Dasa and the thought police

I cannot say with any certainty what Dasa did other than he seemed to harbour extreme anti Islamic views, this is because I rarely read his text. I understand that some held that these views were disgusting and extreme. It really got me wondering though whether merely 'thinking' disturbing or offensive thoughts warranted a banning or even constitutes a crime.

Now I am aware that there is a fine line between thought and action, for example there is such a thing as loitering with intent to commit a crime. Which is fine if you are found outside a jewellers dressed head to foot in black with ski mask and concealing a crowbar, but not merely if your eyebrows meet in the middle or you have snake eyes and look shady.

For the Christian the matter is settled, thoughts are almost as important as the deed itself for they can lead to action, 'every man that keeps on looking at a women so as to have a passion for her has already committed adultery in his heart'. But many of those who condemned Dasa for thinking the way he did were not Christian and do not hold Christian values. I really wonder if those who condemned Dasa are not some kind of 'thought police' and reported him to the site administration for his 'thought crime'?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I cannot say with any certainty what Dasa did other than he seemed to harbour extreme anti Islamic views, this is because I rarely read his text. I understand that some held that these views were disgusting and extreme. It really got me wondering though whether merely 'thinking' disturbing or offensive thoughts warranted a banning or even constitut ...[text shortened]... me kind of 'thought police' and reported him to the site administration for his 'thought crime'?

So far, and as far as I can tell, you are the only person here who has defended dasa in his grossly offensive posting which contained his beliefs about the genocide of an entire religious group containing billions of people.

What I think is more interesting than a response about accusing the people who stood up to dasa of being the "thought police", is a comparison between some of the offensive things you say in this forum, the dangerous beliefs you personally hold and the bullying behaviours of your religious corporation.

A further question, which would be more interesting than accusing those who stood up to dasa of being the "thought police", would be asking if there is any moral difference between the genocide of a race of billions who simply do not share your religious beliefs, and the burning in hell of billions, simply because they did not share your religious beliefs.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I cannot say with any certainty what Dasa did other than he seemed to harbour extreme anti Islamic views, this is because I rarely read his text. I understand that some held that these views were disgusting and extreme. It really got me wondering though whether merely 'thinking' disturbing or offensive thoughts warranted a banning or even constitutes a crime.

Why didn't you read what Dasa posted?

Originally posted by divegeester
So far, and as far as I can tell, you are the only person here who has defended dasa in his grossly offensive posting which contained his beliefs about the genocide of an entire religious group containing billions of people.

What I think is more interesting than a response about accusing the people who stood up to dasa of being the "thought police", ...[text shortened]... , and the burning in hell of billions, simply because they did not share your religious beliefs.

I kinda suspected that the issue would woosh over your head as you clamour to put the proverbial boot in. The issue is not me, its not even Dasa, heck its not even what Dasa actually said! The issue is whether you can be condemned and punished for merely 'thinking'. This is the issue being discussed in this thread.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I understand that some held that these views were disgusting and extreme.

Dasa's posts included calls to action and proposals based on countless assertions and accusations about billions of people from one religious group that were not true. Apparently, you cannot say whether you think the things he said were "disgusting and extreme". Alright then, so be it. Why not offer two hypothetical scenarios that would reflect your own moral stance on what the web site and the community here should and should not tolerate?

[1] What example or examples of explicit calls to action and proposals regarding the treatment of billions of Muslims would illustrate what you perceive as acceptable hate speech that the web site would, in your view, be remiss of they deleted or silenced it? Think of something right at the limit of being acceptable ~ a harsh call for action, but JUST on the right side of a line. And, conversely:

[2] What example or examples of explicit calls to action and proposals regarding the treatment of billions of people from one religious group would illustrate what you think is unacceptable hate speech and, if it were not to be deleted by the web site, you would feel it was remiss of them? Think of something over the line in terms of being acceptable.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I cannot say with any certainty what Dasa did other than he seemed to harbour extreme anti Islamic views, this is because I rarely read his text. I understand that some held that these views were disgusting and extreme. It really got me wondering though whether merely 'thinking' disturbing or offensive thoughts warranted a banning or even constitut ...[text shortened]... me kind of 'thought police' and reported him to the site administration for his 'thought crime'?

Actually, what Dasa did was a crime. His thoughts were not.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
The issue is not me, its not even Dasa, heck its not even what Dasa actually said! The issue is whether you can be condemned and punished for merely 'thinking'. This is the issue being discussed in this thread.

Is there not a difference between "thinking" and "saying"? Is "saying" not an action?

Originally posted by Rank outsider
Actually, what Dasa did was a crime. His thoughts were not.

Really? and what crime did Dasa commit.

Originally posted by FMF
Is there not a difference between "thinking" and "saying"? Is "saying" not an action?

It appears to me that speech is merely the vocalisation of thought and even if it can be argued that it in itself constitutes an act, the mere 'act of speaking' is not in itself a sufficient reason for banning it.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
It appears to me that speech is merely the vocalisation of thought and even if it can be argued that it in itself constitutes an act, the mere 'act of speaking' is not in itself a sufficient reason for banning it.

So do you believe that thoughts and speech are more or less the same morally speaking e.g. in terms of the impact that they might have on others?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I cannot say with any certainty what Dasa did other than he seemed to harbour extreme anti Islamic views, this is because I rarely read his text. I understand that some held that these views were disgusting and extreme. It really got me wondering though whether merely 'thinking' disturbing or offensive thoughts warranted a banning or even constitut ...[text shortened]... me kind of 'thought police' and reported him to the site administration for his 'thought crime'?

You have on several occasions claimed in public that you had reported a post you didn't approve of to the moderators. How does that aspect of your forum track record square with what you have said on this thread so far?

Originally posted by FMF
So do you believe that thoughts and speech are more or less the same morally speaking e.g. in terms of the impact that they might have on others?

I believe that there needs to be some kind of overt step taken and that thought and speech are not enough to condemn someone. Clearly the impact of me saying you are the thought police has more impact than me privately thinking it, but that is a separate issue entirely. I am uninterested in the morality of it.

Originally posted by FMF
You have on several occasions claimed in public that you had reported a post you didn't approve of to the moderators. How does that aspect of your forum track record square with what you have said on this thread so far?

The issue is not about me, the issue is whether you can be condemned for thinking and saying 'stuff'. If you are unable or unwilling to stick to the script then perhaps this is not the thread for you. Strike one.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Really? and what crime did Dasa commit.

Inciting religious hatred.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I believe that there needs to be some kind of overt step taken and that thought and speech are not enough to condemn someone. Clearly the impact of me saying you are the thought police has more impact than me privately thinking it, but that is a separate issue entirely. I am uninterested in the morality of it.

Is there any moral issue you seek to discuss here? If so, could you reiterate it?