What is laughable is that these groups -all of them - are here because the British are a tolerant nation.
Paradoxically we are now victims of this tolerance.

I'm with John on this............

Now I know a few of you can give an answer to the next question, so it's a bit of a pointless one, but.........

Who gives a ****??????

It's a play FFS!!!!!

No, all of these cultures are here because we were a colonial empire plundering the globe and dragging people over here to do things for us ! When we started to behave in a more civilised fashion we allowed many countires populations to migrate here. My mother migrated here from Guyana , a former British colony.

Re the dabate I fully understand both views. I'm strongly anti western religions and have more sympathy for eastern religions. Its very hard to balance the need for freedom of speech with the need to be respectful of peoples cultures.

I think part of the argument is that some of the scenes are thought to mis-represent the sikhs whihc would be a bit like hgaving a play about your Mum being a bit loose. I'd be pissed with that but would I want it banned or should it stay as freedom of speech ? Hard one that and I don't think there is an easy answer.

I'm glad to see good arguments both ways and people agreeing to disagree rather than slagging eachother off.


AllanB

Sorry Guys but you can only take the piss out of C of E all others are banned.

Religous tolerance, sorry religous intolerance ..............

Sorry got to go, need to sail my toy submarine in the font!

THE CHRISTIANS ARE AT IT NOW! :mad:

http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/sto...376992,00.html

Lol! Yeah but they haven't actually rioted over it.

It was hardly a riot. The most I saw was that they 'squared up to the police'. I didn't see any rucks. Certainly nothing like the pro-hunt protests.

Is this playwright concerned about issues or her career?. I know, she thinks, how can I get maximum publicity and make a name for myself - yep, stick in something as offensive as possible.

You know full well what I mean. I don't believe some vicars rattling their teacups is the same as the Sikh "protest" incident.

:rolleyes:

In the same way 75% of the world was when the brits decided to invade. On this issue, what goes round comes around.

I find people's narrow minded moronic addiction to organised religion offensive. But i dont try and stop them from engageing in their regular fix of pious denial.

I do object to censorship in any form whatsoever. I'm an adult and I'll decide what I can and can't watch. I respect people's right to complete artistic freedom, regardless of content and who it offends. Nothing is untouchable and no subject is taboo. Life wouldn't be very interesting if nothing ever pissed us off or challenged us in any way!!!

Give free thought a try you may find it liberating.

Where are all those 'PC do-gooders' who complain on scoobynet when someone posts a video link to a poor soul being beheaded in Iraq? Surely the same arguement should apply: if you don't like it, turn away.

PS - one of the aforementioned has actually posted in this thread.

I feel that people are entitled to their own beliefs, religious or violently anti religious as French Boy seems to be.

I never quite understand why so many of the anti religious types are so manic about it. Is it a matter of conscience perhap's? If you dont want to believe in religion that fine by me, just don't insult those who do-it only weakens your argument anyway.

Religious beliefs as has been said often enough are a guide to living a good unselfish life with thought for others. I see nothing wrong with that!

Wars etc which others blame on religion are always caused by unscrupulous people using the religion to further their own power struggles, nothing to do with the religious teachings at all.

The feelings of the Sikhs are perfectly justified I think since they quite reasonably are objecting to what they see as an insult to their beliefs purely in the name of so called "artistic licence". I well remember all the money it cost the taxpayer to protect that self seeker Salman Rushdie who wrote an insulting book in the interests of making money for himself. He should have been made to pay for his protective cover.

Someone brought up "Father Ted". There is a very big difference here, this programme is a very funny and well acted comedy and only pokes gentle fun at Catholicism and the priesthood. I have never heard a Catholic complain about it and would be very surprised if anyone did take offence.

Les

In the interests of equality, can anyone be arsed to look up protests about Life of Brian, Last Temptation of Christ and the Passion of the Christ? (I can't...)

Spoken like a true right-wing follower.

Luckily your right-wing views are in the minority.

Bob

Oh, Grauniad did...

Art v God - a brief history

The Playboy of the Western World
JM Synge's play, about how a small Irish village embraced a man who murdered his father, caused riots at its opening in Ireland in 1907. The play was criticised as being indecent, anti-Catholic, and negative stereotyping of the Irish community. The company producing the play in the US was charged with blasphemy when it crossed the Atlantic.

The Love That Dares to Speak its Name
James Kirkup's poem, published in 1976, portrayed a legionary having sex with the body of Christ, and suggested Jesus also had sex with Pontius Pilate and with the 12 disciples. It was published in Gay News, and its editor Denis Lemon became last person convicted of blasphemous libel.

Piss Christ
New York photographer Andres Serrano's 1987 image of a crucifix immersed in urine provoked a debate on the acceptability of some art. The US Senate later banned government funding for 'obscene or indecent works'. Piss Christ is now on display in the National Gallery of Victoria in Australia, after the Catholic church failed to have it banned.

Perdition
Jim Allen's play about the role of some Zionists in the Holocaust enraged the Jewish community, and protests forced Royal Court to abandon a 1987 production 48 hours before preview. It was finally staged in London in 1999.

The Satanic Verses
Salman Rushdie became infamous with his 1988 novel. Muslims objected to his portrayal of the Prophet Muhammad, and the book was banned in India and in Bradford. Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini issued a declaration condemning Rushdie to death and the writer went into hiding.

The Passion of the Christ
When Mel Gibson's film was released this year, Jewish groups condemned it for portraying Jews as responsible for the crucifixion. The film gained support from the US evangelical movement.

Popetown
Unshown cartoon series with the Pope (voiced by Ruby Wax) bouncing around Vatican on a pogo stick so angered Catholics that BBC had to shelve it.

I will concede a thread rename then...

"They are ALL at it!!! :mad:"

;)

<Brendan prints off ajm's concession, walks around with smug grin and puffed-out chest...>

;)

Think of it as a goodwill gesture to accomodate your information into the thread. The thread was about one specific event, however if we want to broaden the discussion across all religions so the Sikhs don't feel picked on then let it be!

Afterall, I am all ready covered by post #21! :D

Behzti has been cancelled now - a victory for the Sikhs

Now is the dipiction of rape/murder in a temple correct in any sense? Or is this all fiction?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/e...ds/4112105.stm

Do not attempt to adjust your picture, the Sikhs are now in control of the transmission.

:mad:

"We are concerned that people out there who don't know anything about Sikhs will see this and what sort of a picture will they have in their mind?

"They will paint all Sikhs with the same brush."

Must admit it makes sense.Saying that all kinda things happen in every religeon and all kinda people exist in every race.
Difficult issue to comment on.........

Listened to a Sikh guy on the radio this afternoon. His opinion was that , if people went to watch this play they would all think that what happens in the play, happens in all Sikh temples.
I mean, does that indicate then that because we watch say - Eastenders, we believe that they(people who live in the east end of London) are all miserable b*sta*ds who moan all day long and fight each other?
Or that ALL footballers wives are tarts, or that Jeremy Clarkson is God's son because of his initials?
Oh come on Mr Sikh man, give us some credit for a bit of intelligence.
After all that, I see that the play has been closed down. It wasn't the sort of play I'd want to see, but whatever happened to free expression? Where were all the riots when Jesus Christ Superstar came out?
I am truely , truely getting sick of all this , "They are insulting me " attitude these days. Are we all whimps ????

No you are not:)

Exactly, they have made an assumption about us and consequently removed our right to decide for ourselves.

That is deeply offensive to me. Perhaps if I go and do some damage, injure a few policeman and run riot in the streets they will reverse the decision!

Then again, with the leader of the protestors being a serving counsillor in the local council I expect they won't. :mad:

With a thread title such as 'The Sikhs are at it now!' of course you weren't making any generalisations.

LOL....really.....what proof do you have..

Whatever happened to peaceful protest?
We should all have the right to free speech, we do not have the right not to be offended. This is a serious erosion of civil liberty and most have not seen that. its not whether I agree with the subject matter of the play or not, its the dangerous precedent that has been set.
Think about the implications, you could get almost anything stopped, just because one group doesnt agree.
Perhaps the UK is too multi cultural for its own good?

And therein lies the real problem.

Well said R32.

All this triumphal chest thumping about being "multi-cultural" as if it is something to be proud of ? How blinkered are these self appointed moral guardians ?

It is utterly divisive as just demonstrated by the subject of this thread and empowers petty, narrow-minded bigots to punch above their representative weight by wrapping themselves up as "ethnic minority spokesmen".

We should be aiming for a culture comprising the best of all these seperate cultures assimilated into one with a large chunk of respect for each other and the ability to not be so easily offended by others.

It could be back on at a different venue! A result for freedom of choice! :D

http://www.newkerala.com/news-daily/...lnews&id=49139

I think the protestors have completely c**ked up in this instance. Previously it was a small play that only a few people would have seen. Now it's has such notoriety that thousands will want to see it creating this demand that they will show it elsewhere. It'll probably end up in a big theatre in London too lol :D So much for preventing people seeing the play, was gonna be hundreds, now gonna be thousands! Quite possibly a case of shooting themselves in the foot.