The Black Vault Message Forums

Discover the Truth!        

Religion & Spirituality

Creating a stir in New Zealand with controversial image

Whether you believe in a higher power or not, this forum is dedicated to the topic of religion and spirituality. We live in a diverse world with different morals and ideas when it comes to our beliefs, so come in and share your thoughts.

Postby sheye » Sun Jan 10, 2010 3:53 pm

Religious followers, if their belief is strong enough, should be unfazed by any attempt to ridicule


hmmm....where do I start...first off hahaaaa I think the jokes that people make who are follow the religion are even worse,because of their lack of total respect to the dieties they are supposed to honor and have faith in.
Second,I'm not saying that this type of basphemy ever fazes the true faith of the real followers ....but it is hurtful to have deities that you believe are real and SACRED, to be projected in such vulgar ways. (who wouldn't want to protect against blaspemy, the concepts and deities that they hold dear to their hearts?) I've seen people say disgusting things about jesus (and I mean disgusting) just to instigate trouble,and push otherwise very nice people to a point of anger.
Its like the town drunk thinking hes funny making a bunch of crude, untrue jokes about your mother ? How long do you sit there and take the abuse without defending your mothers honor?
sheye
 
Posts: 1676
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:23 am

Postby greeney2 » Sun Jan 10, 2010 7:04 pm

The fact something may be done in humor or satire is irrelevant, and does not minimize or reduce the degree of blasphamy, like this dipiction of Mary and Joseph. Anything blasphamous is either verbally or by illustration, taking the image of something religiously sacrate, and showing or saying things that are irreverent of it.

The Immaculate Conspetion is not something taken lightly by Catholics, and the images of Mary and Joseph has always been held in a position of holy reverence. Sacrate and Godly things that religions hold in reverence, are not to be defiled by blasphamous talk or depictions, regardless if it is considerd "funny". These things are also not funny to those who hold them in reverence. Sheye gives a good example, that most people regard and hold thier Mother's image to some level of reverence, which you would not allow it to be defiled, for the sake of someone else's fun and humor.

Some religions take blasphamy to a level of death warrents, like the cartoon creator that defiled Mohammad. In Africa, the statement of a newcaster, that the contestants of a beauty contest would satisfy even Mohammad sparked a mass city riot from Muslims. Over 30 Christian churches were burned to the gound, and I think many people were killed and injured. This becasue the image of Mohammad was verbally defiled and considered Blasphamy.

The issue of blasphamy is not the position of the one making these comments and pictures, and their freedom to do as they please if they have no meaning to them. The issue is what some precieves as slur against sacrate images or to the God they worship.
greeney2
 
Posts: 9591
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby sheye » Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:03 pm

I think its just human decency not to get vulgar and mean about someone elses beliefs,and throw stones at concepts you don't really understand. If you have a legitimate beef with ideas of religions, putting that across in a more civilized manner is going to get you a lot further than cheap shots at sacred images ,and lame ass humor for the intention of offending. Not so much talking about the picture in this thread, (I thought it was kinda cute) but other things I have seen,and heard. (its disgusting to the point of ridiculous),and offends many who don't even follow the religion just as much.

p.s
I saw the mention of the immaculate conception ,and wanted to point a mistake that I made for years and see alot of others do as well, cause that term gets thrown around by almost everybody in the wrong context.
The immaculate conception is a dogma of the catholic church about mary being conceived without original sin in the womb of her mother.(has nothing to with a virginal conception)
I think the conception of jesus in her womb (while being virginal) is called the divine conception, but I could be wrong on that, so if anyone knows , please let me know . (Its celebrated as the Feast of Incarnation ,also known as the Annunciation, but not sure what they officially call it call it)
sheye
 
Posts: 1676
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:23 am

Postby greeney2 » Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:22 pm

Sheye if you were raised a Catholic, I think you know how this would be regarded by any priest of nun. I have no doubt many Catholics would chuckle over it, but the truth is, it is a blaspamous and sacreligious depiction. By definition, Blasphamy either by verbal or depictions, defiles religiously sacrate things, in a irreverant way. This picutre certainly does not depict Mary and Joseph with reverence, it is therefore blasphamy.
greeney2
 
Posts: 9591
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby sandra » Sun Jan 10, 2010 9:57 pm

Hardly did I think twice about the picture. In fact I did crack a smile, only because its just such a cheap shot, you can't take it seriously.

Jesus taught what it meant to have extreme faith.

Mary, she had extreme faith in God as well. Both gave testimony to the highest of cocreation...in my eyes.

Mary was not ignorant of her conception by any means. As a woman she was experiencing the most immaculate of faith and belief in God. What kind of faith do we have that manifests in our lives as women? Wouldn't the most holiest of cocreations through faith surely be a child? People misunderstand how aware Mary was of God. Her testimony came in physical evidence, now as we know, that is much harder to accept. Pictures like this really mean nothing.
“Living backwards!” Alice repeated in great
astonishment. “I never heard of such a thing!”
“—but there’s one great advantage in it, that one’s
memory works both ways.”
— Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
User avatar
sandra
 
Posts: 3702
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 6:27 pm
Location: Minnesota US

Postby greeney2 » Sun Jan 10, 2010 10:40 pm

Sandra If it isn't your religion I guess it would be funny. If your religious practices are nil or nothing, than blasphamy is no big deal, becasue you just don't care. It just becomes harmless humor, and we all have freedom of speech, like ethnic jokes humor at someone elses expense.

This picture is blasphamy, because it portrays an irreverant image of Mary. These things are not funny to the Catholic Church, and considered a mortal sin to a Catholic, to Mock the Blessed Virgin Mary. Like I said some may chuckle, but for a Catholic to laugh at this, think it is humorous, would be something to include in Confession after thinking about it.

No priest would tell a Catholic its OK to sexually mock the Mother of Jesus, and say this does not defile the image of Mary. Any Catholic knows the words of a Hail Mary, and you would have a very hard argument to contend this picture is not Blasphamous, if you know the words.


Pictures like this really mean nothing.


They really mean nothing to people insensitive to the ones they mean something to. And the ones who claim its their right to express themselves, thats true, but it doesn't make the content of it not be blasphamy.
greeney2
 
Posts: 9591
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby sandra » Sun Jan 10, 2010 11:58 pm

greeney2 wrote:Sandra If it isn't your religion I guess it would be funny.

I am catholic. I smiled because I simply didn't get the message.

If your religious practices are nil or nothing, than blasphamy is no big deal, becasue you just don't care.

My religious practices, my prayers, my thoughts, my reasoning, my life does not need the care of someone else. It needs my faith that I put into all of it. Blasphamy is also subject to personal perception, meaning alot of times there is blasphamy when it is NOT perceived as such, and other times when it comes in a picture created by someone else we are willing to perceive it, etc etc etc. Just like Judgement of another persons religious beliefs, care for them, and so on. I'm not saying the picture was hilarious and a joke, I smiled because I simply didn't get it. I did not get why they would try to convey such a thing, it is powerless, in my eyes, and I end up only thinking about the good things of Mary and her faith, it brings me to contemplate her life her example, not what they intend of it, because I will not accept that as my own.

It just becomes harmless humor, and we all have freedom of speech, like ethnic jokes humor at someone elses expense.


Did you mention ethnic jokes in reference to me? Hope not, thats rugged. :mrgreen:

These things are not funny to the Catholic Church, and considered a mortal sin to a Catholic, to Mock the Blessed Virgin Mary.


It is considered a sin that will not be held guiltless, and I believe those people will have to deal with their own guilt. I'm not as concerned about a catholic church as much as 'the body of christ'....which this is 'mocking' as well.


Like I said some may chuckle, but for a Catholic to laugh at this, think it is humorous, would be something to include in Confession after thinking about it.


I understand what you are saying....I did not think what THEY were trying to convey was funny. I smiled because I did not get it, simply it just appeared ridiculous.
“Living backwards!” Alice repeated in great
astonishment. “I never heard of such a thing!”
“—but there’s one great advantage in it, that one’s
memory works both ways.”
— Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
User avatar
sandra
 
Posts: 3702
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 6:27 pm
Location: Minnesota US

Postby HaHaaaa » Mon Jan 11, 2010 9:36 am

sheye wrote:
Religious followers, if their belief is strong enough, should be unfazed by any attempt to ridicule


hmmm....where do I start...first off hahaaaa I think the jokes that people make who are follow the religion are even worse,because of their lack of total respect to the dieties they are supposed to honor and have faith in.
Second,I'm not saying that this type of basphemy ever fazes the true faith of the real followers ....but it is hurtful to have deities that you believe are real and SACRED, to be projected in such vulgar ways. (who wouldn't want to protect against blaspemy, the concepts and deities that they hold dear to their hearts?)

Sheye,
I think what I'm trying to say is that you might want to allow your skin to thicken somewhat and let this stuff roll off your back like water off a Duck.
Particularly when it comes to images.
You know, if you don't take offence, none is given.
No-one owns the word 'sacred', because nothing is any more.



I've seen people say disgusting things about jesus (and I mean disgusting) just to instigate trouble,and push otherwise very nice people to a point of anger.

This is different. Saying things about anyone with the intent to cause hurt is against the 'Hate Crime' laws of most countries. Hate crimes are punishable in law.
Its like the town drunk thinking hes funny making a bunch of crude, untrue jokes about your mother ? How long do you sit there and take the abuse without defending your mothers honor?

However long it takes to walk out of earshot. (Shrug)
HaHaaaa
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 6:38 am

Postby HaHaaaa » Mon Jan 11, 2010 9:50 am

greeney2 wrote:Sheye if you were raised a Catholic, I think you know how this would be regarded by any priest of nun. I have no doubt many Catholics would chuckle over it, but the truth is, it is a blaspamous and sacreligious depiction. By definition, Blasphamy either by verbal or depictions, defiles religiously sacrate things, in a irreverant way. This picutre certainly does not depict Mary and Joseph with reverence, it is therefore blasphamy.



Talk about a knee-jerk reaction.... :lol:
The post above would not be out of place in medieval times. :roll:
"defiles religiously sacrate things, in a irreverant way"...... and is therefore blasphemous?

Besides:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press . . . ."
No such thing as blasphemy in the US law. It would be unconstitutional.
HaHaaaa
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 6:38 am

Postby greeney2 » Mon Jan 11, 2010 11:14 am

Please give what you think is the definition of blasphamy hahaha? The definition speaks for itself, laws and freedom of speech does not alter the fact the content of this depiction of Joseph and Mary fits the defintion. They are depicted in an irreverent way, which is the definition of blasphamy.
greeney2
 
Posts: 9591
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

PreviousNext

Return to Religion & Spirituality

  • View new posts
  • View unanswered posts
  • Who is online
  • In total there are 4 users online :: 1 registered, 0 hidden and 3 guests (based on users active over the past 10 minutes)
  • Most users ever online was 292 on Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:19 pm
  • Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests