It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Evangelical Preacher on Trial After Branding Islam 'Satanic'

page: 2
36
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 03:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: beansidhe
a reply to: shooterbrody

Bear in mind this is Northern Ireland and the last thing they need right now is a minister inciting religious intolerance. They certainly don't need any more 'troubles'.


So then it is ok to limit what a minister says from a pulpit in a church?




posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower

It does not surprise me at all that the powers that be of this website side with censorship and prosecution of free speech. Sure, his comments would be found offensive by muslims. Does that mean he's an idiot? Or does it mean he's saying what he has to in order to try to survive this attack on free speech? Stay classy ATS, stay classy. I wonder though, how many imams are prosecuted over there for preaching "hate speech" against infidels? Ah, wouldn't want to upset someone who might cut your head off in response, right?



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: ngchunter

People must have forgotten about Salman Rushdie




edit on 14-12-2015 by infolurker because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 03:15 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

I read your link and checked the Belfastlive page, but there's not much information about what he said. He must have been encouraging violence, or hatred for it to go this far.
He's got a shades of Ian Paisley going on, who was renowned for his virulent 'never, never, never' speeches against Catholics and who denounced the Pope as the antichrist.

I have no idea if that is the reason or not, but it's the first thing that came to my mind when I read your article.



So then it is ok to limit what a minister says from a pulpit in a church?


Good grief, yes. Ministers/priests are not above the law. Belfast has seen more than enough bloodshed, there is no room for more.
edit on 14-12-2015 by beansidhe because: add



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 03:33 PM
link   
What's being done in the name of Islam is satanic.

There is no arguing.

So much for free speech.

Voltaire is rolling over in his grave.

I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend your right to say it.

God forbid we offend anyone.

But what I find to be OFFENSIVE is what's done in the name of religion, and what's being done in the name of 'liberty'.



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: ngchunter

Abu Hamza is the first to spring to mind, Bakri was also arrested if I remember right. There are more if you want to check it out.



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: beansidhe

Someone who tells Muslims to kill non-believers is hardly on the same level as calling someone satanic. I appreciate your attempt to provide an example, though I am speaking specifically of "hate speech," not "calls for murder." There is a difference between saying something hateful and telling people to go kill others. You have a right to life, not a right to be unoffended. Well, in civil society anyway.



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 03:50 PM
link   
More reptilian than satanic and thats all 3 Abrahamic Religions



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
So then it is ok to limit what a minister says from a pulpit in a church?

In practice, it shouldn't be. But apparently that's not the case in the U.K.

More details are here, including excerpts from the sermon: Belfast pastor James McConnell denounces Islam as the devil's doctrine at Whitewell Metropolitan Tabernacle church sermon


Today a new evil has arisen — there are cells of Muslims right throughout Britain — can I hear an amen? [congregation amen]

Right throughout Britain and this nation is going to enter into a great tribulation and a great trial.

To judge by some of what I have heard in the past few months, you would think that Islam was little more than a variation of Christianity and Judaism.

That so, Islam’s ideas about God, about humanity, about salvation are vastly different from the teaching of the holy scriptures.

Islam is heathen, Islam is satanic, Islam is a doctrine spawned in hell.



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 03:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: skunkape23
He probably offended Satanists with that statement. Satanism is not even remotely akin to Islam.
you surely understand that Christianity would view islam as a deciet of Satan. in other word the devil attacks not with physical force but through lies and through taking the truth and adding a bit or twisting it slightly to led humanity into confusion and error. A christian would view anything that says Christ is not the son of God as Islam does as a devil level deceit. Thus in the christian view adherents to islam are beguiled by Satan.

Satan quoted scripture to Eve but with a slight change to deceive her. Satan tried this with Christ during his temptation in the desert. The Anti-Christ will come claiming he is Christ and doing miracles not as a red long john wearing horned monster caricature weilding a pitchfork.

From the point of view of a christian someone coming a long a few centuries after Christ who demotes Christ to a flawed prophet and says he is the true way to heaven would be a deceiver. Especially give that that messenger was the opposite of Christ in all ways and Christ said "Behold I have foretold you *ALL* things.
edit on 14-12-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 04:01 PM
link   
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Satan has nothing to do with actual Satanists or their beliefs, they just use the name to upset uptight Christians.



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Satan has nothing to do with actual Satanists or their beliefs, they just use the name to upset uptight Christians.

This may be but it is irrelevant to the Christian use of the term "satanic." Satanists have no monopoly on the term. It's Christian usage predates the"satanist's" usage.
edit on 14-12-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-12-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 04:03 PM
link   
He should have the right to say whatever stupid crap he wants. Its not muslims prosecuting him, they just seem to be the convenient excuse to roll out whatever draconian punitive measures the state wants to implement under the guise of protecting people.



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 04:05 PM
link   
a reply to: ngchunter

I hear what you're saying and to an extent I agree. From Skeptic Overlord's link:




During his sermon, the clergyman said: "Islam is heathen, Islam is satanic, Islam is a doctrine spawned in hell."
He also likened Muslims to the IRA, saying there were cells spread right across the UK.
When contacted by the Belfast Telegraph last night, the pastor said he stood over his remarks.


I'm wondering if that's what sparked the furore, because that is deliberately inflammatory in context?



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 04:13 PM
link   
a reply to: beansidhe

Last I checked free speech doesn't care what you personally find to be "inflammatory." If "inflammatory rhetoric" isn't protected, then you don't really have free speech. It's easy and pointless to defend speech you find to be innocuous. Again, it's one thing to issue death threats and the like, it's another to say something "inflammatory" or draw "offensive comparisons." It's fortunate that "inflammatory comparisons" are not regarded as a violation of the law in the US or else there would be a prosecution almost every time Godwin's law is fulfilled.



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 04:14 PM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Damn,

They would have given Winston Churchill the death penalty for what he said about Nazism. In today's world they would have labeled him a Naziphobe, hater, bigot, alarmist.




Amid the excitement of the election the exultant columns of the National Socialist Party filed past their leader in the pagan homage of a torchlight procession through the streets of Berlin. It had been a long struggle, difficult for foreigners, especially those who had not known the pangs of defeat, to comprehend.

Adolf Hitler had at last arrived. But he was not alone. He had called from the depths of defeat the dark and savage furies latent in the most numerous, most serviceable, ruthless, contradictory, and ill-starred race in Europe.

He had conjured up the fearful idol of an all-devouring Moloch of which he was the priest and incarnation. It is not within my scope to describe the inconceivable brutality and villainy by which this apparatus of hatred and tyranny had been fashioned and was now to be perfected. It is necessary, for the purpose of this account, only to present to the reader the new and fearful fact which had broken upon the still unwitting world: GERMANY UNDER HITLER, AND GERMANY ARMING.


edit on 14-12-2015 by infolurker because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: beansidhe

I don't see anything more inflammatory than what the news and intelligence services are already telling us. He simply repeated the facts.



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: ngchunter

It's important to remember the context here though, in that Belfast has had decades of sectarian murder and what was essentially a war happening because of 'inflammatory' comments.
You can't compare the US to Northern Ireland, particularly in relation to sectarian violence or incitement to violence. That's why I'm wondering if there is more to this story than the minister's speech against Islam. There are still strong divides in the city.
As I said earlier, I don't know, but I'm of an age where I equate Belfast and terrorists with the IRA and the UVF, not muslims.

He's on trial anyway, and no verdict has been reached as to whether or not he's guilty. We'll see over the next few days, I guess.



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 04:23 PM
link   
I was once followed around by an Islamic woman who muttered under her breath at me. I thought she was a bit mad and so I ignored her, but then one day I paused and strained to hear what she was saying. I heard, "Vile Christian heathen! Allah will killll youuuu."

I am NOT making this up. This was in 1986 in rural upstate New York.

I had done absolutely nothing to warrant this woman's weird hostility. It came from her murderous ideology and her benighted religion, following a God of hate, death, and oppression of all others.

At that time I concluded for myself that this woman, at least, was evil. I wondered if Allah did indeed want me dead, and if so, to me that meant ALLAH IS SATAN. I started educating myself about Islam, which I had regarded up until that time as just another of the world's various (mostly) peacefully coexisting religions. My experience with this woman gave me a new understanding of the mindset of the extremists during the Iranian revolution and the hostage crisis under Jimmy Carter. And that was my introduction to radical Islam. Which is, IMO, Satanic in a way which even Satanism is not. Because Satanists don't actually believe in their deity, whereas radical Islamists do. And Allah wants them to slaughter all the vile Christian heathen. To a Christian, a deity which desires the slaughter of Christians is by definition anti-christian and thus Satanic. It's not really up for debate; to a Christian that is pretty much the definition of the word "Satanic".

So yeah, not a popular message but certainly not one worthy of incarceration, either.
edit on 14-12-2015 by OuttaHere because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 04:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: ngchunter
a reply to: beansidhe

Someone who tells Muslims to kill non-believers is hardly on the same level as calling someone satanic. I appreciate your attempt to provide an example, though I am speaking specifically of "hate speech," not "calls for murder." There is a difference between saying something hateful and telling people to go kill others. You have a right to life, not a right to be unoffended. Well, in civil society anyway.

But that's the point of hate speech laws. To prevent someone being from being egregiously offended. But there's also a trend in our universities following Microaggression theory. Some universities are enacting laws on their students and teachers, so they cannot say or write certain things which might offend:
en.wikipedia.org - Microaggression theory...

www.theatlantic.com - How Trigger Warnings Are Hurting Mental Health on Campus...

Words can be weapons. Thats' the point of all this. Enough harassment can destroy a person. Hate speech can also incite violence, by encouraging masses of people to harm others.
edit on 12/14/2015 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join