Plus the one child policy has nothing to do with open-mindedness.

Why is this happening now? Also those were some random excerpts that just cut off so they would sound bad, not to say the bible doesn't have some fucked up stories in it. Beliefs aside because I'm not really interested in the spiritual aspects of the bible but I think the censorship of something so pivotal to history means that there are some alternative motives involved. I'm more curious to know what the motives are then I'm to stop the censorship though. The bible has been fucked with too much to take every word to heart.

Once again, what was being discussed is classifying the Bible as adult material, not suitable for those under 18. I suppose that's a very limited sort of censorship, but everyone's talking like the goal was to ban it, and that's just not so.

What about Song of Solomon?

Others have already addressed the rest of this post, but I think this part needs to be answered.

To my knowledge, the last judicial caning (or flogging - a British relic) in Hong Kong took place in 1990. On November 1 of that year, the Corporal Punishment Ordinance was repealed, and none has been administered since. It's also illegal in schools - but in very rare instances, it has been seen in some homes. Just not in public.

Also, underage prostitution is (relative to their neighbors) extremely uncommon there.

I believe you are thinking of Singapore, not Hong Kong. Or possibly Malaysia.

No, I don't know of any with the nakedness removed, but newer translations or paraphrases or commentaries may point this out as an euphemism for something more. (If your such a scholar go find it yourself.)
And I actually hadn't heard of feet being a euphemism for genitals, so though my head is not up my ass, I could get my Strong's Concordance, or Young's or Langenscheidt dictionary out of storage (I haven't studied Biblical Hebrew in quite some time.) But i probably need to search various commentaries instead to find the feet/genital reference. Istill think ou have the wrong take on it.
But that is what i asked you, if your wang comment referred to his nakedness, (in the privacy of hishis tent by the way), so why did you presume it was removed?

I stand corrected in full deference to your wisdom. I was thinking of Hong Kong, but I am willing to believe I had a bad source on the prostitution and was not up to date on caning.
I still am not surprised about censorship there.

Such censorship is just silly.
I could understand if this was all illustrated or something but as if any kid is going to read those passages from the Bible and have any fucking clue what it means.
Although if they're going to make a Hong Kong movie version of Bible porn, I'd probably see it...
Especially if Shu Qi is in it.

I have to agree with the 'all or nothing' view on this - If they're gonna use a censorship system, stick to the rules and be consistent. My particular beliefs on the bible are irrelevant, it comes down to consistency vs. religious pass, and I think logic has been undermined for far too long using religion as an excuse.

I think its a sentimentality that serves to make religion appear more mysterious than it really is. The fact that we present and teach religious vews in almost an entirely separate category than other views encourages blind following rather than thinking for yourself from a very early age.

Legionnaire, I'm sure, is very intellilgent, and, as a writer, well-versed in controversies surrounding censorship issues. However, his blanket assertion that censorship the written word is never justified, sounds a bit knee-jerk to me.

In my opinion, such a bold statement would have to be accompanied by a full appendix of qualifications and exceptions. You don't have to go delve too deeply into the debate to discover a whole panopoly of situations in which censorship of certain reading material either protects people from harm, or serves the public good.

We could debate it if you like, but my argument is pretty strong.

People have to be taught right and wrong.

You must be the only person on this thread who has a clue what the article was actually about. Thanks for being there.

Please, please, please give me one concrete example how censorship helped anyone except those who are censoring? Or again, are you just trolling? As far as your "argument" (dogma) being pretty strong... you know, denial is not just a river in Egypt.

If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.



NOTE TO SELF: dont get caught banging a virgin without fifty shekels of silver..........