• afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I got your point, such as it is, and it was so clearly bad that mocking it seemed appropriate. There is a difference between targetted harassment of an individual who is a member of the general public and attacking skydaddy. One is a crime with a victim you can identify and the other (like all blasphemy) is a victimless crime. If Allah were real, and not just a plagiarism run through the mind of a warlord genocidal pedophile, it could not be harmed. It could not be afraid. It could not even be resisted. A human can’t harm a god, a human can easily hurt a human.

      Your entire attempt at comparison was not even worthy of this comment as it was so wrong. If you compared a sneeze to a supernova it would have been closer to comparing fictional Allah to a human. Blasphemy can never ever ever be a crime with a victim.

      Now go burn a cross in front of my house, but please make sure to wait a bit as there is still some daylight. I want it to be nice and dark.

      • kaffiene@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        The argument I was making was pretty much the kind of reasoning that the Danes are using in their law making. I don’t know why you bother even discussing these issues when you are incapable or unwilling of even think about their reasons. Enjoy fighting strawmen.