This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Religion
  3. 'Kill all gays' Christian pastor is the 1st person BANNED from Ireland

User Info: YHWH_Saves

YHWH_Saves
1 month ago#11
Steven Anderson is certainly not the only one doing this, but I hate that I have to defend his behavior as a Christian.

I still put accountability on anyone who decides to hate on Christianity because of its abuses (I was able to overcome these in favor of seeking the truth; why can't they?), but this does not make evangelism easy/fun. Like I said before, there is much to like about Steven Anderson; it's a shame that his KJV-onlyism and abrasiveness have led him down a silly path.
"Man will not live off of bread alone, but by every word proceeding through the mouth of God." "You are not able to serve God and wealth.".
(edited 1 month ago)

User Info: Dancedreamer

Dancedreamer
1 month ago#12
You know, those Muslims over in other countries killing Christians are really good people aside from the killing Christians part! Really good people! I am going to defend them because they sought truth!
This isn't funny Dean, the voice says I'm almost out of minutes!
~Alexandra
(edited 1 month ago)

User Info: YHWH_Saves

YHWH_Saves
1 month ago#13
Dancedreamer posted...
You know, those Muslims over in other countries killing Christians are really good people aside from the killing Christians part! Really good people! I am going to defend them because they sought truth!

Aside from this being a huge leap from what I actually said, yes - I do believe that people should be able to separate abuse from truth.

Maybe that's too big of a burden for the general populace, but it makes sense to me.
"Man will not live off of bread alone, but by every word proceeding through the mouth of God." "You are not able to serve God and wealth.".

User Info: 3127

3127
1 month ago#14
There are no such things as “good people” or “bad people”. Just people. Just people thinking and saying and doing things you may or may not approve of... things that often have consequences affect themselves and the people around them. Maybe they can accept those consequences, maybe not. Either way it doesn’t make them “good” or “bad”. Just complicated.
331212777

User Info: rockoperajon

rockoperajon
1 month ago#15
OrangeWizard posted...
rockoperajon posted...
Well, while I don't believe it's right to silence someone for having absolutely repugnant opinions, I won't be the first in line to fight for Steven Anderson's freedom of speech.


Usually people only "fight" for freedom of speech when it comes to their own country. Nobody's fighting for the Chinese, for example.

Also: "They're not silencing you, they're just showing you the door"

That's what certain people would probably say if someone were banned from a website, bakery, or some private establishment. They say "it isn't censorship unless the government does it!" I wonder of those same people would say that this is censorship or not. My opinion is that censorship is censorship, whether done within a private institution or the government. Censorship does not always need to overlap with one's "right to freedom of speech" and it's not always inherently bad either, but it is still censorship.


OrangeWizard posted...
LinkFanatic posted...
Hate speech should absolutely be censored. f*** principle.


The issue there is "what is hate speech?" and "who defines what hate speech is?"
Without proper checks and balances, the definition of what hate speech is can grow like a weed, and pretty soon, you're the one being censored for one reason or another. This is happening now across the internet.


On further reflection, I wonder if what Steven Anderson says can be counted as simple freedom of speech. Yes, defining "hate speech" can be very tricky, but I believe there are laws against slander and libel.

Now, it's one thing to say you hate gay people because you think they're gross and the Bible says homosexuality is wrong. I think that's still a disgusting opinion to have, but it's still just your opinion that you're entitled to.

However, Anderson is saying things that are just plain objectively wrong, like claiming all gay people are also pedophiles and rapists. Now, does spreading misinformation like that still count as free speech? Should it still be protected under the first amendment? I don't think it should.
"We few... We happy few..." -William Shakespeare
"We band of buggered." -William the Bloody

User Info: Hypergamer55

Hypergamer55
1 month ago#16
Steven Anderson believes homosexuals can't get saved and can't repent of their sin. Along with other crazy beliefs, no Christian should be defending him. He has no business traveling to other countries to spread his nonsense.

Much of the Independent Fundamental Baptists/KJV Onlyists think he's dangerous and makes them look bad. Then again, much of the IFB is just as crazy as he is in other ways.
NNID: Dj.D25, add me for 1v1 on SSB4 Wii U or Splatoon squads/private battles.

User Info: kozlo100

kozlo100
1 month ago#17
F this guy and the horse he rode in on. Those are obviously shockingly horrific viewpoints to hold.

That said, I'm not sure I can really get behind a policy of banning people from entering a nation because of their beliefs or speech. It seems clear cut with a guy like this, but it sets a precedent that can get pretty dangerous pretty quickly.
Time flies like the wind,
and fruit flies like a banana.

User Info: LinkFanatic

LinkFanatic
1 month ago#18
OrangeWizard posted...
The issue there is "what is hate speech?" and "who defines what hate speech is?"


I'm not sure what the official definition of hate speech is, but I would define it as a perspective that marginalizes or oppresses a group of people who aren't doing any harm.
Islam is Chaos Control.

User Info: kozlo100

kozlo100
1 month ago#19
LinkFanatic posted...
I'm not sure what the official definition of hate speech is, but I would define it as a perspective that marginalizes or oppresses a group of people who aren't doing any harm.


To play devil's advocate: That seems like it can get awfully slippery awfully quick if implemented as government policy.

The 'not doing any harm' clause, for example, depends greatly on who is determining what is and isn't harmful. There are Christian groups that would say other religions are doing harm in the form of putting people's souls in danger. Certainly you can find any number of atheists who would say Evangelical Christianity is doing harm. Should the government have precedent to censor either of those groups should the relevant majorities come to power?
Time flies like the wind,
and fruit flies like a banana.

User Info: ledzep3__v9

ledzep3__v9
1 month ago#20
This is an open border issue, not a freedom of speech issue.
  1. Boards
  2. Religion
  3. 'Kill all gays' Christian pastor is the 1st person BANNED from Ireland