Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

First Century Record of Jesus by a non-Christian?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    how? My first amendment rights say I can call a news site "fake" if I want.
    Yes you can call it whether you like, that's what 'freedom of speech' is all about, but you were suggesting that it should not be allowed in this instance.

    And we are talking about an ILLEGITIMATE news site, that even SAYS it is fake on the page.
    It was a legitimate satirical news site with a disclaimer to this effect.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Tassman View Post
      Yes you can call it whether you like, that's what 'freedom of speech' is all about, but you were suggesting that it should not be allowed in this instance.
      um. no. You are the one whining that we can't call it fake news and that doing so is against the first amendment.
      Labelling legitimate news sites as "fake news" just because one doesn't like the content, is contrary to the First Amendment.
      again. HOW? and does that mean it is illegal for you to call Brietbart a fake news site?



      It was a legitimate satirical news site with a disclaimer to this effect.
      except the news stories weren't funny or satirical, they were just fake. Because he wanted to fool people into spreading it around and hoping it would go viral so he could make money on ad views. It is a money scam. pure and simple. It is not a legitimate news site, it is not even a legitimate satire site. It is a FAKE news site with the sole purpose of scamming people to make money.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Sparko View Post
        um. no. You are the one whining that we can't call it fake news and that doing so is against the first amendment.
        No, I was “whining” that news reportage cannot be infringed upon according the First Amendment...even when labelled “fake news” by the likes of Trump.

        again. HOW? and does that mean it is illegal for you to call Brietbart a fake news site?
        Even crappy Alt Right news sites such as Breitbart are protected by the Freedom of the Press clause in the First Amendment.

        except the news stories weren't funny or satirical, they were just fake.
        Your opinion! But the “funniness” or otherwise has no bearing whether the site should be allowed to exist.

        Actually, it was an interesting commentary on people who are so anxious to have their religious presuppositions reinforced, that they will believe anything that seems to do that.
        “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Tassman View Post
          No, I was “whining” that news reportage cannot be infringed upon according the First Amendment...even when labelled “fake news” by the likes of Trump.



          Even crappy Alt Right news sites such as Breitbart are protected by the Freedom of the Press clause in the First Amendment.



          Your opinion! But the “funniness” or otherwise has no bearing whether the site should be allowed to exist.

          Actually, it was an interesting commentary on people who are so anxious to have their religious presuppositions reinforced, that they will believe anything that seems to do that.
          Look again at the OP - there was no claim that the report was believed, only that it would come as no surprise if it proved to be true - but you're so eager to believe your presuppositions, it also comes as no surprise that you missed the fact.
          1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
          .
          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
          Scripture before Tradition:
          but that won't prevent others from
          taking it upon themselves to deprive you
          of the right to call yourself Christian.

          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by tabibito View Post
            Look again at the OP - there was no claim that the report was believed, only that it would come as no surprise if it proved to be true - but you're so eager to believe your presuppositions, it also comes as no surprise that you missed the fact.
            Yes you're correct. My mistake. But you nevertheless missed the disclaimer at the bottom of the article, which could have saved you some embarrassment.
            “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

            Comment


            • #51
              My mistake. But you nevertheless missed the disclaimer at the bottom of the article, which could have saved you some embarrassment.
              That it would have.
              1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
              .
              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
              Scripture before Tradition:
              but that won't prevent others from
              taking it upon themselves to deprive you
              of the right to call yourself Christian.

              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                No, I was “whining” that news reportage cannot be infringed upon according the First Amendment...even when labelled “fake news” by the likes of Trump.



                Even crappy Alt Right news sites such as Breitbart are protected by the Freedom of the Press clause in the First Amendment.



                Your opinion! But the “funniness” or otherwise has no bearing whether the site should be allowed to exist.

                Actually, it was an interesting commentary on people who are so anxious to have their religious presuppositions reinforced, that they will believe anything that seems to do that.
                You realize that

                1. The first amendment only stops CONGRESS from interfering with the press, not me or you or anyone else.
                2. Not everyone who claims to be the Press actually is. Merely claiming to be a newspaper or journalist doesn't give you the protection of the press. An advertisement disguised as a news article for instance, can be shut down by the FDA for false advertising. A scam site that writes made up news to get clicks on ads is the same thing. It is not actual news. Especially if it has a disclaimer on the site SAYING it is fake news. duh!

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                  You realize that

                  1. The first amendment only stops CONGRESS from interfering with the press, not me or you or anyone else.
                  2. Not everyone who claims to be the Press actually is. Merely claiming to be a newspaper or journalist doesn't give you the protection of the press. An advertisement disguised as a news article for instance, can be shut down by the FDA for false advertising. A scam site that writes made up news to get clicks on ads is the same thing. It is not actual news. Especially if it has a disclaimer on the site SAYING it is fake news. duh!
                  Not so! The First Amendment states, in relevant part, that: “Congress shall make no law...abridging freedom of speech.” This applies to all, with some limited exceptions..

                  http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federa...rces/what-does
                  “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                    Not so! The First Amendment states, in relevant part, that: “Congress shall make no law...abridging freedom of speech.” This applies to all, with some limited exceptions..

                    http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federa...rces/what-does
                    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press

                    It says that Congress can't make any laws against the press or free speech.

                    So what law has congress made against the press when I speak out against fake news?

                    Also does it say that Congress can't stop criminals from publishing known falsehoods and lying? If so, how is it that there are laws against false advertising? Or against false medical claims (snake oil)?

                    The "free speech" refers to political speech, and not fake news made up to make money off of advertising.

                    Stick to Australian politics Tassman.

                    Comment

                    Related Threads

                    Collapse

                    Topics Statistics Last Post
                    Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                    1 response
                    24 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post whag
                    by whag
                     
                    Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                    60 responses
                    281 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post tabibito  
                    Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                    45 responses
                    299 views
                    1 like
                    Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                    Started by shunyadragon, 02-15-2024, 11:52 AM
                    74 responses
                    319 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post whag
                    by whag
                     
                    Started by whag, 02-06-2024, 12:46 PM
                    60 responses
                    337 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post whag
                    by whag
                     
                    Working...
                    X