skepsis

can I get this?

I was trying to convey the idea that the phrase (which IS profane, by conventional standards at least) is offensive to such a large group of people, whether Muslim, Jewish, Christian etc. I have blown this out of proportion though, I was a little bored and tipsy last night.

The problem with "interpreting" this kind of thing is that there's no end to it. I've heard it said that "Life of Brian" was actually reverent in its treatment of Christianity due to its comedic, affectionate nature. It's natural that someone who is not offended would have difficulty comprehending the fact that the film is, beyound all doubt, defined as profane by all branches of Christianity. Similarly, a docile-looking image of a docile-looking prophet Mohammed sitting on a bus beside a bomb could have a secular excuse, something along the lines of it being a sharp satirical take on the differing beliefs within Islam. I think you'd agree there would be outrage.

afterskoolklub's argument is interesting, althogh it fails to operate within the philosophies in question here:

If there is a God and blasphemy has been specifically defined for us in some kind of revelation, then profanity does not rely on the human mind to any great extent, and can exist without in-depth interpetation - all we can do is try to avoid it. If there is no God, profanity is nonsense anyway. Whether someone identifies a profanity or not is irrelevant to its offensiveness to a higher being.

But lets forget about it, shall we? Its nothing unusually terrible anyway, its just a bit callous. And thanks for the abuse above, Mr Doran.

I'm out of here

Why are you limiting this to current religions? The recognition, whether man-made or not, of a higher being goes back much farther than the slave trade and the "subjugation of women" (which I would argue was often not opposed by women of the time, and was, more often, a repectful attempt to define the relevant positions of men and women in society).

Also, your issue with any of the replacement words above stems from what? Your moral code? In asserting that these things are repulsive, you've validated my point that things can be offensive. I'm not trying to be a moron here, I'm trying to explain how the article title is more offensive than necessary.

With regards to my apparent inability to comprehend the your article and thus realise that it was okay after all: it's not a metaphorical work of genius. The article's title stands alone in large type on the front page of a major music website. Profanity can exist as an entity in itself, whether there is another intention behind the entity in question or not.

I've been sucked into this and its ridiculous. Surely everyone here can look at the title reasonably and see how it can be seen as offensive to large numbers of people, and how redundant the title really is in terms of the article itself.

It stands on its own as pathetic, tasteless and infantile. It's ironic that in a week where the death of music journalism is being debated, such compelling evidence should be shoved in my face.

I'm sure you'd all agree the article would look hideously out of place in any newspaper - why should the editorial and linguistic standard of music journalism be so base?

I'm not a Christian, I'm just sensitive to the gradual erosion of standards in society. Don't reply saying I must be a Christian or I wouldn't be bothered - I'm not.

And to the individual who wrote the following:
"why shouldn't you offend someone who believes in 2000 year old Jewish zombies?

or multi-armed elephantine over-seers
or miraculous birthing through a slit in someone's side

etc...it's pretty much the ultimate WTF. Be offended, please."

Everyone's an idiot except you? I think you should get some perspective. Belief in God has been a core part of humankind throughout history. Just because the genepool has only recently coughed up someone of your formidable intelligence doesn't mean you should disregard everyone else.

It's a ridiculous headline which serves no real purpose. The offense lies in the unnecessary juxtaposition of an obscenity with the name of God, which several major world religions come under. Fact is, there's no need for it.

It's frankly completely offensive to me.

Grammar: newborn giraffe

"We are witnessing that which stokes the fires in our bellies gradually turning to shit."

"You’re stupid, you’re wrong, and you stink of shit from wading around in it for so long. Fuck off."

Classic. Great review.

the album was out today, after being pushed back from last monday? Now I'm hearing it's next Monday... :(

on itunes

that's what she said.

I'm sorry