SaxAppeal pulled off shelves

[PeterCH]

I am assuming the same fukkers that had the mag pulled will donate equal to the losses incurred by the charities...wait...that is expecting too much.

The aim of Sax Appeal was to raise money. In writing an article which denigrated a big section of the population they chose to obtain their money from those who were not offended. Hence non-fukkers like yourself
should buy the magazine and support Shawco and Rag, as fukkers like me,
won't.

By the way, it is C.U.N.T (Christian who Understands No Theorems) and not cûnt.
The 2nd is a naughty, naughty word.

Thank you for educating us, the Grade 2 allusion was lost on many of us.

 

[Sackboy]

You are right, you are entitled to your opinion and you are entitled to express it as you wish (provided it does not constitute hate speech) but you are not entitled to get prissy with people who don't share your opinion, who are offended and exercise their right to stand up for their beliefs and demand your tolerance of those beliefs.

Don't you dare for one second expect that this right of free speech only goes one way.

Is this article is highly offensive to many christains? - Yes
Is this article is also protected by free speech? - Yes
Do those offended have the right to express their view? - Yes

Weather you like it or not South Africa still has a very large Christian population (compared to other countries). If PnP thinks that pulling this mag is beneficial to their business image, let them do it. (It's their right too.)

Now you've expressed your view, no need to carry on. Move on to something else and leave people to their views.

Precisely.
It's notable that they didn't offend Muslims (too scared). People like DJK are probably not Christians or brought up in another religion, which seems to give them the right not to be offended. Personally I wasn't offended, but disappointed. That mag used to be a good giggle, but as someone said they now resort to shock tactics and offence (except to Muslims or Jews -- Pick 'n Pay head is Jewish).

 

[Vrotappel]

christians = muslims = does not tolerate freedom of expression

... at least they can ask their God to forgive us (and hopefully themselves) ...

 

[stix]

How dreary. A note to the religious, get on with your lives and let god deal with judgement etc.

+1

 

[PeterCH]

christians = muslims = does not tolerate freedom of expression

... at least they can ask their God to forgive us (and hopefully themselves) ...

You do not see yourself not tolerating freedom of expression by raising an issue over this?

 

[Sackboy]

I think the propensity to offend a religion is directly related to the strength of their tolerance.

 

[shadowfox]

SaxAppeal is not someones private paper but is funded by PnP and used to generate funds for charities - mainly the clinics UCT runs in the townships/Manneberg. The bolded bits are obscene and not funny in any way.

Pick & Pay are merely one of many sponsors of the magazine.

And while I may agree that the bolded bits aren't funny - I don't see the point in kicking up such a massive fuss about it. I'm reminded of the cases revolving around Zapiro's Zuma cartoons.

 

[shadowfox]

Which is why people who are offended should return the magazine for a full refund and think twice next year about purchasing it, know that UCT Shawco supports this form of distateful speech and that the advertisers/sponsors also back it - ie do not support these groups, vote with your wallets.

And all this will do is remove much needed charity funds from organisations that benefit from it.

 

[Guest 20221009]

So I guess Malema "kill for Zuma" comments were all fair play then..

 

[Sackboy]

So I guess Malema "kill for Zuma" comments were all fair play then..

I'm afraid politicians are fair game, but careful what you say about Ms. Botox or the fanbois will get screechy.

 

[BinaryJack]

The aim of Sax Appeal was to raise money. In writing an article which denigrated a big section of the population they chose to obtain their money from those who were not offended. Hence non-fukkers like yourself
should buy the magazine and support Shawco and Rag, as fukkers like me,
won't. .

It is easier to bitch and whine about sensibilities being offended than actually looking at the good the mag has been doing for charities.

Thank you for educating us, the Grade 2 allusion was lost on many of us

I was just pointing out that the acronym for Christian who Understands No Theorems, has nothing to do with a similar slang word for female genitals.

What is the actual problem with the article?

Jesus must feel like a Tool.

or

Praise the Lord, it must be a miracle!

or

God is a pervert.

or

C.U.N.T.

 

[Sackboy]

It is easier to bitch and whine about sensibilities being offended than actually looking at the good the mag has been doing for charities.



I was just pointing out that the acronym for Christian who Understands No Theorems, has nothing to do with a similar slang word for female genitals.

What is the actual problem with the article?

or

or

or

Here's the bad logic again.

So if Salman Rushdie donated the proceeds from the Satanic Verses to the Great Ormond Street Hospital for Sick Children, would that make it any less offensive to Muslims??

 

[Guest 20221009]

Here's the bad logic again.

So if Salman Rushdie donated the proceeds from the Satanic Verses to the Great Ormond Street Hospital for Sick Children, would that make it any less offensive to Muslims??

+1

 

[BinaryJack]

Here's the bad logic again.

So if Salman Rushdie donated the proceeds from the Satanic Verses to the Great Ormond Street Hospital for Sick Children, would that make it any less offensive to Muslims??

So the less fortunate must suffer in order to placate the sensitivities of the religious?

 

[Sackboy]

So the less fortunate must suffer in order to placate the sensitivities of the religious?

If suffering means reading a slightly cleaner version of Sax Appeal, then so be it. I just want all religions to be treated equally.

 

[grayston]

SaxAppeal is not someones private paper but is funded by PnP and used to generate funds for charities - mainly the clinics UCT runs in the townships/Manneberg. The bolded bits are obscene and not funny in any way.

It's a student newspaper. What did you expect - Oscar Wilde?

 

[BinaryJack]

If suffering means reading a slightly cleaner version of Sax Appeal, then so be it. I just want all religions to be treated equally.

In this case suffering has nothing to do with reading a [-]censored[/-] cleaner mag.

 

[grayston]

I am catholic and I do find it offensive and rather sad.

Then don't read it. No-one's forcing you to do it. It's not like tasteless humour is a mandatory part of the school syllabus or anything...

Honestly what did they hope to achieve by this?

Cheap laughs and publicity.

Come on, seriously, I mean, durrr...

As for those slating the actions of the christians, why should we allow this slander of something we hold to be true?

It's only slander if Jesus _doesn't_ feel like a tool. Unfortunately, that's a question only he can answer.

At what point does freedom of speech cross the Line and start to interfere with freedom of religon.

When it says: If you follow religion X, you should be physically and/or mentally attacked.

Freedom of speech means you can't say that. But freedom of religion doesn't stop anyone from criticising or mocking religion.

Hey - every time you say that yours is the only true God, you're ridiculing EVERY other religion EVER invented. So now you need to take your own medicine, and like it.

I dont believe in throwing my religon in your face so why should you throw your disbelief in mine.

Well - you throw your belief in people's faces whenever you mention it. And you're doing it now. Keep it completely to yourself, and only then can you claim moral high ground.

 

[grayston]

Here's the bad logic again.

So if Salman Rushdie donated the proceeds from the Satanic Verses to the Great Ormond Street Hospital for Sick Children, would that make it any less offensive to Muslims??

You've got it the wrong way around.

The Muslims were being offensive to Rushdie...

 

[Sackboy]

You've got it the wrong way around.

The Muslims were being offensive to Rushdie...

They wrote a book did they? Silly man.