case couldn’t they be accused of religious censorship?
For Fry, it’s not a one-off, it’s a mission, which was why he was asked.
It won’t be long before we take another leaf out of the book from the religion of peace and start demanding death for apostates.
Well, it seems to be a trend….
Fifty lashes while you intone “Thou shalt not offend, thou shalt not offend…..”
Surely the prosecution would have to produce God as a witness or at least prove that he exists but was unwilling to go to court,in order to prove that either he wsa offended, or a bystander was offended?
I would have though that God would have to be produced as a witness. His lack of existence would surely nullify the prosecutions case?
Anyways, they announced today that they had dropped the case. Apparently they couldn’t find sufficient “offended people”! Seriously. You couldn’t make it up.