Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Conversation >

Blasphemy

Page: 1(2)

07:38 / 20.04.05

also saying 'Oh MY god!' you could argue isn't blasaphamy anyway. If you were saying 'oh christainity/cathoodisms(sic?) etc god' or Ywallah or however you say it, then she might have grounds for complaint. Tina might be moaning to her god, Geoff or something, and not Mary's God.

But again, it raises the question, why isn't 'Mary' turning the other cheek? How can she not of understood that in the world where one fifth of it's inhabitants share your religious view, there is a lot of room for other deities and non-religious folk, and they are going to use language that you don't understand or agree with.

Ex

08:38 / 20.04.05

Also, the phrase "that's so gay" might be annoying but it's very rarely actaully an attack on gays, it's simply a figure of speech.

It's a phrase of speech that, as far as I know, has only started up in the last ten years or so - as opposed to religious oaths that are pretty historical and entrenched. I understand that people who use it may not intend it as actively offensive, but I think it's developed from deliberate homophobia, only makes sense in a deeply homophobic society, and supports that kind of society.

If someone used it in my office, I'd have a word (probably 'What a coincidence, so am I') and if they persistantly used it, I'd have no problems with asking the manager to have a word.

I try to avoid religious oaths and all kinds of swearwords at work (with varied success). I feel as though my workmates don't have the option of not being in the room with me, so I don't speak as freely as I might in a social situation.

It can get very awkward when it's someone who's not on the same level as you - one of my demi-bosses has noted that the Welsh do everything on the cheap, people who live in the countryside are all screaming bigots, and Christianity is 'barmy rubbish'. If I take issue, it's only after a mental calculation that I'm on a fixed term post and rplacing me would be difficult.

Scrambled Password Bogus Email

08:48 / 20.04.05

Is this a reasonable demand? Would you be willing/able to meet it if it were placed on you?

Since the exact content of the offending speech has been indicated, specifically 'Oh my God!' and 'Jesus!', maybe even, *blush* 'Jesus CHRIST!', the question is really very specific itself...the broader enquiry is intersting, but returning to the actual point:

I would say that unless the environment renders such language innappropriate, (papal PA, say), the answers are (for moi)

1. No
2. Yes, I'd try, if the job meant a lot to me.
3. Though I'd probably slip up fairly regularly.

If you were the manager, how would you have handled it, assuming you had complete legislative freedom to react however you wanted?

Would it be reasonable for an employee to complain that they caught you doing overtime on the Sabbath? Same question, basically. The answer, I'd hazard, is that they can object to themselves being required to work thusly, but not to others choice to do so if it suits them and their beliefs. Likewise, one could not require Mary to blaspheme, but she, similarly, cannot require Tina to refrain. She can ask, sure. But it's an open question, and the answer can reasonably be 'No'.

10:04 / 20.04.05

I think that like the “that’s so gay” example, the practice of saying “oh my God” or “Jesus Christ” may have taken on a life of its own in our social context, but its original purpose was specifically to offend particular people or ways of life. Can anyone offer a good reason for saying these things other than because they are offensive? And if not, surely the right not to be offended takes precedence over the freedom to do something for which there is no real justification.

Ultimately, of course people are free to use whatever speech they want, but personally, I would not feel comfortable using this language (taking the Lord's name in vain) in front of someone who found it offensive. I wouldn't use "that's so gay" at all, and although I do take the Lord's name in vain sometimes, in the cold light of day, I can't really defend it.

Jack The Bodiless

10:33 / 20.04.05

Well, no actually they came about through invocation, not imprecation.

Regrettable Juvenilia

10:51 / 20.04.05

Of course, one possibility that hasn't really been discussed is blasphemy where the specific aim is to denigrate the name of God, because you think he's an implacably monstrous fuckface. It's not comparable to denigrating gay people because... well, I like gay people. I don't like God. Why would you?

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

12:51 / 20.04.05

also saying 'Oh MY god!' you could argue isn't blasaphamy anyway.

I've always thought that. It is, however, "taking the name of the Lord in vain" and as such, while it may be on a par with killing, it's also no worse than dishonouring your parents or coveting you neighbour's ox., but so's "good Lord", and people rarely object to that. As Jack says, these would have been invocations; calls for help in the face of something startling, or maybe a broken photocopier.

All I can say is I'm glad she doesn't work in my office.

Page: 1(2)