"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 15/01/15 11:12, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Gaff wrote:
I can recall many Years ago there was some problem due to a clock that
had Jesus on the cross on it and the chime was every hour little men
came out and hammered in the nails for the hours. The world has not
ended since then, and most people, although they find it in bad taste or
gross, realise that its just dark humour. So yes, in many ways people
are entitled to be annoyed even outraged, but not go around doing
people harm over bad humour. At tg that rate, Bernard Manning would
never have lived past his 30 birthday.

It's not that long ago Mary Whitehouse initiated a trial of Gay News for
blasphemy in the UK.

Although I don't think she represented the majority even at that time -
and she herself became a subject of comedy.

It's not just Moslems who don't want anything they don't like said about
anything to do with their religion. Even more so in the US.

And Africa.

And (although not targetted at me) *I'm* generally careful to blame
"religion" as a whole as the christians have been just as bad as the
muslims

Worse in some ways when they are burning each other at the stake
even in places like Britain.

(and still are in the whackier parts of the USA and Africa).

I dare say even the followers of the Roman, Greek and Norse gods did their
bit to "educate" unbelievers.


Freedom of speech usually means 'my right to criticise you' Commonly, not
the other way round, too.


I'm all for that. I've noticed the only group who get the **** taken out
of them on TV are gingers (Citizen Khan, target Dave the white
ginger-haired mosque manager) and maybe some slight ribbing in Dr Who (Amy
Pond).

Is that because gingers don't have an effective lobbying group?