Another Big Big Thread of Religious Discussion

[Mirai Gen]

Yeah, if she's being prosecuted under a code that had malicious intent, then she's safe.

It's very unlikely that the judge will actually see a wedding as malicious intent.

Feel free to add in your own joke here.

[P-Sleazy]

She could be in a bit more trouble than you think though because they already had their christian wedding a month prior to this. This was just a showcase wedding to show off, a second wedding if you will.

[Osterbaum]

I like how you Catholics accept everything that gets spoon-fed to you by the Vatican.

I dislike this kind of generalization. Nothing really ever is that simple.

I'm catholic, but I suppose one could say that I am so barely.

I'm part of the catholic church, but in truth I pretty much completely make my own ideas of everything and don't get them spoon fed to me by anyone or any religion.

I'm not religious at all.

And I'm not just talking about myself, your generalization I don't think applies to nearly all catholics of the world.

And don't argue that by refusing to pay for it their 'discriminating,'

As Fifth said, it is discrimination. Besides, don't argue against something by saying "Don't argue...". See, I did it right there! And it's kinda retarded.

[Mannix]

people do that all the time. my brother got married while he was stationed with the american military in germany. he and his wife got legally hitched by a justice of the peace in denver, then had the ceremony in costume in a german castle.

more important is this bullshit law that all these third world countries seem to have about offending their cultural sensibilites. a swiss guy just got a huge jail sentence in thailand for spraypainting a mural of the king. we're talking like 15-20 years for "insulting" the king. turkey and most of the other middle east countries have similar laws as well. it's horse shit and anti-free speach.

[Mirai Gen]

Originally Posted by B_real_shadows

She could be in a bit more trouble than you think though because they already had their christian wedding a month prior to this. This was just a showcase wedding to show off, a second wedding if you will.

Dude. "Malicious intent" is even the declared state of the law.

I would love to see someone explain how celebrating a wedding in a foreign land and not following certain rites due to ignorance is considered 'malicious'.

[I_Like_Swordchucks]

Not to mention its not like the wedding was excessively public. The wrong person happened to see the pictures, and its quite possible that they wouldn't have shown this guy the pictures if they knew he was going to try and get her arrested.

I get the funny feeling that Hurley didn't realize her "horrible behavior" could get her a 3 year prison sentence.

[42PETUNIAS]

While what they did was certainly very offensive, I don't think that they could actually show it as being done with malicious intent. They will probably get a good lawyer, and show that it was nothing more than celebrities being really stupid.

Originally Posted by mannix

more important is this bullshit law that all these third world countries seem to have about offending their cultural sensibilites. a swiss guy just got a huge jail sentence in thailand for spraypainting a mural of the king. we're talking like 15-20 years for "insulting" the king. turkey and most of the other middle east countries have similar laws as well. it's horse shit and anti-free speach.

Burning an American flag is free speech too, but it seems like thats still illegal over here.

[Tendronai]

She can get off of this without any serious problems - offering enough money to involved parties as an "act of contrition", if her lawyer fails.

On a side note, why doesn't anyone do cursory research of foreign countries legal systems before they do these things? It seems to me that so many problems could be avoided if someone bothered to check into the acceptability of a plan.

[Elminster_Amaur]

I dislike this kind of generalization. Nothing really ever is that simple.

I'm catholic, but I suppose one could say that I am so barely.

I'm part of the catholic church, but in truth I pretty much completely make my own ideas of everything and don't get them spoon fed to me by anyone or any religion.

I'm not religious at all.

And I'm not just talking about myself, your generalization I don't think applies to nearly all catholics of the world.

But see, you just explained yourself that you aren't Catholic. If you accept a majority of the Church's teachings, you still aren't Catholic, unless you accept all of the Church's teachings, which is why you are agreeing with Fifth, and not Sess. See, the Church's position is that Papal decrees are infallible, and that means that free thought on the subject is not allowed. I doubt the Church would consider people who disagree with their "Abortion shouldz always be illegals" stance as anything higher than heretics or Protestants. So at best, they consider you and those people of "Catholics for Free Choice" as Protestants who mostly agree with them. At worse, you are heretics and will burn in hell for disagreeing with the most holy person in their religion: the Pope. That is why anyone who is truly Catholic MUST agree with all of the Vatican's stances on anything. Quite frankly, I'm glad that particular Beast is in its death throes. It has caused more suffering than most of the "evil" governments combined. The deaths of 6 million Jews at the hands of Hitler can hardly be compared to how the Catholic church has tried to kill science, free thought and the spirituality of everyone in the world for almost a millenia.

[Mannix]

Originally Posted by 42PETUNIAS

While what they did was certainly very offensive, I don't think that they could actually show it as being done with malicious intent. They will probably get a good lawyer, and show that it was nothing more than celebrities being really stupid.

Burning an American flag is free speech too, but it seems like thats still illegal over here.

where do you live? burning an american flag is free speech in the united states. that's why bush was trying to get an amendment banning it. i believe even the supreme court ruled it was constitutionally protected, although i don't have a source atm. ah, now i do.