Intelligence Squared - The Forum for Live Debate

A project of St James Ethics Centre

eNews Signup Support Us
  • Australia
    • Australia
    • UK
    • Germany
    • China
    • Ukraine
    • USA
7 Nov2013

God And His Prophets Should Be Protected from Insult


Debate Details
The Panel
Results
Video / Audio

Have Your Say   (Terms of Use)

66 Comments

  • Posted by Jamie, Tuesday, 1 July 2014 (5 months ago)

    Truly horrendous debate. If you want to have a debate, get people on each side of the topic.
    There is a very clear practical and historical defense of free speech that was barely raised, we had to rely on the audience to even mention it.

  • THE BIBLES , Wednesday, 16 April 2014 (8 months ago)

    The Holy Bible is a book of countless stories and records of history. It talks about both the “before” and “after” years of Christ’s existence in this imperfect world. It’s like a documentary of the origin of the earth and how it’s going to end but only it is printed on paper.

  • greg hoey , Monday, 10 February 2014 (10 months ago)

    Julian Burnside the silver-tailed, silver haired, over-paid, under-worked, arrogant, rather spiteful, blacklisting, australian lawyer who speaks with a plum to his voice like he's never done a hard days work in his sweet, innocent, north shore, richy rich life was on the side of "NO FREE_SPEECH for any who criticise religious theology" in a recent debate against those who value free-speech even if it happens to cause offence to some religions was quite happy to insult a certain unknown individual? [by referring to said unknown individuals nose], when it suits him.

    Yet this same man has the tenacity to openly defend not allowing criticism or insults to be made against religion or certain kinds of individual by shutting down the right to free speech in australia because this may offend some religion or other!

    Julian Burnside is just Another of these BIG TIME NEPOTIST UPPER-MIDDLE CLASS HYPOCRITs and blacklisters of 'others' [low income outsiders not entrenched or associated with spruiking the requested] so common in modern day left-leaning liberal australian discourse.

  • Posted by StHilarious, Friday, 7 February 2014 (10 months ago)

    Vain imaginations of self-proclaimed prophets

    What should be addressed is the validity of a religion, as vain imaginations of self-proclaimed prophets cannot be taken seriously without qualification. The bible tells us to seek God and the possibility of a relationship with God in whose image we are created. It has validity, because that relationship is possible, its account by eyewitnesses and many fulfilled prophecies. The Red Sea scrolls give further evidence that the Old Testament writings haven’t changed. The Qur’an hasn’t been subjected to the scrutiny the bible has been, nor are there any fulfilled prophecies in it. Therefore no one can guarantee what the Qur’an present is authentic coming from God. No one takes the Santa Claus story seriously, but Islam is ultimately more dangerous as it deceives adults. People who believe in fables are more prone to feeling insulted, as they haven’t used discernment before allowing those beliefs to be established in their minds. Western-society, apart from Roman Catholicism, which was based on Judeo-Christian principles, questions everything. Islam doesn’t teach to question and set people free like Jesus does.

  • Posted by Ivan, Friday, 7 February 2014 (10 months ago)

    We should absolutely defend God or his servants if they are blashphemed. Just as we would defend a friend or family member who is being attacked for whatever reason.

  • Posted by Ralph Seccombe, Monday, 3 February 2014 (10 months ago)

    Comment on the debate is at http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=15825 in an article “Blasphemy laws unreasonably infringe freedom of speech”.

  • Posted by Muhammed, Sunday, 2 February 2014 (10 months ago)

    The reason why the video isn't available for viewing is because the Muslim speaker exposes the truth. Search for the debate on YouTube and see for yourself

  • Posted by Muhammed, Sunday, 2 February 2014 (10 months ago)

    The reason why the debate is not available for viewing is because the Muslim speaker Uthman Badar exposes the truth. Search for "God And His Prophets Should Be Protected from Insult" on youtube and see for yourself.

  • David Brookman , Sunday, 2 February 2014 (10 months ago)

    I do not see why one particular philosophy should have special legal protection. As an theist I am discriminated against daily, abused by christians. I have even been sacked from a University lectureship because of my prominent atheism. No religion deserves special protection. 31% of the Australian population are atheist or have no religion and we are actively repressed by such laws.

  • Posted by Cris Parker, Tuesday, 7 January 2014 (11 months ago)

    S.Khan, there is no censorship made to legitimate respectful comments, the hoops that need to be jumped through to leave a comments are there to prevent SPAM. We encourage people to continue the conversation and I hope after this debate is available on line people will express the views.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


Intelligence Squared Debates are brought to you by:
St James Ethics Centre,
Legion House Level 2,
161 Castlereagh Street,
Sydney NSW 2000 Australia

Website crafted by Kindleman