No Robots

Well, how very sporting of you. Of course, I count all mythicists and their fellow travellers as part of the anti-Christian Right. So, you can stick that in your pipe and smoke it (to use another phrase that I grew up with).

sotto voce

Should it therefore be classified as a prohibited publication?

Toto

No. We still have the First Amendment.

No one wants to ban Greek mythology either.

Chili

It always was to be read under spiritual guidence and never, never recommended to be read by believers in fear that they would read it and take it literally . . . or why else would censorship be attached? An i think the whole thing is allegory except John 6:55 where the words "real food and real drink" are used to say that it is not allegory.

sotto voce

Who is 'we'?

Toto

Sorry, I see you don't have a first amendment. But I bet you do have books about imaginary Greek gods behaving badly, and no one tries to ban those books.

ApostateAbe

Americans take it for granted that the act of opposing a viewpoint is not nearly the same as advocating the prohibition of such a viewpoint from publication. That thought is generally not on the table.

DCHindley

Plato did.

His Utopian Republic would have nothing to do with popular myths, only the deep ones that reveal transcendantal truths. <goosebumps>

DCH

sotto voce

I think you mean, '"We, in the USA." Others have their own arrangements.

Would it be correct to say that incitement to brutal violence is permissible in the USA provided the motive is religious?

Or would it be correct to say that invoking the USA's First Amendment in this context is not only to distract with a parochial concern, but is irrelevant even at that level?

ApostateAbe

The first amendment is relevant only when someone inquires an opinion about whether or not a publication be prohibited.