Hong Kong Wants The Bible “Reclassified” As Indecent Because Of All That Violence And Incest
Filed under: Bullshit Humans Enjoy
Well, what do you know — more than 800 Hong Kong residents are seeing what we’ve seen in all these years: the Bible is one red-hot piece of literature.
A spokesperson for Hong Kong’s Television and Entertainment Licensing authority (TELA) said it had received 838 complaints about the Bible by noon on Wednesday.
The complaints follow the launch of an anonymous Web site — www.truthbible.net — which said the holy book “made one tremble” given its sexual and violent content, including rape and incest.
The Web site said the Bible’s sexual content “far exceeds” that of a recent sex column published in the Chinese University’s “Student Press” magazine, which had asked readers whether they’d ever fantasised about incest or bestiality.
That column was later deemed “indecent” by the Obscene Articles Tribunal, sparking a storm of debate about social morality and freedom of speech. Student editors of the journal defended it, saying open sexual debate was a basic right.
And this is the best:
If the Bible is similarly classified as “indecent” by authorities, only those over 18 could buy the holy book and it would need to be sealed in a wrapper with a statutory warning notice.
Stumble it!
More or Less Related Posts
May 17th, 2007 at 4:10 pm
Thanks for sharing! It’s a beautiful day!
May 18th, 2007 at 6:31 pm
For people around the world who are interested in this news, you may wish to know that Hong Kong’s Obscene Articles Tribunal is capable of making crazy rulings. In 1995, it actually classified a picture showing Michelangelo’s statue of David as indecent (which was only overturned on appeal).
The present controversy sparked off when some hypocrite newspapers (themselves publishing erotic contents daily) and conservative moralistic organizations (some related to the fundamentalist church) condemned the university’s student publication for the sex contents, intensified by the government tribunal’s classification of it as indecent, which will bring criminal consequence to the student editors. This aroused the anger of a sizable public and in particular some activists on the internet who initiated this campaign. Having read the ‘offensive’ contents of both, I think it is fair to say that some descriptions in the bible are indeed more explicit than those in the student publication.
The number of complaints against the bible has now exceeded 2,000 (while the student press has received about 200 complaints), but the TELA has declined to refer the bible to the tribunal for classification. The outcome may seem sensible but again it provokes criticisms of double standard. People are now lodging complains to the Ombudsman against the TELA’s inconsistent decisions.