ASA regulator bans advert for mocking Virgin Mary

Post Reply New Topic

I am asking this in all sincerity.

May I pray for you, TwilightPrincess?

If you would prefer that I not, then I won't. But I wanted to make the offer. All I will pray for, if given your permission, is for peace to be granted to you. That's it. I won't "sneak in" anything else. Just peace.

I would prefer that you didn’t although, as an atheist, I usually think that people can have whatever conversations with imaginary friends they like.

I may be passionate about certain social issues, but I am at peace personally.

No problem. This is why I like to ask first. Some folks appreciate it, some folks decline.

https://extremismterms.adl.org/glossary/gender-ideology

https://glaad.org/gender-ideology-defin ... line-hate/

https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/12/10/bre ... ology-myth

Being LGBTQ+ is not any more an ideology than being straight is. They are innate characteristics, like having blue eyes, red hair, being attracted to a man if one is a woman, or identifying as a woman if one was assigned female at birth.

Referring to being gay as an ideology is suggesting that it’s a choice and/or an identity built off of ideas or beliefs rather than an innate part of who a person is - like it’s somehow different or less valid than being cisgender and heterosexual. It’s considered anti-LGBTQ+ to use that term. Historically, it has often been used to espouse bigotry and hate towards people in that community.

Religion, on the other hand, is based on beliefs, ideas, writings, etc. It’s not like having red hair or blue eyes. Obviously, many belief systems can become a treasured part of a person’s identity - for better or worse.

I just thought I would mention this since the term “LGBTQ ideology” has come up repeatedly and could be triggering to people in the LGBTQ+ community.

Many but not all people make a distinction between ideology and religion due, in part, to religion’s supernatural elements that are not epistemological, not that I’m an expert on this topic. Others speak of “religious ideology.” When I used the word ideology in this thread, I was alluding to identities that were founded on beliefs rather than innate characteristics.

Anyway, “disagreeing with LGBTQ ideology” is comparable to having racist attitudes since race and sexual/gender identities are innate characteristics. People are free to have whatever views they wish. The problem is more about how those beliefs are expressed. Unlike belief systems which can be critiqued as abstract concepts and institutions, you can’t do that so much with race, sexual identity, gender, and gender identity unless we’re talking about something like issues/concerns those communities are facing such as oppression which has come up/been relevant in this thread.

Last edited by TwilightPrincess on 29 Nov 2024, 2:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

There have been several posts in this thread that have nothing to do with the original post (they simply attack theology and make wild accusations, in the attempt to justify biases, beliefs, and behavior). These posts do, however, increasingly support the concerns raised by the OP.

The original post pointed out that mocking/ridiculing Christianity/Catholicism is acceptable among several people who otherwise believe that mocking/ridiculing (almost) every other group is unacceptable. The most plausible explanation is the simplest one, the one I had been charitably trying to avoid, but has become impossible to ignore:

Anti-Catholic/anti-Christian bigotry.

How dare people ridicule an organization that has a problem with institutionalized bigotry!

You’ve apparently missed the point that’s been made over and over again. I’m sure it’s nicer to believe that anti-Catholicism/anti-Christianity are the problem and that people are being big meanie heads by thinking ridicule is acceptable, but Catholicism and many denominations of Christianity receive backlash due to the bigotry they commonly espouse which has been highlighted in this thread. Obviously, it’s not a problem with all churches. Thoughts and ideas should not be above criticism or even ridicule. Ridiculing an organization for going with pure creationism rather than evolution is understandable because it’s not supported by evidence and it furthers the scientific illiteracy that is a serious problem in this country. One wouldn’t want to express hate towards a believer or discriminate against them but some ideas are absurd and/or harmful/toxic, and it’s understandable if they are treated as such.

As have you. Hate Toward Faith = Hate Toward Believer. Your worldview apparently cannot grasp this concept, despite it being mentioned several times, in different ways.



Can you see how your posts might convince someone that you are bigoted against Catholics/Christians?



"Believer" can literally be substituted with any other kind of person -- Black, White, Muslim, Atheist, Straight, Lesbian -- and this sentiment would be recognized for the hate it conveys. Except, of course, it's okay to say, "believer," because of all of the justifications you've already conveniently laid out for us.

It’s because I know it’s not necessarily true. I love my family very much even though some of their beliefs are repellent and bigoted. I know all too well how people can be indoctrinated to believe truly horrific things. Not all who became Nazis did so because they were horrible people. Sometimes people are captives of a concept. Nazism is a belief system, and it was an important part of their identity to adherents. Obviously, I’m not saying that Christianity or Catholicism are like that, but a few denominations get pretty damn close - the Westboro Baptist Church for instance.

Less extreme forms of bigotry are still a widespread issue in many churches. I think of this stuff in terms of a spectrum. Just because people attack beliefs doesn’t mean they hate anyone.

Also, this is PPR. The point of this place is to discuss and debate PPR. It’s not about proselytizing or a support forum for Christians. People will likely say things here they wouldn’t elsewhere because this is the place for those conversations. It’s about open discussions of those belief systems, which may sometimes cause offense. That’s the nature of this place. However, you could start an uplifting Bible thread for believers or something like that.
People can think what they want, but I think I’ve made my position clear here.
They aren’t so much justifications as trying to explain to you why the guidelines on WP function as they do - why we can say “Christianity is stupid” but not the people. Beliefs and ideas are fair game here within reason, not people. Being gay or straight is not a belief or idea as I discussed above.

By the way, Islam is also a belief system folks here have been critical of. It’s less present in Western countries, so it receives less attention/criticism on WP than Christianity does. It is fair game, though. Given the oppression Muslims experience in the US due to being a minority, those conversations are typically more about situations in the Middle East. I have talked about problematic passages in the Quran.

Last edited by TwilightPrincess on 29 Nov 2024, 3:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

I can't imagine TP showing hate towards anyone. It seems typical of the religeous to cry wolf at a mouse. I might offer Christianity some respect after they excise the cess pit of the old testament from their scripture.
Until then I will continue to shun their hypocrisy.

When I was suffering with alcoholism I had a big bunch of Pentecostalists praying for me. I really didn't want them to. The guiding light was a biker who I'd worked with; he had been born-again. He was a nutter. They were all nutters. Laying on of hands, speaking in tongues, the lot. They were like the scene with James Brown in 'The Blues Brothers'.

It seems to have worked. I'm now 31 years sober.

Thank you for your revealing honesty.

Any enlightening comments to add blitzkrieg, or are you also aiming to duck out from supporting your own statement?

God's loving embrace and acceptance is reserved exclusively for heterosexuals? First I've heard of it.

Erm, what now?
Literally substituted? Of course not.
At the very least because "Black, White, Straight, Lesbian" people are those things, and not mere "believers".

Criticising people because they're black, lesbian and so on is not acceptable, and neither is criticising Christians because of their beliefs.
I don't know how many more times this needs to be stated, but there it is. Again.

It seems to me that taking a stance where criticizing details of a belief system is the same as attacking its believers is irrational.
As irrational as criticizing the faults and construction details of a train's engine is equivalent to attacking its drivers.
Neither is the thing being criticized.

Wait, but Christian beliefs are to be respected without criticism because they're super-special and believers claim they're true?
Nah. Sorry, that's not how things work.

As a person who follows Judaism albeit not devoutly, I deem this rather unfortunate. Nevertheless, free speech for everyone!

I will say that I didn't read this entire thread and probably won't follow it, however I know some devout Catholics quite well; and mocking the Virgin Mary — I believe that to see this would be genuinely hurtful for them. Trying to think of a good secular parallel, but let's just say that in a world in which the former Cleveland Indians and Washington Redskins had to re-brand themselves because some people found that sort of branding hurtful, yes that kind of hurtful.

Although I personally have zero problem with somebody making fun of JW beliefs. Largely through this forum, I have come to believe that they are a genuinely toxic cult with no redeeming qualities (not one!) who have ruined 10s or 100s of thousands of lives. I call them as I see them.

Religious beliefs are sometimes extremly hurtful to real people in the real world. Religous people deserve respect. Religious beliefs deserve no more or less respect than political beliefs. If they are hurtful or plain stupid it's fair game to point it out or mock them.

Thus my comment concerning Jehovah's Witnesses. I have no reason to believe that reverence for the Virgin Mary is either hurtful or plain stupid, whether or not one accepts any aspect of Christian/Roman Catholic doctrine.