I can't help but ask this , Euro pet "lovers" (literally & figuratively) are accusing someone else for something?
I am sold.
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
I am sold.
Just hope those pets receive the same social benefits like any others for its service.
The funny thing is that child bride is still occurring in many southern states in the US as legal loopholes and at the same time they are obsessed with pedophile.
Trust me, they have far surpassed paedophilia & exploring new kind of "values" now
Meanwhile in China, the purposed draft of a revision on Public Security Administration Punishments Law would give the police broad power to detain without trial (administrative detention) for speeches on ethnic/religious issues . The draft has been under public comments for more than a couple years now, so the legislative process appears to be frozen at the moment. Not sure if it's ever going to pass into law, but according to the draft, the police can detain without trial for between 10 to 15 days anyone who they deem to have
1. incited ethnic separatism, ethnic hatred and ethnic discrimination.
2. used religion to incite hatred and discrimination.
3. published in print or online content that insulted or discriminated against ethnic groups or religions.
A lot of atheists in China were very alarmed by the draft after it was put online for public comments. But I actually think its approach is quite nuanced. Compare the treatment of ethnic issues with religious issues. Anyone who incite ethnic hatred can be detained, anyone using a religion to incite hatred can be detained, but one will only be detained for publishing insults against religion. I imagine not every speech online or offline counts as publishing. Thoughts?
1. incited ethnic separatism, ethnic hatred and ethnic discrimination.
2. used religion to incite hatred and discrimination.
3. published in print or online content that insulted or discriminated against ethnic groups or religions.
A lot of atheists in China were very alarmed by the draft after it was put online for public comments. But I actually think its approach is quite nuanced. Compare the treatment of ethnic issues with religious issues. Anyone who incite ethnic hatred can be detained, anyone using a religion to incite hatred can be detained, but one will only be detained for publishing insults against religion. I imagine not every speech online or offline counts as publishing. Thoughts?
Last edited:
Jump into the sea, drink enough sea water until the other ship next to it being satisfied enough to pick it up, perhaps.
Actually it does.
Otherwise you don't need a platform, online or offline to "publish/put" it.
Atheists who adhere to western "freedom of speech" will certainly be alarmed. Atheists of Chinese tradition including all communists are not worried, it is the later who make, execute and guard these rules. Being a "atheists" is not an excuse of being racists and ultra-nationalists.
This revision (not only the ethnic and religious part, but the whole) should have been introduced earlier.
The difference between what the administrative regulation (not a criminal law of court) forbids and "constructive criticism of religion" is that the later is strictly limited to academical study in an institution guarded by the CCP committee and National Education Commission guidelines. Example:
1. it is ok to say that religion fool people into obeying injustice by oppressive state power in a sociopolitical class. That is part of Karl Max's theory adhered by CCP.
2. It is NOT ok to call people of a religion to be stupid or barbaric in an online forum or in person or in school class (as the French did). That is insult.
This is nothing new really. It is easy for anyone who adhere to Chinese political tradition and communism to make the distinction of the two. It is only confusing and alarming for people who got brainwashed by western media thinking they are free of everything.
Last edited:
Yes I suppose they should be called New Atheists as in the New Atheism advocated by the Four Horsemen of New Atheism. Although the distinction between traditional atheism and New Atheism is beyond attitude toward freedom of speech. I would actually classify myself as a New Atheists with the caveat that I agree that there are good utilitarian reasons for tolerating religions, but I don't think any of the Four Horsemen would deny that.
Last edited:
A theorist is not responsible for people's daily life but a ruling political party (CCP) or emperors (Chinese tradition) do. China has tried "pure form of communism" which turned to a total disaster, lesson learnt in the hard way, should not happen again.
