Sunday, October 07, 2012




Must not call a pineapple "Mohammad"

Britain

A group of atheist students were thrown out of their freshers' fair because they included a pineapple labelled 'Mohammed' on their stall.

The Reading University Atheist, Humanist and Secularist Society (RAHS) said they wanted to celebrate free speech and promote their upcoming debate 'Should we respect religion?'

But they were ordered to remove the offending fruit by union staff who said their actions were causing 'upset and distress' to a number of Muslim students and other societies.

RAHS refused, citing that they had labelled the pineapple after the Islamic prophet to 'encourage discussion about blasphemy, religion, and liberty'.

According to RAHS, a group of students surrounded their stall and removed the pineapple's name tag before the society was 'forced to leave the venue' accompanied by security

Source



21 comments:

Bird of Paradise said...

I wonder who they would have reacted to a pineapple named CHARLES DARWIN?

Old Bob said...

Too bad the that Muslims and Christians are so blinded by their religion that they cannot see the truth in the following quote:
"One man's theology is another man's belly laugh." by Robert A. Heinlein


Anonymous said...

Why u attacking CHRISTIANS? This was islamic and pc bullcrap.

Use the Name, Luke said...

It certainly seems like these atheists (and many like them, including some here) are more interested in giving others a metaphorical poke in the eye than in trying to convince them that atheism is true. That strikes me as counterproductive.

Anonymous said...

Bravo, usually atheists are too scared to poke fun at the Islamists. However, they will find that in England, that Islamists are a protected class and it is criminal to mock them.

Go Away Bird said...

England pays the price for illegal imagration and the EUROPEAN(SOVIET)UNION

Anonymous said...

Is Luke not aware that 'a-theism' is merely the refutation or non-acceptance of 'theism'. Logically it doesn't need to convince that any negative position is true; that is up to the positive claim by the 'theists' (whether or not some "atheists" make any other positive claims of their own).

Anonymous said...

I will now name my pet pig Mohammed

Anonymous said...

I think so long as they are equal-opportunity insulters they should be free to continue. Why single out just one?

Anonymous said...

Seems like a fair comparison to me:

Islam promotes, without any hesitation, cutting off the head of an infidel. In order to properly eat a pineapple, you must first cut off the top.

Use the Name, Luke said...

Is Luke not aware that 'a-theism' is merely the refutation or non-acceptance of 'theism'

"I don't know" is a non-position. That's agnosticism.

"There is no god" is atheism. It's a positive truth claim, otherwise known as a position.

Your assertion is nothing more than a type of word game known as sophistry.

Anonymous said...

Luke is now pedantically playing with words and terms. He knows full well that most "atheists" merely do not believe in the liklihood of a god or gods existing, and only a minority go so far as to make a claim that gods do not or cannot exist. There are also the further definitions distinguising between various forms of atheism and agnosticism. Furthermore, many theists (like Luke) are responsible for calling people "atheists" whatever the latter actually believe or claim.

Use the Name, Luke said...

playing with words and terms

Wow. So using precision in word usage and confirming that precision with dictionary definitions is playing word games? Here's another word you're demonstrating.

Taking any position on the "liklihood of a god or gods existing" is not the same thing as no position/"I don't know".

many theists (like Luke) are responsible for calling people "atheists" whatever the latter actually believe or claim.

The people in the article called themselves atheists. It's their actions we're discussing.

Anonymous said...

Luke responds EXACTLY as expected. He is quite anal about his postings, at least until he sees something shiny.

Use the Name, Luke said...

Of course logic is predictable! Duh! That's part of what distinguishes it from the MSU way of thinking.

Anonymous said...

MSU, like religion?

Use the Name, Luke said...

MSU, like pretending that holding a position on something is not holding a position on something. Or ignoring evidence. Or pretending insults are rational arguments.

Or (especially!) trolling.

Kee Bird said...

Whats you got against relegion and god annon 1:28?

Anonymous said...

Luke is doing everything he can to avoid the fact that THEISTS make a positive claim (about god/s) and A-THEISTS reject that claim (ie. a negative position). It's up to the folks making a positive claim to uphold it and not those in the default position to defend NOT holding such a claim. If for instance Luke doesn't believe that people are abducted by aliens, does he have to prove every case is false, or is it up to those who claim to have been abducted to support their claim?

Anonymous said...

Also the evidence for a positive claim (like theism) has to be convincing enough, and the sceptics (or a-theists) don't have to accept the quality of evidence provided, just like the above-mentioned claims of alien-abductees), and indeed the sceptics/atheists can pose arguments against the claims made, without that being a claim in itself (which seems to be Luke's fallacious point).

What Burns My Bacon said...

Why do I have the feeling that if this pineapple was named Jesus and some Christians complained that the atheists would not be asked to leave?