Samuel Smiths – What a Fucking Rotter

I was late to getting the news that Samuel Smith’s brewery has issued a decree across its entire estate of pubs that anyone found to be swearing should be turned out of the premises, whether they will be barred seems to be up for debate but seeing as ever news piece I’ve read on this links to another article, which links to another and another and another, it is pretty hard to guess what the exact truth of the matter is.

I’ve read precisely one blog on this, saw a few comments on the #hopinions thread that Beer O’Clock run every Sunday

 

 

and I saw CAMRA’s response to the news

 

On this matter I don’t particularly care in one instance; if a private business wishes to enact its own policies about what is “good behaviour” then by all means go ahead.  People cheer when the private companies that are Facebook and Twitter remove members that are abusive (within their own definition of what abuse actually is) but heaven forbid a private company should refuse to, for example, make a cake saying something they disagree with, oh no.

It is rather odd that Sam Smiths has chosen to focus purely on swearing, I can only assume that they are OK with someone in their establishments saying nigger or faggot so long as there isn’t a four-letter word in amongst said possible drunken diatribe but what constitutes a private conversation in a public place?

Then again the current state of the world is pitted against itself in what exactly is and isn’t a “bad idea” what is and isn’t “hate speech” and more pertinently, what is or isn’t “offensive.”

Within the beer bubble itself there are points of view on certain subjects (for example pump clips) that go against the new orthodoxy and while all these little games and battle of wills are being played out, governments world wide are monitoring and recording their citizens communications under the pretence of security and protection.

 

The last thing anyone needs to be protected from is words, rude or not.

 

Thanks for reading

 

On a separate note, here is why some people actively boycott drinking Sam Smiths beers and so for some a swearing ban is neither here nor there…

 

Advertisements

My Religion Is Better Than Yours – Its Killed Less

Firstly apologies for linking to the Independent and especially its BuzzFeed part that is their “Indy100” but this response has been tweeted onto my time-line for numerous days and I get the feeling the people doing it don’t really think that deeply about things such as murder and subjugation.

Muslim lawyer shuts down troll who says there’s no ‘Christian version’ of Isis

Qasim Rashid goes on to say that he was making his point as to terrorism having “no religion.”

Only it does.  People can say that people are using a “perversion” of any holy text but that is to gloss over how and why they are able to claim their acts in the name of their religion.

This is moral relativism that is at the base of every major religion.  Putting aside the wars, murders, slaughters and the general body counts that can be laid at the feet of each religion there is something more pernicious at the heart of all of them and that is the enslavement of the individual, of their thoughts and of their actions.

The punishment that you can get while still alive for thinking or behaving in a way not in keeping with their god’s word and the biggest kicker of all, eternal punishment after you die.

I know people of religion always love to bring up the “atheists” that were Stalin and Mao.  Wonderfully adept totalitarian dictators who, in the case of Stalin re-established the Russian Orthodox Church to culturally unify the people behind him and in the case of both established their political thinking as the religion of the people, because you can’t become a living god if people are praying to other ones.  Simple replacement of one cult of religion for the cult of personality that Stalin and Mao desired and required for total domination.  Indoctrination into any belief process requires total acceptance and the inability to question anything.

The simple matter for me is, if anything and everything in a religious text is open to interpretation then that bad has to be taken as well as the good.

And if it can be taken in a “bad way” then perhaps it isn’t good at all.

 

Believe what you want, there are 6 billion people in the world, there should be 6 billion “religions”

 

Thanks for reading.