• bramkaandorp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    16 days ago

    The difference is in the endorsement of horrible behaviour. So, if the same horrible things were encouraged in an LGBTQ+ book, I would expect it to get the same response as what the bible is getting.

    • mhague@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      16 days ago

      Endorsement? Or depictions?

      It’s historical fiction. The Bible predates religion: straight from the cult era. Christians, Muslims, and Jews are just dingle berries stuck to our cultural relics. These books belong to secular people. And since when are secular people using this stuff to promote rape?

      For that reason, plus being against such puritan attitudes toward content, is why I think censoring this stuff is bullshit.

      People are going to stoop to hyper literal interpretations of a NSFW label and ignore the subject of cens*rsh*p… Because religious people suck? I get it, but this is our shit. Fuck what they say or think about our fiction.

      • bramkaandorp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        16 days ago

        Oh, don’t get me wrong, I also don’t think the bible should be censored. It’s just that the bible does endorse bad behaviour, such as how to treat slaves (and thus owning slaves). It is not just a piece of fiction that nobody believes in, and it wasn’t written by people who just wanted to entertain their friends. A lot of the bible is about morality.