Hong Kong: Reclassify the Bible as indecent?

[Andrew Green]

HONG KONG (Reuters) - More than 800 Hong Kong residents have called on authorities to reclassify the Bible as "indecent" due to its sexual and violent content, following an uproar over a sex column in a university student journal.

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.

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.


TELA said it was still undecided on whether the Bible had violated Hong Kong's obscene and indecent articles laws.

So here is a question, should books of historical or religious significance be exempt from such restrictions (Assuming that the restrictions are in place and will remain so)? Or should all books be held to the same standards?

According to Wikipedia, Christians makes up about 7% of the population. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong#Religion ), so I imagine most people over there would view it as historically important, but still just a work of fiction.

 

[mrhnau]

If they think the Bible is indecent, then they have incredibly stringent criteria for indecent. Are they slapping indecent labels on everything over there?

 

[Andrew Green]

If they think the Bible is indecent, then they have incredibly stringent criteria for indecent. Are they slapping indecent labels on everything over there?

Got me. From what I can tell an article was published and got slapped with it due to sexual content, people are arguing that the bible has much worse sexual and violent content and should be held to the same standards.

We do it in North America more for just images, Trashy Romance novels (aka porn for house wives :lol: ) can be bought by anyone, same story as a picture book on the other hand...

So I think the question is should the bible be held to the same standards as other books, assuming the stardards are in place and removing them is not a option.

 

[tellner]

Let's be objective and honest here. If you judge the Bible by the same standards as you would any other piece of writing it is obscene. There's a lot of incest, rape, degradation, torture, mass murder, hideous and inventive ways of killing people and more. Children are murdered for teasing old men. Murdering little babies by smashing their brains out agaisnt rocks is considered a blessing. Much of the Christian Bible is a detailed snuff scene complete with torture, mutilation, whipping and more. A guy who is considered "righteous" screws his daughters after offering them up to be gang-raped. Genocide is praised. So is the mutilation of little boys' penii. The only reason it's not considered disgusting primitive trash is that it happens to be the Holy Books for about a billion people. And no, the Quran is no better or worse.

 

[thardey]

Most of the complaints are probably about the book "The Song of Solomon". It's a pretty graphic poem about sex and intimacy. Most Jewish Rabbis are adamant that it's all metaphor, but the basic reading can get pretty hot.

 

[Xue Sheng]

So here is a question, should books of historical or religious significance be exempt from such restrictions (Assuming that the restrictions are in place and will remain so)? Or should all books be held to the same standards?

According to Wikipedia, Christians makes up about 7% of the population. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong#Religion ), so I imagine most people over there would view it as historically important, but still just a work of fiction.

It is a non-religious/Taoist/Buddhist culture to them it is a book that is all.

If they think the Bible is indecent, then they have incredibly stringent criteria for indecent. Are they slapping indecent labels on everything over there?

It is a book to them nothing more. You cannot judge move like this by Christian standards because they are not Christian. And yes they slap indecent on considerably more than we do in the US. Porn (adult), although it exists there can get you thrown in jail rather fast. Kiddie porn, if it exists there, will get you killed. Also to the Chinese a cartoon is for children not for adults so the also stopped airing the Simpsons because it was indecent.

Let's be objective and honest here. If you judge the Bible by the same standards as you would any other piece of writing it is obscene. There's a lot of incest, rape, degradation, torture, mass murder, hideous and inventive ways of killing people and more. Children are murdered for teasing old men. Murdering little babies by smashing their brains out agaisnt rocks is considered a blessing. Much of the Christian Bible is a detailed snuff scene complete with torture, mutilation, whipping and more. A guy who is considered "righteous" screws his daughters after offering them up to be gang-raped. Genocide is praised. So is the mutilation of little boys' penii. The only reason it's not considered disgusting primitive trash is that it happens to be the Holy Books for about a billion people. And no, the Quran is no better or worse.

Agreed, with all that Begetting going’ on I don’t see why this is surprising.

Hey they published Bill Clinton's book ONLY after they edited out all the naughty bits, but Bill didn’t complain it is all cash for him.

 

[bushidomartialarts]

Current US definition of pornography includes the qualification that it is without artistic, historical or cultural merit.

That's why the Bible, and Maplethorpe (remember him?) and Marilyn Manson are sold at Amazon.com, but you have to go downtown to that one bookshop to get your incest & homosexual rape porn -- despite the content being nearly identical.

Dunno about Hong Kong law....

 

[Andrew Green]

Current US definition of pornography includes the qualification that it is without artistic, historical or cultural merit.

I'm not sure that quite applies. They are not talking of banning it, just restricting who can buy it.

You mention Marilyn Manson, but his stuff does come with a warning label does it not? "Parental Advisory"

I also doubt very much that any magazine featuring Nude photos, no matter how artistic, would be given a oky doky on sale to kids. Does Playboy spreads for example have artistic merit? If not, why not? If you hung them in a art museum would they?

 

[crushing]

Most of the complaints are probably about the book "The Song of Solomon". It's a pretty graphic poem about sex and intimacy. Most Jewish Rabbis are adamant that it's all metaphor, but the basic reading can get pretty hot.

Yeah, This Book is Not Yet Rated. Give the book the MPAA standards (if you can find those standards) Violence, murder, torture and mayhem are acceptable, but some sensual sexuality gets it the NC-17 treatement.

 

[tellner]

Hong Kong is manifestly not the US. And while there is an awful lot of Chinese Christians there are many who resent the religion and its books because of the treatment of China by the West. In said treatment the missionaries were among the most vile.

 

[Rich Parsons]

So here is a question, should books of historical or religious significance be exempt from such restrictions (Assuming that the restrictions are in place and will remain so)? Or should all books be held to the same standards?

According to Wikipedia, Christians makes up about 7% of the population. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong#Religion ), so I imagine most people over there would view it as historically important, but still just a work of fiction.

All books should meet the same standards.

I happen to agree, that under the definitions it would be indecent.

Note: They are only letting people know it is indecent. They are not banning nor burning this book or others.

 

[Steel Tiger]

All books should meet the same standards.

I happen to agree, that under the definitions it would be indecent.

Note: They are only letting people know it is indecent. They are not banning nor burning this book or others.

I agree with this and would go a little further. In this time of serious religious nutters having access to mass media and a world wide audience, all religious texts should have some form of advisory warning for children and their parents. I think a lot of the religious wackjobs out there have resulted from younger people reading religious texts and interpreting them before they have developed their world view. Thus they develop ideas and concepts that do not relate to the world around them.

I am no advocate of banning books. People should be allowed to read what they want, but some subjects need to be approached with care where younger minds are concerned, and I think religion is one of them.

 

[MA-Caver]

Everybody is going to be offended by SOMETHING! It's been proven right here on MT in many of it's forums. And in other forums all across the internet. What's offensive to one may not be to another... just a matter of what it is and who it's directed to.
One man's art is another man's porn. Who's right?

Society is the majority that decides what is indecent in it's eyes. Close by in that part of the world (Taiwan/Thailand for example) it's ok and legal to have sex with under-aged children while here (in the U.S.) it's an criminal offense (actually, IMO it should be the death penalty; but that's another thread). So who's right and who's wrong? Depends upon where you live and what the majority of the people around you say it is.

If they want to say the Christian Bible (and I assume that IS the one they're talking about) is offensive then that's what THEY want to say. I have opinions about it but I'm not going to change their minds when it's their own minds that have decided that. One of my favorite quotes goes something like: "A man whose opinion is changed against his will is of the same opinion still."

 

[bushidomartialarts]

I'm not sure that quite applies. They are not talking of banning it, just restricting who can buy it.

That's pretty much what the US laws on pornography do. Playboy and Anal Donkey Midgets aren't banned...just restricted to a certain age group (though some communities reserve the right to ban indecent material outright)

You mention Marilyn Manson, but his stuff does come with a warning label does it not? "Parental Advisory"

Yup, but by choice. Those labels were imposed by the music industry, not the government.

I also doubt very much that any magazine featuring Nude photos, no matter how artistic, would be given a oky doky on sale to kids. Does Playboy spreads for example have artistic merit? If not, why not? If you hung them in a art museum would they?

Actually, I remember being 12 and getting access to nude photos by checking out photography magazines and books at the library. And there are plenty of books and magazines on painting or drawing that include nudity.

And Playboy spreads have been found by the court to not have artistic merit. Which is why they're defined as 'indecent', which was sort of my point.

Now none of this applies directly, since the case in point is in Hong Kong, not the US. But this thread is also a discussion of the definition of indecency. By US legal standards, the Bible is not indecent because it has merit other than masturbation.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Now none of this applies directly, since the case in point is in Hong Kong, not the US. But this thread is also a discussion of the definition of indecency.

By US legal standards, the Bible is not indecent because it has merit other than masturbation.

Very true, but as you said this does not apply since we are talking Hong Kong, not the US.

 

[tellner]

China is manifestly not the US. Chinese standards apply in China. American standards apply in America, Shrubus Minimus' efforts to export them by force notwithstanding.