( search forums )
bring back censored
Soldat Forums - Misc - The Bash Pit
SPARTAN_III
June 1, 2005, 2:40 pm
gah i miss my old censored icon....now it got replaced with (Please refrain from swearing)

i want my censored icon back!!!

BManx2000
June 1, 2005, 2:52 pm
No :D

Deleted User
June 1, 2005, 3:16 pm
NEIN
.

Deleted User
June 1, 2005, 3:16 pm
quote:Originally posted by BManx2000No :D


... like you can do it...

lastpatriot
June 1, 2005, 8:14 pm
Why are J3sus and S4tan censored?

(Please refrain from swearing) (Please refrain from swearing)

mar77a
June 1, 2005, 9:56 pm
don't know...you can't have more than 4 lines in your sig patriot, btw.

Deleted User
June 2, 2005, 12:10 am
they censored (Please refrain from swearing)???

omg. and i like censored smileys too.

AerialAssault
June 2, 2005, 12:26 am
why are these forums so blasted christian? my god, let us SWEAR. we (the people) should start a revolution to end this horrible censorship machine, imposing their ideologies upon us. members of the forum UNITE!

Deleted User
June 2, 2005, 12:39 am
FIGHT DA POWA!

*Raises up fist*

Vijchtidoodah
June 2, 2005, 1:29 am
AA, stop picking on the Christians, it's no better than picking on the Jews.

That being said, you're about half right. Our prudence (which is a laughable concept in the Americas) derives from our puritan background. It has nothing to do with Christianity as a whole, nor does it have anything to do with the fact that the majority of people are Christian. In fact, most countries have a majority of Christians residing in them.

As for the Christian messiah's name being a swear word, I can only think of one reason -- "Thou shalt not take the Lord's name in vain." Which is, again, laughable because the law is completely misunderstood; it doesn't have anything to do with saying God's name unnecessarily nor should it offend anyone (especially in this day and age).

wormdundee
June 2, 2005, 3:35 am
the word j.esus should definitely not be censored, on many forums there are highly philosophical discussions about religion (ahahaha), and having it censored would add confusion

we did actually have one of these "highly philosophical" discussions in a thread here once

Vijchtidoodah
June 2, 2005, 4:11 am
My god can kick your god's ass.

n00bface
June 2, 2005, 4:56 am
my dad can kick your god's ass

Deleted User
June 2, 2005, 5:59 am
im protestant.

jesu can kick your dads ass.

Unlucky 13
June 2, 2005, 7:03 am
[IMAGE]
Ah damn it, that doesn't work annymore. Well, it looks more blended in, and makes the page load a teeny bit quicker.

Captain RibMan
June 2, 2005, 7:11 am
i'm also offended, the dark lord is most displeased at the censoring of his name

Vijchtidoodah
June 2, 2005, 7:17 am
Hey, hey, lucifer was black too.

frogboy
June 2, 2005, 7:21 am
Hurrah for Stan, for His name is not censored.

Captain Ben
June 2, 2005, 7:48 am
I thought the (Please refrain from swearing) thing discouraged swearing by making it harder to read...
And FINALLY, someone has sigged me!

Maxx
June 3, 2005, 12:57 am
quote:Originally posted by Vijchtidoodah
As for the Christian messiah's name being a swear word, I can only think of one reason -- "Thou shalt not take the Lord's name in vain." Which is, again, laughable because the law is completely misunderstood; it doesn't have anything to do with saying God's name unnecessarily nor should it offend anyone (especially in this day and age).


That's exactly what it has to do with.




Taking God's name in vain is saying it for no reason.

His name should only be said when it's talking about Him.

Vijchtidoodah
June 3, 2005, 1:55 am
No, it isn't Maxx. Taking his name in vain refers to the act of committing a crime, for instance, and then saying that god told you to do it, because if you do you're not only tarnishing your own reputation but also your god's.

Deleted User
June 3, 2005, 2:25 am
Buddha made me do it
.

Maxx
June 3, 2005, 2:54 pm
quote:Originally posted by VijchtidoodahNo, it isn't Maxx. Taking his name in vain refers to the act of committing a crime, for instance, and then saying that god told you to do it, because if you do you're not only tarnishing your own reputation but also your god's.


You're so confused.

Vijchtidoodah
June 3, 2005, 10:53 pm
Okay. Are you going to give me some sort of reasonable justification of why we aren't allowed to speak god's name for no reason, or are you just going to sit there and claim that I'm wrong without anything to back your statement up.

...Oh man, holding back my generalizations is so difficult right now...

Tidal
June 3, 2005, 11:21 pm
GODGODGODGODGODGODGODGODGODGODGODGODGODGODGODGODGODGODGODGOD! for real?

Maxx
June 3, 2005, 11:37 pm
For example, saying "oh my God" or "J.esus Christ, look at that!", is taking the Lord's name in vain because it's not respecting Him at all; it's just throwing His name around for no reason.



And about committing a crime and saying God told you to do it:

God is the main authority, of course, but He also expects us to respect other authorities He has put over us like parents or cops.If you did something that disobeyed those authorities, you would also be disobeying God, which He wouldn't "tell" you to do, or want you to do.
Therefore that would be you're own free will just wanting to sin, and it wouldn't be God's "fault" at all.

Vijchtidoodah
June 4, 2005, 1:02 am
Haha, I know that saying those things disrespect your god, but that belief has absolutely no association to the commandment at all. It's just a general rule of thumb, like good manners in the religious world.

As for your second response, you've completely missed the point. Look at it from someone else's point of view, or, better yet, your own but from a stance that you haven't yet considered: Say you're watching the news -- it's rare footage of a man walking down the street in what seems to be a very large jacket, even though it's incredibly hot outside. He's passing a by a pizza shop that's full of children who have just won a baseball game when, all of a sudden, he shouts out "MY GOD HAS COMMANDED ME TO DO THIS!" and runs into the building. A fraction of a second later, the whole shop erupts in flames.

Now, what do you think of that man's religion, the one that forced him to blow up innocent children? Naturally, you would say that the religion is sick and should be dissolved. And then you learn through the report that he was a practicing Christian - he went to church and prayed every day of his life - and you may think "That man was confused and did what he did by his own free will," but then you'll realize that not every non-Christian knows that fact and they'll have a tarnished view of your religion and your god, and no matter what you do you will never be able to change people's opinions.

That's what the commandment means. That is why that piece was included in the very document that forbids murder, adultery, thievery, and idolatry -- not because it's some petty thing that states that you can't say god's name unnecessarily, but because it ruins people's view of the entire race and diminishes chances of obtaining converts.

Maxx
June 4, 2005, 1:52 am
That condition would just be some moron trying to use God as anexcuse to do that.


Vijchtidoodah
June 4, 2005, 1:56 am
That's an irrelevant observation.

Did you even consider what other people might think? Are you even able to look past your own personality and empathize, or are you completely trapped where you stand?

Captain Ben
June 4, 2005, 2:30 am
I'm lost in this conversation, but I'll give it a try:
I agree with what you said, Vijcht. Where did the Taliban get their idea of killing for God/Allah?

Deleted User
June 4, 2005, 2:31 am
It's JIHAD
.

karmazon
June 4, 2005, 2:35 am
TALIBAN !!!!!

<----

Vijchtidoodah
June 4, 2005, 2:48 am
Captain Ben, killing in the name of one's god hasn't been restricted to modern times. In fact, it dates back to ancient times (pre-judaism, in fact), when people were known to have sacrificed even their own children for a good harvest. It was only a natural step (as was the change from animal sacrifice to human) to begin slaughtering defeated enemies to honor their god, and then to wage wars in the name of their gods.

However, I'm not too familiar with the Islamic Jihadists, but from what I know, they are doing it chiefly to gain martyrdom for themselves, and, in the larger picture, to wage a war they can't possibly win with the use of the most economic and "practical" solution - cheap suicide bombers that can kill with a ratio greater than 5 to 1.

Maxx
June 4, 2005, 1:57 pm
quote:Originally posted by VijchtidoodahThat's an irrelevant observation.

Did you even consider what other people might think? Are you even able to look past your own personality and empathize, or are you completely trapped where you stand?


Yea, I see what you mean, just when I was typing that I was being rushed off the computer and couldn't type anymore.
:P


Captain Ben
June 4, 2005, 2:59 pm
I understand...
Reminds me of those bodies found in the pete swamps. They had to sacrifice important people, not just a slave or peasant, because it might anger their gods.
Though, in killing in the name of GOd, I think the Crusades are a good example. So are the Aztecs.

DeMonIc
June 4, 2005, 3:56 pm
The Crusades were simply operations to get treasures from the far away lands, as well as other things that the Vatican found interesting. The only way to get the masses to battle was making the goal "religious", since christians were very ambitious about those things back then, unlike today.