Poll: 58% of “Liberals” Think People Should be Prosecuted For Criticizing Religion

[Hawker]

A poll of 4,015 people conducted by Populus for the Fear and HOPE 2016 report found that only 54% agreed people should be "allowed" to say what they believe about religion. 46% said there "some things" that you should "not be able to say about religion".

Those who were considered to be "mainstream liberals" were the most likely of all groups to support restrictions on free speech. 58% of this group agreed that "if necessary" people "should be prosecuted" for saying certain things about religion.

Bizarrely, despite the poll results suggesting a majority of liberals believe Islam should be immune from vociferous criticism, 59% of respondents also believe that “Islam poses a serious threat to Western civilisation”.

You must be registered for see links

So once again we are seeing how people who call themselves liberals are going in the opposite direction of what liberalism is. Why do these people keep calling themselves liberals is something I don't understand. Do you think that people should not be allowed to say what they believe about religion?

You must be registered for see images

 

[Brian Griffin]

No people should be prosecuted for believing and spreading religion.
Religion has caused too many wars and death.
Belief in Gods is just too stupid.

 

[SSStylish]

They call themselves "liberals" because media promotes "liberals" as the morally superior, "good" people. They love circle jerking and bathing in their unearned moral superiority and whenever you present facts that oppose their ideology they accuse you of being a mysoginist/racist/etc. to feel morally superior and to avoid a real discussion.

They also seem to be the biggest cultural marxist cucks ever. I honestly can't stand those kinda people. True liberalism is rare these days.

 

[Urda]

Being labeled a liberal is stupid.

 

[Wabbit]

You can find liberals inside jails of theocratic nations.

 

[ComplexCity]

Do you believe that I should be able to make fun and call someone fat if they themselves don't think they are fat?


Should I be able to talk about someone's mom and not face zero consequences of their child?


How about make fun of someone because I want to?

 

[Hawker]

Do you believe that I should be able to make fun and call someone fat if they themselves don't think they are fat?


Should I be able to talk about someone's mom and not face zero consequences of their child?


How about make fun of someone because I want to?

Firstly you are comparing religion to a person. It's not the same thing at all. Religion is an ideology. Fascism is an ideology. If I say fascism sucks I'm not supposed to go to jail, but if I say Islam sucks I'm supposed to? Religion is just a bunch of ideas tied together. Why is it so wrong to say that few if not all of those ideas suck? So someone won't get butthurt? Boohoo. Religion even still is such a big part of societies that it affects alot of people. Why should a man made set of ideas be off limits from criticism?

Secondly answer me why expressing my beliefs and opinions is okay, but criticizing other people's beliefs and opinions is not?

Thirdly what you are talking about is just pure bullying. And you can get prosecuted for that also. But you should be able to make the difference between good manners between people and the silence in the face of some inherently wrong ideas that should be criticized, but the law prohibits it. Because the latter is what's happening when religion is put off-limits from criticism.

In conclusion: Good manners are commendable and common decency certainly requires respect for the individual rights of others, but it does not demand that we let the arbitrary theological preferences of others shape public policy. In fact, when theology advocates f.e. harmful health policy, common decency may require that good manners be set aside.

 

[Dark Sonic]

Damn 58%?

 

[Lelouch Le Brittania]

Fake liberals

 

[Illuminater]

They are also the same idiots that hate on trump and protest in the streets.

 

[Hawker]

They are also the same idiots that hate on trump and protest in the streets.

Actually real liberals also hate Trump. But mostly it is the regressive leftists that protest on the street yes.

I noticed that you disliked Lelouch Le Britannia's comment and you liked my op so I assume you don't realise that there actually is a difference between what the current "liberals" aka regressive leftists think and what the real liberals like me think. It is crucial you understand this so that you understand my op fully.

 

[Osmon]

They are also the same idiots that hate on trump and protest in the streets.

You like both Meek Mill and Trump. You get a big double L.

OT: Each to their own I suppose but people shouldn't be persecuted just because they believe in a different religion than me (I'm Muslim) or don't believe at all. What I find ridiculous is when people go all philosophy and start stealing quotes and they think they some 'enlightened free human beings' who don't believe in God or religion so they start criticizing and bashing people who believe :lol

 

[ComplexCity]

Firstly you are comparing religion to a person. It's not the same thing at all. Religion is an ideology. Fascism is an ideology. If I say fascism sucks I'm not supposed to go to jail, but if I say Islam sucks I'm supposed to? Religion is just a bunch of ideas tied together. Why is it so wrong to say that few if not all of those ideas suck? So someone won't get butthurt? Boohoo. Religion even still is such a big part of societies that it affects alot of people. Why should a man made set of ideas be off limits from criticism?

Secondly answer me why expressing my beliefs and opinions is okay, but criticizing other people's beliefs and opinions is not?

Thirdly what you are talking about is just pure bullying. And you can get prosecuted for that also. But you should be able to make the difference between good manners between people and the silence in the face of some inherently wrong ideas that should be criticized, but the law prohibits it. Because the latter is what's happening when religion is put off-limits from criticism.

In conclusion: Good manners are commendable and common decency certainly requires respect for the individual rights of others, but it does not demand that we let the arbitrary theological preferences of others shape public policy. In fact, when theology advocates f.e. harmful health policy, common decency may require that good manners be set aside.

Don't know why this didn't show in my not's

Honestly saw your name a skimmed through the "prosecute" part. Seeing as how you are a known bigot against religious folk....

Do I think people should be punished for stating what's on their mind? No. Do I feel like people need to respect other people's belief? Yes. I like how "liberals" like to hypocritically say everyone needs to respects one another's views but as soon as something goes against what they believe, they get quick to start disrespecting and condemning other's people's beliefs. I specifically state liberals because they are hypocrites to their own logic and viewpoints


Assuming I read what you posted above correctly, how is me hurting someone's feelings (I.E Calling them fat when they weigh 550lbs) in anyway violating their amendment rights?

 

[Hawker]

Don't know why this didn't show in my not's

Honestly saw your name a skimmed through the "prosecute" part. Seeing as how you are a known bigot against religious folk....

Do I think people should be punished for stating what's on their mind? No. Do I feel like people need to respect other people's belief? Yes.

Anyone has the right to believe anything they want. And everyone else has the right to find it utterly ridiculous.

I like how "liberals" like to hypocritically say everyone needs to respects one another's views but as soon as something goes against what they believe, they get quick to start disrespecting and condemning other's people's beliefs. I specifically state liberals because they are hypocrites to their own logic and viewpoints

I don't know if the part about "liberals" is you agreeing with me and my op (because I am accusing regressive leftists of hypocrisy) or you accusing me of being a hypocrite? Anyways if you think I'm a hypocrite theen keep in mind that I don't respect stupid beliefs. I do however respect a person's right to have them. I also defend my right to find them ridiculous.

If you want an example of a stupid belief which should not be respected then I could take for example sharia law which is based on religious beliefs and limits individuals human rights. I'm going to criticise a religion for allowing that law to exist, and I'm going to criticise anyone who represents an ideology that entails that law.

Assuming I read what you posted above correctly, how is me hurting someone's feelings (I.E Calling them fat when they weigh 550lbs) in anyway violating their amendment rights?

I'm puzzled. Your original reply to this thread was a way to show me that how you criticise my opinion which is to allow free speech on all fronts? You gave me examples which are considered bullying. You explicitly mentioned: "making fun of someone because you want to" and "talking about someone's mom". I told you how making fun of someone just for the heck of it, is different than criticising stupid beliefs. Person and ideas are two different things. Bullying and criticizing are two different things.

But now you are talking about stating a fact? If someone is fat then he/she is. It's a physiological state and calling it by it's name is just stating a fact. But if it's done on the purposes of bullying and making fun of someone then it is wrong and you could be persecuted for it because insulting a person is punishable by fine or prison time in many western countries.

I don't get your last comment though. If you think that hurting someone's feelins by stating a fact isn't violationg their amendment rights, then you agree (at least partially) with me, so that question is completely futile?

 

[ComplexCity]

Anyone has the right to believe anything they want. And everyone else has the right to find it utterly ridiculous.

I don't know if the part about "liberals" is you agreeing with me and my op (because I am accusing regressive leftists of hypocrisy) or you accusing me of being a hypocrite? Anyways if you think I'm a hypocrite theen keep in mind that I don't respect stupid beliefs. I do however respect a person's right to have them. I also defend my right to find them ridiculous.

If you want an example of a stupid belief which should not be respected then I could take for example sharia law which is based on religious beliefs and limits individuals human rights. I'm going to criticise a religion for allowing that law to exist, and I'm going to criticise anyone who represents an ideology that entails that law.

So again in this logic since people being fat isn't always genetic then it's ok because of my freedom of speech to tell them how I find them being fat to be stupid because being fat is unhealthy

 

[V h o]

There will and always will be consequences to "free speech", you cannot just say anything and everything you like and expect people to agree or be okay with it especially with something as personal as religion.

 

[Hawker]

So again in this logic since people being fat isn't always genetic then it's ok because of my freedom of speech to tell them how I find them being fat to be stupid because being fat is unhealthy

Check my edit. I agree with you. But firstly you used "making fun of" and bullying as an example and now you are just talking about stating a fact.

 

[ComplexCity]

Check my edit. I agree with you. But firstly you used "making fun of" and bullying as an example and now you are just talking about stating a fact.

No I meant exactly what I said. Even if you call someone fat nowadays (making fun of them or not) it counts as making fun of people. Either way how is making fun of someone for being fat impeding on the their constitutional rights?


Edit: Please enlighten me as to how making fun of someone is impeding on their amendment rights

 

[Hawker]

No I meant exactly what I said. Even if you call someone fat nowadays (making fun of them or not) it counts as making fun of people. Either way how is making fun of someone for being fat impeding on the their constitutional rights?


Edit: Please enlighten me as to how making fun of someone is impeding on their amendment rights

"Fat" is the equivalent for "overweight". Both mean the same thing. A doctor can say that you are overweight. Is he making fun of you? Or is it just when he says that you are fat when he is making fun of you? Good manners also entail choosing your words right. You can criticise someone's size and lifestyle on health basis, but you can do it respectfully. Nevertheless I don't think it's wrong whether you use the word fat or overweight, if you are criticising health. And it definitely is not the same as making fun of someone.

Making fun of someone being fat to my knowledge falls on the category of bullying and it is considered as a punishable crime in some countries. If you are just doing it to cause emotional pain. Someone who's studied law correct me if I'm wrong on this. Because the difference here with making fun of someone being fat and making fun of religion is that you are making fun of a person's appearance and in the case of religion you are just making fun of an idea. Like I said, they are different things.

I can't answer you about the amendment rights, because I'm not familiar with them. But I do know that you can get persecuted for bullying.

 

[BlacLord™]

That's OTT.

The only time that the law should involve itself with religious persecution is when the recipient is being bullied or their life is threatened.