View Single Post
Old 29-11-2007, 06:28 PM #17
Retroman Retroman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Worthing, Brighton.
Posts: 994
Retroman Retroman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Worthing, Brighton.
Posts: 994
Default

I think they forget the fact that it's just a name...
And a much more common name than "Jesus"

Though even if it was called Jesus, people shouldn't be stopped from liking/using the name just because of someone previously called it.

I suppose parents should be sentenced to 40 lashes for naming their child Mohammed? Or Moses? or Jesus? or Mary? Or John? Or Peter? or Matthew? Or Luke? or Mark?

Because someone out there might remember a religious figure from the past, with the same name, and remember how hard that person had it...then take offense that you liked the name? Logic at its finest.

If anything, shouldn't naming your child/teddy be a sign of respect? rather than an insult?

And why should only "that" Mohammed be allowed that name as a tribute to his honour...when plenty of other Mohammed's probably existed at the same time? His name doesn't define who he is, so it shouldn't be restricted.

And arresting people over teddies earns respect, only because you're scaring everyone into thinking they'll be severely punished for just about anything that they do, no matter how miniscule/meaningless. Eg. Naming a teddy.

I would think that'd do a country more harm than good? if people look upon it as a prison cell lead by unusually power mad people who think that allowing only one person to be addressed as Mohammed benefits anything/anyone in anyway what so ever.

P.S I agree Stu, people should be free to express public negative opinions on religion, without everyone labelling them blasphemous etc.
Retroman is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote