Things just get better!

[Nearly Sane]

Wtf does 'By offence we should be offending with the truth' mean?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

Non sequitur to what Tesco's did or didn't do.

Dear god man, will you ever find out what non sequitur actually means?

By offence we should be offending with the truth....Not clever turdpolishing.....not by celebrity..........not with '' professional comedians.''

Presumably you thought you were expressing a coherent thought when you typed that? Any clues as to what that thought might have been?

Anything?

Oh, and I see that the argument I actually made went about 32,000 feet above your head. Oh well.

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

Wtf does 'By offence we should be offending with the truth' mean?

Nothing. It's gibberish.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

Dear god man, will you ever find out what non sequitur actually means?

Presumably you thought you were expressing a coherent thought when you types that? Any clues as to what that thought might have been?

Anything?

Oh, and I see that the argument I actually made went about 32,000 feet above your head. Oh well.

Nah, Antitheist Chappy, Your piece was just a standard World of new atheism release (from what end i'm not sure).

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Wtf does 'By offence we should be offending with the truth' mean?

Man insensed by trivialisation of outrage, outraged by non standard English?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

Nah, Antitheist Chappy, Your piece was just a standard World of new atheism release (from what end i'm not sure).

There was nothing "antitheist", atheist or theist about it. It was actually about the primacy of freedom of speech over the right not to be offended. If you tried reading it again perhaps the argument would become apparent, assuming that is you don't want to continue with your attempted derail.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

Man insensed by trivialisation of outrage, outraged by non standard English?

Non-standard English if fine; incomprehensible word salad isn't. If you want to communicate something, you need to express it in coherent language.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

There was nothing "antitheist", atheist or theist about it. It was actually about the primacy of freedom of speech over the right not to be offended. If you tried reading it again perhaps the argument would become apparent, assuming that is you don't want to continue with your attempted derail.

The derail has come from you. The issue is Tesco's not some polemic about the licence antitheism has to be nasty to a group of people they don't like.

[jeremyp]

Let's be honest: for Christians: Good Friday is good. From their point of view, it's the day that God stepped in and took responsibility for their sins and took their death sentence in their place. What's not good about that?

Then Tesco offer some cheap alcohol to help them celebrate. That surely makes it even better. I don't see what's wrong with this advert.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Let's be honest: for Christians: Good Friday is good. From their point of view, it's the day that God stepped in and took responsibility for their sins and took their death sentence in their place. What's not good about that?

Then Tesco offer some cheap alcohol to help them celebrate. That surely makes it even better. I don't see what's wrong with this advert.

I see Tesco's saw fit not to agree with you.....I wonder why.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

The derail has come from you. The issue is Tesco's not some polemic about the licence antitheism has to be nasty to a group of people they don't like.

Whoosh!

[jeremyp]

I see Tesco's saw fit not to agree with you.....I wonder why.

Because I'm not trying to sell stuff to delicate snow flakes that cry when you hurt their ickle feelings.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Because I'm not trying to sell stuff to delicate snow flakes that cry when you hurt their ickle feelings.

Yes but where does disinterest stop and enjoying it because people might be upset by an example of an ad populum begin?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

Yes but where does disinterest stop and enjoying it because people might be upset by an example of an ad populum begin?

First, there was no "ad populum". Tesco weren't arguing for anything - they were just trying to sell comestibles.

Second, whether people enjoy other people being upset is by magnitudes less important than protecting freedom of speech – exactly the same freedom of speech that allows the Christians who complained to say and do as they please. Stephen Fry’s quote again.

You’re awful confused here.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

First, there was no "ad populum". Tesco weren't arguing for anything - they were just trying to sell comestibles.

Second, whether people enjoy other people being upset is by magnitudes less important than protecting freedom of speech – exactly the same freedom of speech that allows the Christians who complained to say and do as they please. Stephen Fry’s quote again.

You’re awful confused here.

Non sequitur plus gratuitous use of celebrity?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

Non sequitur plus gratuitous use of celebrity?

Neither.

First, when you try to use terms like non sequitur when you obviously don’t have the first idea what they mean you just exit yourself from the conversation. You asserted that Tesco tried an argumentum ad populum, and I explained why they did not. There’s no non sequitur there at all.

Second, the “celebrity” or otherwise of Stephen Fry is neither here nor there. The only point that’s relevant is the force of his argument – which is that, “You can’t say that because I’m offended by it” is not a good reason for not saying something.

I note too that the basic point that freedom of speech is something we all – Christians included – should hold dear rather than attack so as to protect our feelings has passed you by entirely.

Why is that?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

Neither.

First, when you try to use terms like non sequitur when you obviously don’t have the first idea what they mean you just exit yourself from the conversation. You asserted that Tesco tried an argumentum ad populum, and I explained why they did not. There’s no non sequitur there at all.

Second, the “celebrity” or otherwise of Stephen Fry is neither here nor there. The only point that’s relevant is the force of his argument – which is that, “You can’t say that because I’m offended by it” is not a good reason for not saying something.

I note too that the basic point that freedom of speech is something we all – Christians included – should hold dear rather than attack so as to protect our feelings has passed you by entirely.

Why is that?

Any argument which depends on an appeal to the majority is a bad one. Goodness knows you guys keep banging on about that sort of thing.

Free speech is non sequitur to this thread which I started. What Tesco put was out of crassness and ignorance. It isn't a great blow for free speech or are you just trying to treat us to virtuoso turdpolishing?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

Any argument which depends on an appeal to the majority is a bad one.

Again, there was no "argument" - it was just an advertising slogan. Why are you lying about that?

Goodness knows you guys keep banging on about that sort of thing.

You made a(nother) mistake, I corrected it. Where's the "banging on"?

Free speech is non sequitur to this thread....

FOR FUCK'S SAKE - THAT'S NOT WHAT NON SEQUITUR MEANS!!! WHY THE HELL DON'T YOU JUST LOOK IT UP OR SOMETHING?

AAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!

What you're trying to say is irrelevant.

...which I started.

Indeed you did, and the freedom of speech issue explains why your position was wrong when you did it.

What Tesco put was out of crassness and ignorance.

By "put" do you mean the ad or its withdrawal and the craven apology? You may think the ad to be crass and ignorant, though if it did the job of selling more booze then it seems quite effective to me. If you mean the withdrawal and apology, then I agree - they shouldn't have done it for the reasons I set out earlier that you either just ignored or misrepresented.

It isn't a great blow for free speech or are you just trying to treat us to virtuoso turdpolishing?

The former. Free speech isn't a pick what you like buffet - "I'll defend it when it suits me, but attack it when the same freedom exercised by others offends me". Freedom speech is freedom speech whether or not you like what's said or it's nothing. People who want the freedom to express their religious beliefs should be aware of the potential consequences if they try to deny it to others.

[Robbie]

On the whole I agree with Rose, we live in a secular society and can't expect anyone to pay attention to religion but, Rose, do you see Christians being miserable because of Good Friday? I've not seen that in my entire life,even in the days when I was a kid & Christianity was taught in school and shops weren't open. I'm surprised you said that but accept your experience may be different to mine. All I can say is you've met some weird Christians.

Even Muslims during Ramadan don't spread misery around. They fast as much as they can, depending on their job and health & it's their business. If we didn't know it was Ramadan we'd never guess unless we offered refreshment & it was turned down.

[ippy]

Tesco has upset a lot of christians, yes?

ippy

[Robbie]

From what the article said,seems so. I've not heard of it other than that & none on here seem bothered.

[floo]

Tesco give hope of employment to utter numpties.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39587226

I think Tesco's ad was in very poor taste, whether you are religious or not. Crucifixion was a terrible way for anyone to die.

[Robbie]

Tesco didn't mention crucifixion though. Christ's crucifixion only means something to Christians, doubt anyone else even thinks of it.
Yesterday's news! A mountain out of molehill and all forgotten by Monday. Makes me think the media are scratching around for something to say.

Other supermarkets had similar offers.

[floo]

Tesco didn't mention crucifixion though. Christ's crucifixion only means something to Christians, doubt anyone else even thinks of it.
Yesterday's news! A mountain out of molehill and all forgotten by Monday. Makes me think the media are scratching around for something to say.

Other supermarkets had similar offers.

But they mentioned Good Friday, and Good Friday is all about the crucifixion.

[jeremyp]

I think Tesco's ad was in very poor taste, whether you are religious or not. Crucifixion was a terrible way for anyone to die.

Wouldn't that imply calling Good Friday "Good" was in very poor taste?