Adult toy retailer slapped down for 'RES-ERECTI*N' ad over Easter

Adult toys and lingerie retailer Honey Birdette was today placed on the naughty step by the UK's egg-xacting watchdog the Advertising Standards Authority for mixing sex and religion in a promotion over Easter. The seller of sex toys including Milano Pleasure Beads and vibrators named Dolly, Dita, Dallas and Bullet Bliss, sent …

[Spacedinvader]

Jesus Christ!

Is nothing sacred anymore?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Jesus Christ!

See subj.

Like it ever was?

[Flocke Kroes]

Re: Jesus Christ!

When your only tool is a nail gun, every task looks like a messiah.

[bombastic bob]

Re: Jesus Christ!

"Is nothing sacred anymore?"

nothing. this IS the intarwebs, after all. Rule 34 and all that.

besides, Easter is more a PAGAN spring equinox celebration in most cultures, with the fertility symbols like eggs and rabbits. Back in the middle ages (or something) Passover's proximity to the spring equinox made it convenient to "christianize" the pagan Easter holiday. Sure, there'll be a lot of passover Seders on Good Friday followed by Sunday church services, but those eggs and bunnies are all of Pagan origin.

So maybe the Adult Toy business can just say they're PAGANS, and are celebrating THEIR religious holiday?

[Stevie]

Re: Jesus Christ!

They missed a bet by not going with "Easter Teats" to link to their selection of festive nipple clamps.

[Hans 1]

Holy dildo, what is all this about ? Oh, I see, it is all written in the believers digest, I see...

[I ain't Spartacus]

Sorry, but your post instantly made me think:

"Holy dildo Batman!"

[Chemical Bob]

Well, Batman and Robin *did* wear tights...

[bombastic bob]

Well, Batman and Robin *did* wear tights...

Inspiring Saturday Night Live's "Ambiguously Gay Duo"

[Your alien overlord - fear me]

So, did they shove the ad next to the beads where the sun don't shine?

[Mark 85]

The ads for prayer beads? As in "use these when you don't have a prayer on Saturday night sex"?

[Gordon Pryra]

2 Wrongs make a right here I think

Its offensive to me that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy with respect and not ridicule.

its offensive to me that people who work in advertising also claim to have any rights to respect

In this case, mixing the two should actually make a right?

[sabroni]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

.... with respect and not ridicule.

Maybe if your post showed that you'd made any effort to think about this beyond parroting Dawkins et al I'd respect your opinion. But you don't, so I don't. Note I don't need to ridicule you to disagree with your opinion, however ridiculous it may seem to me.

Many of the famous names in science believed in God. They were clear on what science is about and what religion is about and realised that they don't really cross over. A point that the fundamentalist scientists on this board seem to consistently miss.

[JulieM]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

Riducule is the most charitable response I can think of, to grown-ups with imaginary friends in 2017.

[John H Woods]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

Many of the famous names in science believeD in God, yes.

Of course science and religion wouldn't cross over if the latter didn't make claims the former could prove false.

Fundamentalist scientist? What's that? Someone who refuses to entertain proposition for which there is no compelling evidence whatsoever?

[brainbone]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

> "Many of the famous names in science believed in God. They were clear on what science is about and what religion is about and realized that they don't really cross over."

Science is about trying to find the most reliable answer a question you can using the available data we have, admitting when you're shown to be wrong and updating that answer.

Religion is about taking the most unreliable path we've ever had to an answer: blind faith that the answer given is correct.

See where they cross over? Answering questions.

See what religion fails to do? Actually answering the question in an honest way.

[Pompous Git]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

brainbone:

"Science is about trying to find the most reliable answer a question you can using the available data we have, admitting when you're shown to be wrong and updating that answer."

Not according to Einstein:

"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts."

brainbone:

"Religion is about taking the most unreliable path we've ever had to an answer"

Not really... It's more about attempting to answer questions that science can't answer.

Physicist Paul Davies:

"Scientists are slowly waking up to an inconvenient truth - the universe looks suspiciously like a fix. The issue concerns the very laws of nature themselves."

[brainbone]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

> "If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts."

You completely misrepresent Eisenstein's position. He's basically just telling you to try adjusting your perspective. To not be afraid of challenging previously established science. To not be blinded by your bias of what you think you know. He's telling you to use the scientific method. He's not telling you to have blind faith in your hypothesis.

> "Not really... [Religion]'s more about attempting to answer questions that science can't answer."

Science has answered many of these questions. Often, the answer is "currently, we just don't know." It's the same answer religion should give you, if it was honest. "I don't know" is a perfectly valid answer. To claim you do know when you don't or can't know, is not a valid answer.

[Pompous Git]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

brainbone:

"You completely misrepresent Eisenstein's position."

Actually no, I quoted him. You represent him as having a position different to that quoted. How about Paul Dirac?

"I learned to distrust all physical concepts as the basis for a theory. Instead one should put one's trust in a mathematical scheme, even if the scheme does not appear at first sight to be connected with physics. One should concentrate on getting interesting mathematics."

"This result is too beautiful to be false; it is more important to have beauty in one's equations than to have them fit experiment."

brainbone:

"Science has answered many of these questions."

From The Existence of God (OUP : 2004), P. 53:

"Its degree of simplicity and its scope determine the intrinsic probability of a theory, its probability independent of its relation to any evidence. The simpler a theory, the more probable it is. The simplicity of a theory, in my view, is a matter of it postulating few (logically independent) entities, few properties of entities, few kinds of entities, few kinds of properties, properties more readily observable, few separate laws with few terms relating few variables, the simplest formulation of each law being mathematically simple. … A theory is simpler and so has greater prior probability to the extent to which these criteria are satisfied."

and

"It is crazy to postulate a trillion (causally unconnected) universes to explain the features of one universe, when postulating one entity (God) will do the job."

Have a nice day :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

"It is crazy to postulate a trillion (causally unconnected) universes to explain the features of one universe, when postulating one entity (God) will do the job."

1) The universe just exists - always has done.

2) What superior being created the Universe?

3) God created the Universe.

4) What superior being created God?

5) God just exists - always has done.

Apply Occam's Razor.

Statement 5 is the same as statement 1 - but raises more questions about the nature of this omnipotent God to add to those raised by the nature of the Universe.

Therefore statement 1 has less variables - and is more probable to be the correct answer.

[Pompous Git]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

"1) The universe just exists - always has done."

Not according to modern cosmology. The universe came into being with the Big Bang. What caused the Big Bang? And so on... Personally I believe the Big Bang, not called that but invented by the Roman Catholic priest the Reverend Monsignor Georges Lemaître to preserve the Christian account of the Creation.

Your statement 1 is consistent with my view, but not the currently accepted scientific cosmology.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

"Not according to modern cosmology. The universe came into being with the Big Bang. [...]"

With the Universe came Time and Space. Therefore "The universe just exists - always has done" is true within the framework of our concept of time.

What existed before that singularity may be entirely different - or may be just a minimal point in a repeatedly expanding and contracting universe. At the moment we don't seem to be able to decide if the current expansion will eventually change to a contraction.

[Pompous Git]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

"With the Universe came Time and Space. Therefore "The universe just exists - always has done" is true within the framework of our concept of time."

The BBT claim is that the universe is ~13 billion years old. It cannot be infinitely old (always existed) AND 13 billion years old. It's one or t'other.

Our concept of time is at most a few thousand years old. Are you claiming that the universe didn't exist before then? You're somewhat incoherent on this matter.

[brainbone]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

> "when postulating one entity (God) will do the job"

And yet you can't really define what this "God" is. Is this god, this thing that can do anything and everything, not a complex entity? How did this complex entity come into existence? How does the postulation of it answer any questions with any degree of honesty?

Every god postulated so far is simply the ejaculate of mental masturbation. Deepity conjectures bolstered by unfalsifiable nonsense.

[Pompous Git]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

"And yet you can't really define what this "God" is."

How about "God is everything that there is"?

"Every god postulated so far is simply the ejaculate of mental masturbation. Deepity conjectures bolstered by unfalsifiable nonsense."

I suspect from your hysteria and rudeness that you are deeply troubled by something. Or you forgot to take your meds...

[brainbone]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

> "I suspect from your hysteria and rudeness that you are deeply troubled by something."

Yes. I'm deeply troubled by rampant peddling of bullshit. Further, it deeply troubles me that others are not troubled by this, or worse, enthusiastically engage in it.

[maff]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

> It's more about attempting to answer questions that science can't answer.

Can you name one question religion has answered?

[Pompous Git]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

"Can you name one question religion has answered?"

Certainly :-)

What personal, life-orienting core commitments are consistent with my worldview?

A Christian, Muslim or Jew might answer: "To fulfill the will of God, or to obey God and enjoy him forever, or to be devoted to knowing God, or loving God."

Mine (I'm not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew): "To realise my personal potential for experiencing life, and to do as much good as I can for others in a world of social diversity and conflict."

[Alumoi]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

Can you name one question religion has answered?

Shirley you're jesting. Everybody (well, Christians anyway) knows that God created the universe and all there is.

Now where's the joke icon for those who won't get it?

[gandalfcn]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

"Many of the famous names in science believed in God."

What is that supposed to prove other than the fact that there was no alternative in their societies at the time if they didn't want to be ostracised or even tortured etc.?

And what about all the non-Christian "names" from outside the so called Christian World? Presumably they don't matter because the weren't Christians. Correct?

You give religion a bad name. Thank god!

[Pompous Git]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

"What is that supposed to prove other than the fact that there was no alternative in their societies at the time if they didn't want to be ostracised or even tortured etc.?"

What evidence do you have that Lord Kelvin, Wilhelm Röntgen, Pierre Duhem, Guglielmo Marconi, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Max Planck, Arthur Eddington, John Ambrose Fleming, Robert Millikan, Max Born, Arthur Compton, Ronald Fisher, Georges Lemaître, Kathleen Lonsdale, Theodosius Dobzhansky, Werner Heisenberg, Michael Polanyi, Mary Kenneth Keller, Mary Celine Fasenmyer etc were ever tortured, or threatened with ostracism for their science. As well as Nobel Prize winners, there are nuns, priests and theologians in that far from complete list. According to 100 Years of Nobel Prizes a review of Nobel prizes awarded between 1901 and 2000 reveals that 65.4% of Nobel Prize Laureates identified Christianity as their religious preference. Christians have won a total of 72.5% of all the Nobel Prizes in Chemistry, 65.3% in Physics, 62% in Medicine, and 54% in Economics.

I note also that many non-Christian scientists also expressed a belief in God during the 20th C (Einstein for example). Maybe you're claiming they were tortured. I dunno, you don't seem to like providing any support for your assertions.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

You don't have to be tortured. Even fifty years ago, telling people you were an atheist might not get you the rack, but it probably would guarantee you didn't get invited to many parties.

[Pompous Git]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

"You don't have to be tortured."

I'm truly relieved to hear that DougS. I really wasn't looking forward to it with any great relish ;-)

"Even fifty years ago, telling people you were an atheist might not get you the rack, but it probably would guarantee you didn't get invited to many parties."

Depends on where you're living I imagine. I don't recall anyone in the part of semi-rural Australia I then lived having any great interest what your religious persuasion was. I suspect that would have already been perceived as infra dig. I can only remember one teacher at the high school I was attending having any obvious religious leanings. The chap who lent me the money to attend university (and later returned the money when I repaid him) was a lay preacher and I was firmly atheist in those days. I didn't ask for the loan and was somewhat surprised when he offered it.

I certainly accepted more invitations to parties than I should have; my studies suffered a little and I had to accept placement at one of the lesser institutions.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

" I don't recall anyone in the part of semi-rural Australia I then lived having any great interest what your religious persuasion was."

Even in England 50 years ago it mattered what religious pigeon hole you fitted. Atheism was not an stated option - your birth religion was a given unless you formally adopted another one.

Churches controlled most of the primary and junior schools. Religious observance and church attendance were compulsory for pupils. RCC schools took it has their primary mission.

Even joining the Scouts or Girl Guides required an affirmation of religious belief.

At a theoretically non-denominational state secondary school we had to take part in the daily whole school religious assemblies - which were decreed by law. The only exceptions were for those minority pupils of the significant other religions - who had their own concurrent religious observances.

Who you could marry was generally limited by your respective religions. Mixed religion marriages were often either forbidden - or a source of shame and social stigma for you and any children.

Anyone who got married was expected to have a religious wedding - unless they were proscribed by their birth religion's dogma. A registry office ceremony was regarded as second-class and somewhat shameful for most people. Ditto for not having your baby baptised. Refusing to be confirmed - or refusing to be a religiously observant godfather was again considered a shameful reflection on your character and your family.

Sunday was almost a total close-down of shops, entertainments, or public transport. Even the recreation grounds had their gates locked or their equipment rendered immobile. Blasphemy crimes were still prosecuted.

Fifty years ago in England - the Swinging Sixties was the cusp when religion started to lose its grip on the majority of the population in England. TV no longer had to close for an hour at 6pm so people would go to church. Nor did the evening's broadcasts have to end with a clergyman delivering an Epilogue sermon.

It was still a long time before any official form had a space for "atheist" or "no religion".

[Tom 38]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

Even joining the Scouts or Girl Guides required an affirmation of religious belief.

Still was ~25 years ago, "On my honour, I promise: to do my duty to God and to the Queen, to help other people, and to keep the Scout's code"

[Pompous Git]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

"Even in England 50 years ago it mattered what religious pigeon hole you fitted... "

Yes, it was a great relief to leave England's green, unpleasant land to come and live in the Land of Under. You have my deepest sympathy...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

"Yes, it was a great relief to leave England's green, unpleasant land to come and live in the Land of Under."

The scandals surrounding the Catholic Church and its schools in Australia are finally getting real attention. It would appear that - given its relatively small population - it had a more religious environment in the 20th century than did England.

Emigrants and settlers tend to perpetuate the religious and cultural observances of their original founding country - whereas the latter's culture moves on.

[Pompous Git]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

"It would appear that - given its relatively small population - it [Australia] had a more religious environment in the 20th century than did England."

In England I attended a school established by the Church in medieval times; we had daily prayers and attended church every Wednesday morning. In Australia we never had prayers at school, nor did we attend church. So I'd say that Australia was less religiously inclined.

I'm not sure who the emigrants from Australia were that you refer to, but while the settlers (immigrants) did bring their religious convictions with them, the rather mixed nature of them has led to a reasonably successful multicultural and tolerant society.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

"The scandals surrounding the Catholic Church and its schools in Australia are finally getting real attention. "

Not to mention the scandals of how evacuees and orphans shipped of to Australia were treated. And how the native peoples were and are treated. I don't think anyone, from any country or culture, should be casting stones here.

[Pompous Git]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

"how the native peoples were and are treated."

So it's nice to see that the appalling level of violence committed against aboriginal women by aboriginal men receiving some media attention. Referring to this in "polite society" in recent decades has tended to result in accusations of denigrating aboriginal culture.

[jake]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

I was vocally not a christian 50 years ago, and I got invited to many parties. In fact, the only person who seemed to be distressed by my lack of religious tendencies was MeDearOldMum. She's long since forgiven me, good xtian that she is.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

"They were clear on what science is about and what religion is about and realised that they don't really cross over."

The ability of the human mind to compartmentalise such that two opposing views can be held and believed to be true at the same time still astounds me. Is that science or the work of god?

[Pompous Git]

Re: Its offensive that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy...

"The ability of the human mind to compartmentalise such that two opposing views can be held and believed to be true at the same time still astounds me. Is that science or the work of god?"

Definitely god, though I suspect work is the wrong word. I see it as irrefutable proof that god has a sense of humour.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: 2 Wrongs make a right here I think

Maybe you should live in a former colony where religion and government are separated (well, for the most part)

There are certainly no laws preventing advertising sex toys and Easter together here, though quite why one would think that's a good sales tactic is another matter altogether.

[iron]

Re: 2 Wrongs make a right here I think

Would that be the former colony where we banished the religious fanatics who were too extreme for us? The one where people actually believe the universe is 6,000 years old? Yeah that went really well for you.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: A good sales tactic

It's about the, er, second, uuhh, coming.

Sorry, too soon?

[MyffyW]

Oh dear

It's really not that difficult to respect somebody who holds different views to your own, is it?

[JulieM]

Re: Oh dear

It's not so much a question of it being difficult, as such; rather, a question of some opinions simply not deserving respect.

[MrDamage]

Re: Oh dear

> "It's really not that difficult to respect somebody who holds different views to your own, is it?"

I treat other people's views and opinions like a penis.

It's all well and good that you have one, and that you're proud of it, but the moment you whip it out, start waving it in my face and telling me how great it is compared to anyone else's, is the moment I stop respecting, and start ridiculing.

[I ain't Spartacus]

Re: 2 Wrongs make a right here I think

Its offensive to me that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy with respect and not ridicule.

Then you should take a long, hard (fnarr fnarr) look at yourself.

Treating people with respect should be your default position.

You don't have to agree with their views in order to do that. You're even welcome to ridicule those views, though don't be surprised if this doesn't make them happy, or causes them to dislike you.

Hence that quote that you should never discuss religion or politics in polite company.

Maintaining respect for people you disagree with is simply basic politeness. And is something you'd do well to learn. It might increase people's respect for you.

[maff]

Re: 2 Wrongs make a right here I think

> Treating people with respect should be your default position.

> You're even welcome to ridicule those views

Pick one, because you can't have both.

Respect should not be the default position. Tolerance should be the default position. Respect implies approval, tolerance does not. I'll tolerate your right to believe whatever you want, and you can tolerate my right to believe you're mistaken.

[bombastic bob]

Re: 2 Wrongs make a right here I think

"your default position."

*AGH* you almost made me spit my coffee. ok I already ruined the keyboard when I read the article's subtitle on the main page, but still...

heh heh heh

[FuzzyWuzzys]

Re: 2 Wrongs make a right here I think

Personally I think all religions are a crock of lies however as a decent human bring and assuming the moral high ground I choose to respect people who do wish to have faith in their various deities, even if they choose not to respect my peace and quiet on a Sunday morning by banging on my door and trying to thrust copies of Watchtower in my hand!

Just 2 months ago, being well into my death metal I was out on my drive washing my car in my favourite Decapitated band shirt when a sweet old dear comes wandering up to me.

"May I speak to you about the Lord....oh....erm.....". I point at my shirt and console her with, "I'm sorry love, much as I respect your right to practice your faith I personally have absolutely no interest in religion. I take the Humanist line on such matters.".

"Oh, I see. Thank you very much for your time."

[Jamie Jones]

Re: 2 Wrongs make a right here I think

I've never had a home visit from any religious folk #LIVEINTHEUK

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: 2 Wrongs make a right here I think

"May I speak to you about the Lord....oh....erm....."

Had a visit from the usual grouping composed of two elderly women and an elderly man. Unusually they were apparently only pushing their leaflet through letterboxes. As I was in the hall I opened the door before the man reached it. He half-heartedly proffered the leaflet and said "I don't suppose you want this?" as he turned away. Poor sod.

[MyffyW]

To return to the main programme

As Aretha once said:

"Sisters are doing it for themselves"

"You make me feel like a natural woman"

"Rock steady"

"Freeway of love"

and not forgetting..... "Respect"

[wayward4now]

Re: 2 Wrongs make a right here I think

"He half-heartedly proffered the leaflet and said "I don't suppose you want this?" as he turned away. Poor sod."

I always thank them nicely, while rejecting the pamphlet. Their next stop might be a neighbor with a gun in his/her mouth.

[Chemical Bob]

Re: 2 Wrongs make a right here I think

"even if they choose not to respect my peace and quiet on a Sunday morning by banging on my door and trying to thrust copies of Watchtower in my hand!"

Next time they come by, answer the door while wearing nothing but grubby underpants. Problem solved!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: 2 Wrongs make a right here I think

Also, like at the height of the Cultural Revolution when religion was frowned upon by the state, the Vatican instead in keeping churches open on the premise that even 'two Huangs make a rite'.

/ i'll get my vestment ...

[John 110]

Re: 2 Wrongs make a right here I think

"Its offensive to me that I must treat people who claim to believe in a sky fairy with respect and not ridicule."

I think you'll find that you're the one that mentioned "sky fairy".

Unless believers are either helping or harming you, you're under no obligation to either respect or ridicule them.

Respect is a basic human right, and should only be withheld for good reason.

That you feel you are allowed to ridicule folk who don't subscribe to your worldview is probably reason enough to allow me to withhold my respect.

But I wouldn't dream of ridiculing you (without checking out all your posts first)

/rant

[Gordon Pryra]

Re: 2 Wrongs make a right here I think

I had to chime in here

"Respect is a basic human right, and should only be withheld for good reason."

What a crock, 99% of decent god fearing secular people don't really care about religion (after all I don't spend all day thinking about the ginger bread man either)

But when pushed, the biggest issue they will talk about is the lack of respect for all other religions by ALL religions.

Next comes the lack of tolerance of all religions for anyone that has any belief that is slightly different from theirs. How many versions of Christianity are there for example? And how many times has this resulted in abuse of one kind or another?

In 2017 the Church is STILL debating whether "the gays" (tm) and the scary women can play in their gang

You guys.....

Put it this way, treat people as you would like to be treated yourselves, and maybe those who don't believe in a god may have some respect for you. In the mean time, you act like children and are viewed as such

[Pompous Git]

Re: 2 Wrongs make a right here I think

"99% of decent god fearing secular people don't really care about religion"

god fearing = deeply religious

secular = non-religious

Oh dear, you don't really expect anybody to pay the slightest attention to what you have to say when you commence with a made up statistic and a contradiction do you?

[codejunky]

Erm

Easter. Represented by eggs (new life) rabbits (think about it) celebrating spring and all the lovely procreation that comes with it. Kudo's to the toy maker for sticking with the theme

[defiler]

Re: Erm

Exactly my thought - you seem to have just got back from buying a sandwich a little quicker! :P

[defiler]

But hang on...

Isn't Easter really all about springtime and nature coming into bloom? And isn't that really all about the flora and fauna getting it on? So doesn't that make Easter inextricable associated with sex?

Come on!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: But hang on...

Well, yes and no...

The early Christians moved the story of their leader's execution and subsequent 'new life' to Easter to (in best M$ tradiations) 'embrace and extinguish' the happy heathens with their bunnies and eggs celebrating the new life of spring - just like they moved the story of their leader's birth to on top of the winter solstice, which traditionally signified a new beginning.

Christians aren't known for subtlety.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: But hang on...

Good that you noted this, but . . . it was not "early Christians" as such, it was early Christian "leadership", which conscripted those common observances, to ease conversions and consolidate their own power.

But, such is to be expected from those who hunger to gain and consolidate power over others.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: But hang on...

"Christians aren't known for subtlety."

It always amuses me when churches have Easter Egg competitions and put large fir trees on prominent display.

Apparently the Vatican has just decreed that the communion wine can be a non-alcoholic grape drink - but that the bread is not allowed to be gluten free.

Any tribal group always has shibboleths for which there is no logical reason - apart from social separation and control of their followers. Melinda Gates has gone on record as disagreeing with the Pope's continued proscription of reliable contraceptives for family planning.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: But hang on...

The Pope has relaxed some restrictions, there's only so much he can do without backlash that will get some ultra conservative pope that follows him and undoes everything. I have a feeling they will change their tune about that in my lifetime.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: But hang on...

" I have a feeling they will change their tune about that in my lifetime."

I remember us saying that very confidently in the 1960s . Unless I become a Methuselah then I'm not expecting to live to see any significant changes. The world is getting more nationalistic - and with that usually comes the enforcement of religious dogma as social control.

[bombastic bob]

Re: But hang on...

"The early Christians moved the story of their leader's execution and subsequent 'new life' to Easter"

almost, but not quite.

Christmas might have been moved from October ('feast of tabernacles' time, explains the Mary/Joseph hotel thing and why they were in Bethlehem when she's about to give birth in the FIRST place) to December, to coordinate with the Yule celebration at the winter solstice.

but Easter corresponds to Passover, which is defined in the Old Testament as something to do with the friday after a new moon at the spring equinox or something [I forget the details, and I'm not Jewish]. So the christian easter always corresponds to the Jewish calendar for Passover, which is defined as being somewhere close to the Spring equinox.

But yeah, "christianizing" pagan holidays happened a lot back then. It's why Christmas has trees, and Easter has eggs and bunnies. I think Martin Luther was even criticized for having a Christmas tree, being considered "a pagan symbol" by many.

But yeah you were on the right track, with a few inaccurate details.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: But hang on...

"So the christian easter always corresponds to the Jewish calendar for Passover, which is defined as being somewhere close to the Spring equinox."

The calculation of the date of Easter has a very complicated history. Apparently it was detached from the Jewish calendar after the 3rd century due to a perceived unreliability.

The date can still differ between the Orthodox Church and the Catholic traditions. One depends on the Gregorian calendar and the other the Julian calendar. Added to which is whether the Vernal Equinox is taken as a fixed date of 21st March - or by astronomical observations.

Here is an apparently comprehensive explanation.

The calculation of Easter was apparently so important that the Catholic Church relaxed some of its proscriptions on scientific research. The book "The Calendar" by David Ewing Duncan attempts to cover some of the politics.

[Pompous Git]

Re: But hang on...

"the Catholic Church relaxed some of its proscriptions on scientific research"

What proscriptions? References definitely required.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: But hang on...

"What proscriptions? References definitely required."

That the Church controlled the European centres of learning was a fact. Anyone whose research looked likely to contradict the established religious dogma was likely to find themselves in serious trouble. Astronomy was one of those areas - yet it became obvious that to determine the variable date for Easter required research into that field. Thus the genie was out of the bottle.

The following quotes from Wikipedia on Galileo's support for the Earth going round the Sun:

Quote:

The matter was investigated by the Roman Inquisition in 1615, which concluded that heliocentrism was "foolish and absurd in philosophy, and formally heretical since it explicitly contradicts in many places the sense of Holy Scripture".

Quote:

In 1758, the general prohibition against works advocating heliocentrism was removed from the Index of prohibited books, although the specific ban on uncensored versions of the Dialogue and Copernicus's De Revolutionibus remained. All traces of official opposition to heliocentrism by the church disappeared in 1835 when these works were finally dropped from the Index.

[Pompous Git]

Re: But hang on...

"That the Church controlled the European centres of learning was a fact. Anyone whose research looked likely to contradict the established religious dogma was likely to find themselves in serious trouble. "

If the Church controlled the university at Paris how come The Condemnation of 1210? The works of a number of scholars were condemned for pantheism and Aristotelianism. "Neither the books of Aristotle on natural philosophy or their commentaries are to be read at Paris in public or secret, and this we forbid under penalty of excommunication." The condemnation had only local force. You clearly don't understand the medieval university system if you think it was centrally controlled. The universities weren't even controlled by the cities they were located in!

In 1615 it became required that De Revolutionibus have the frontispiece modified to include that this was a mathematical theory. This followed a debate with the case for heliocentrism being put by Jesuit priest Christoph Scheiner. The Church at no time proscribed astronomy and supported many astronomers. Another Jesuit astronomer of the period of the period was Fr Grassi. Galileo insulted both. He accused Scheiner of lying when he claimed to have seen sunspots first contra the evidence. He also launched a stinging personal attack on Grassi for establishing that comets occupied the space between Earth and the sun. Galileo insisted that comets were an atmospheric phenomenon.

You still haven't provided any evidence of the Church proscribing science.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: But hang on...

" I think Martin Luther was even criticized for having a Christmas tree, being considered "a pagan symbol" by many."

There was a strong Pagan tradition in the Germanic lands that centred round trees. Wikipedia says:

1) Tacitus claimed that the 1st century tribes of Germany did not "confine the gods within walls... but that they worshipped outdoors in sacred woods and groves".

2) the Swedish Temple at Uppsala, which, according to Adam of Bremen, writing in the 11th century, was built around a grove that was "so holy that each tree is itself regarded as sacred".

Holly, ivy, and mistletoe are also Pagan symbols. Even the word for Christmas in northern Europe tends to be a variant of the Pagan "Yule".

[Tom 38]

Re: But hang on...

Of course, Easter, the festival where we celebrate fucking and fertility by painting and eating eggs, worship the image of a golden bunny rabbit, and then round it off by eating some delicious roast baby lamb, the first bounty of the feast of fucking.

Oh, and this stuff is so good, one guy literally came back from the dead for his roast lamb.

[Jamie Jones]

Re: But hang on...

I thought the pope had OK'd contraception a few years ago.... Ho hum.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: But hang on...

"I thought the pope had OK'd contraception a few years ago.... Ho hum."

Is that a subtle reference to celibacy - or his widely quoted comments to reporters on the plane back from his Philippines trip?

The latter was clarified by the Vatican afterwards - that he had meant that the minimum for a family was three children and "more is better". His concern was that a pious continuous reproductive cycle could cause a mother's premature death.

It was firmly reiterated that the family planning would have to rely on the approved method of prediction of ovulation. Artificial contraceptives, withdrawal, or vasectomies were still not allowed.

[Jamie Jones]

Re: But hang on...

Is that a subtle reference to celibacy - or his widely quoted comments to reporters on the plane back from his Philippines trip?

Neither. There was no hidden meaning. I was under the impression that condoms had been sanctioned....

Off to google... Ok, found this: Vatican Confirms Shift on Condom use

Reading the article, there are some caveats I didn't realise, but other than that, why the frig did my original post deserve 2 downvotes? Those 2 morons would be better served on youtube-comments.

(yeah, i know - mentioning downvotes on el reg just ensures you get more of them. Bring it on!)

[frank ly]

Easy Beat Gold Eggs

I followed the link, I read the details, I watched the video. I still have no idea what it is. In many ways, I'm too old to care anymore.

[JudeKay]

Re: Easy Beat Gold Eggs

Beats us as well

[Mark 85]

Re: Easy Beat Gold Eggs

Ah.. you're in the S&M aisle. The knowledge you seek is two aisles over.... in Toys.

[wolfetone]

Re: Easy Beat Gold Eggs

"I followed the link, I read the details, I watched the video. I still have no idea what it is. In many ways, I'm too old to care anymore."

You tried asking your wife?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Easy Beat Gold Eggs

"This short video (SFW) should help explain it."

Thanks for that. The video took a while before it became obvious how it was to be used. It also explained why they come in six-packs - a one-off use that appears rather wasteful of the materials.

The video is visually SFW - but the soundtrack has a very explicit vocabulary.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Easy Beat Gold Eggs

Never mind the Easter advertising fuss - the video explaining how to use these Easy Beat Gold Eggs suggests using them on "him" while he's driving! That is surely inciting people to distract a driver causing them (at the very least) to end up driving without due care and attention and thus a bit more of a serious problem than potentially upsetting some people.

I started typing this comment with humour in mind but the more I think about it, the more I think "I really do hope no-one's that stupid" quickly followed by "of course someone will be" and then "erm, would it be a total over-reaction to point plod in the direction of the explanatory video in question?"

[Anonymous Coward]

Easter is just a Pagan fertility festival with a thin whitewashing of christianity painted over it. Those ads were totally appropriate.

Fucking prudes can fuck off.

[Anonymous Blowhard]

"Fucking prudes can fuck off."

They're prudes; they don't want to fuck (that's what they say in public anyway)...

[DagD]

They're prudes; they don't want to fuck (that's what they say in public anyway)...

wouldn't that be "Fucking prudes can fuck on"?

[wolfetone]

Christians don't have sex. So it is offensive.

Both my parents are Christian and they never had sex. Not even once. So there!

[Fruit and Nutcase]

@wolfetone

Both my parents are Christian and they never had sex. Not even once. So there!

Oh, you too are of virgin birth!

[wolfetone]

"Oh, you too are of virgin birth!"

Yes! BOW DOWN BEFORE ME AND FEEL MY WRATH!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Only Catholic Priests are allowed to mix sex and religion.

I'm going to hell.

[Anonymous Coward]

"I'm going to hell."

Didn't the Pope say that Hell doesn't exist? - or was that Purgatory, or Limbo, or some other threat of graduated physical torture if you don't contribute to their coffers.

[Hans 1]

>Only Catholic Priests are allowed to mix sex and religion.

>I'm going to hell.

Why only Catholic ? I heard of enough cases of Anglican priests having the same problems ... d*b's are everywhere, I'm sure there are cases of imams and buddhist clerics as well, evil is a human nature, you get evil humans anywhere, of every gender, every belief, every ethnic group ... does not mean ALL humans are evil, no more than it means all humans of one of the named groups are ...

Feynman, where has humanity heading ?

Yes, I have trouble respecting religions because they do so much wrong, it does hurt my feelings to shut up, but I do shut up, because I am wiser then them poor gullible walking meat balls.

[Pompous Git]

"Yes, I have trouble respecting religions because they do so much wrong..."

Jesus Christ, the founder of Christianity, instructed his followers to heal the sick. The early Christians were noted by their contemporaries for tending the sick and infirm. Hence it is no surprise that today the Roman Catholic Church is the largest non-government provider of health care services in the world. It has around 18,000 clinics, 16,000 homes for the elderly and those with special needs, and 5,500 hospitals, with 65 % of them located in developing countries. The Church's Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Health Care Workers said that the Roman Catholic Church manages 26% of the world's health care facilities.

Can't be arsed to look at the contribution provided by the many other institutions that hew to the Christian or indeed other faiths.

The universities at Bologna (1088), the University of Paris (c.1150), and the University of Oxford (1167) were all established by the Roman Catholic Church.

Disclaimer: I'm not a Christian, but I am capable of accepting the facts of history.

[Anonymous Coward]

Much of the modern RCC's interest in buying up hospitals and medical groups is to allow them to restrict the services they provide. There is a long list of women's healthcare they do not allow their doctors to provide.

(At least this is how it is in the states. I live in an area where the two decent hospital chains and largest medical group were purchased by a large Catholic charity. The number of women who die in childbirth at their facilities has been climbing ever since. Gotta try to save that hopelessly premature baby. Too bad about the mother. Go team Jesus!)

[Anonymous Coward]

"The early Christians were noted by their contemporaries for tending the sick and infirm."

So were many Muslim rulers when their empire was at the forefront of scientific research with preservation of ancient scientific texts. See Jim Al-Khalili "Science and Islam" on the BBC iPlayer.

The organised Christian religion has made a core fetish out of people having to suffer in this world and "the next" for the glory of their god.

The quality of a person's life has taken second place to an ideology that says preserving that life to its bitter end - no matter how painful for the recipient and their family - is a holy duty.

Mother Teresa was accused of giving her terminally ill patients nothing to really dull their pain - as their experiencing the pain was the important thing for her religious convictions.

[gandalfcn]

Jesus Christ, the founder of Christianity,

"Jesus Christ, the founder of Christianity," Was he? Or was Christianity founded in his name?

As your opening was false it doesn't say much for your intellect does it?

[Pompous Git]

Re: Jesus Christ, the founder of Christianity,

"Was he? Or was Christianity founded in his name?

As your opening was false it doesn't say much for your intellect does it?"

Try reading 1 Corinthians 15:1-4; 2 Corinthians 5:21; Romans 5:8; 1 John 2:2; 1 Corinthians 15:12-34. Ephesians 2:20 tells us that Christianity was "built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus Himself as the chief cornerstone." See also Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 1:8 and Revelation 5:9-10.

The rather obvious fact that you haven't bothered to read the Bible, or provide a source for your assertion, says far more about your "intellect" than mine.

[MrDamage]

Re: Jesus Christ, the founder of Christianity,

A lot of people try reading the bible, but when the prologue (genesis) has so many plot holes and retcons it makes the twilight saga seems like quality material, they give up in disgust.

[Pompous Git]

Re: Jesus Christ, the founder of Christianity,

"A lot of people try reading the bible..."

Indeed. What I find intriguing is the god-botherers who knock on my door from time to time. They want to convince me that it's the infallible word of god, yet when questioned about aspects of Leviticus (much more interesting than Genesis) they confess to having never read it.

[jake]

Re: Jesus Christ, the founder of Christianity,

Ever try reading Revelation while considering that the author might be in the last stages of dying of syphilis, and describing the events that were visible to him just outside his jail cell on Patmos? It makes a lot more sense if you do.

[Pompous Git]

Re: Jesus Christ, the founder of Christianity,

"Ever try reading Revelation while considering that the author might be in the last stages of dying of syphilis..."

No, but I have thought ergotism (Saint Anthony's Fire) and think it far more likely. The first written records of a syphilis outbreak of in Europe occurred in the late 15th C at Naples during the French invasion. There has been much effort in attempting to establish a European rather than North American origin of the disease, but I remain unconvinced.

Personally I have never been able to make any sense of Revelation, nor any of the proffered explanations for its inclusions.

[jake]

Re: Jesus Christ, the founder of Christianity,

I don't believe the "originated in the New World" theory for syphilis is correct. For example, the first Crusaders late 11th C.) brought what they called "venereal leprosy" back from the Holy Land ... which was treated with mercury. Leprosy isn't sexually transmitted, nor is it treated with mercury. Syphilis is both, and I can see how the symptoms could be confused.

Granted, it was probably quite rare back then (perhaps a variation that wasn't as virulent as our more modern strain/mutation?) ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Jesus Christ, the founder of Christianity,

"Try reading 1 Corinthians [...]"

Most of those references are letters written by Paul.

Christianity and much of its dogma was created by Paul. Later bishops selectively edited the various collected texts into one book. People like Saint Jerome and Saint Augustine added more "moral" proscriptions that are now central to the Churches' core fetish of "sin".

None of them actually knew Jesus Christ.

[Tom 38]

Re: Jesus Christ, the founder of Christianity,

Most of those references are letters written by Paul.

Saul, who was a tax collector, heavily oppressed early Christians while Jesus was alive.

After they started growing as a cult, miraculously JC appeared to him on the road to Damascus (no-one else with him at the time saw or heard), and he turns up as a religious leader who no longer works and lives from the munificence of his worshippers.

At least most of the Koran actually comes from the Mobot himself. The bible is a bunch of stuff written by men who are not the original source, tens to hundreds of years after the events they talk of, edited even further hundreds more years later and selected in order to build a book of mostly coherent religion that suits their needs to control people.

[Pompous Git]

Re: Jesus Christ, the founder of Christianity,

"Saul, who was a tax collector, heavily oppressed early Christians while Jesus was alive."

Which makes it somewhat difficult to believe that Christianity didn't exist before he founded it.

"...in order to build a book of mostly coherent religion that suits their needs to control people"

Another possible explanation is that most people are so insecure in their beliefs they need to recruit others into it. The greater the number who believe, the more likely the belief's true.

[jake]

Re: Jesus Christ, the founder of Christianity,

"The greater the number who believe, the more likely the belief's true."

That is total bullshit.

[Anonymous Coward]

You missed out that the Roman Catholic Church is #1 in organized peodophillia. 7% of all Australian priests have been accused of child-abuse. Presumably the other 93% were either directly involved in covering up the activities of the 7% and/or the other abusers who have not yet been caught, or guilty of negligence by not doing anything to stop the abuse. For this alone the Roman Catholic church needs to be broken up and dismantled as a criminal organization, if only to cover the costs of reparations to those who suffered.

[Anonymous Blowhard]

re. I'm going to hell.

@AC

If you get there before me, can you save me a seat near the air conditioner?

[Pompous Git]

"I'm going to hell."

I'm pretty much evenly divided over heaven and hell. I have many friends in both places...

[jake]

"I'm going to hell."

Objection. Assumes location not in evidence.

[Pompous Git]

Re: "I'm going to hell."

"Objection. Assumes location not in evidence."

Overruled! The "hell" of the Bible is a rendition of the Hebrew sheol (the grave), or Greek Hades the place where dead people go.

OTOH if you had objected to heaven not being a place, then I would have agreed with you. I've always taken Jesus' words: "The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand" to mean it's here and now, not a location t some future time. In the words of Frank Zappa: "You'd better dig it while it's happening, because it might just be a one-shot deal."

[jake]

Re: "I'm going to hell."

The concept of "hell" does not equate to a simple translation of a Hebrew or Koine Greek word, and you know it. Stop being disingenuous for the sake of argument. It's beneath you.

[Solarflare]

Think that one was bad?

Just wait until you see the campaign they have lined up for Ramadan next year!

[Simon Harris]

Re: Think that one was bad?

They're having in Leslie Phillips to do the voiceover, and will be launching the Ramadan-a-Ding Dong.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Think that one was bad?

Edible bacon panties?

[Pompous Git]

Re: Think that one was bad?

"Edible bacon panties?"

Don't bother. They're not real bacon...

[jake]

Re: Think that one was bad?

Fake bacon? Now THAT is sacrilege!

[Pompous Git]

Re: Think that one was bad?

"Fake bacon? Now THAT is sacrilege!"

We need to burn the bastards at the steak.

[I ain't Spartacus]

Re: Think that one was bad?

Will the Christmas campaign involve Santa's sack in any way?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Think that one was bad?

A new sex doll called dan?

Think about it and then the potential slogan.

[MrDamage]

Re: Think that one was bad?

I already know what they have in store.

Strap-ons.

I just feel sorry for anyone called Dan.

[Alistair]

Umm

The vernal equinox is about having the planting done and taking a party. And since its nice and warm and safe, making babies.

Now, I've a Roman Catholic upbringing and know full well that not only did the RC's steal the occasion but so have several other religions.

But these are sex toys, that encourage the user to NOT MAKE BABIES!!! OMG OFFENDED! Eostre will wilt your plants and leave your cattle barren!

/joke

Interesting to note that *only* one recipient complained. AND they took action. I wonder how many complaints they get that the ignore anyway.....

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Umm

"And since its nice and warm and safe, making babies."

In agrarian societies in northern Europe - was there really a "safe" time to produce babies? Unlike most useful animals the human gestation period takes too long to fit neatly into a year's seasons.

Conception at the Winter Solstice would possibly give the mother a tough few months in early pregnancy - but food would have become more plentiful later on when she was eating "to feed two" - and then while lactating immediately after the birth.

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone seen

the last part of "American Gods" ? ...

[DagD]

Rubbing the holy bishop raw...

Radar Operator: Colonel, you better have a look at this radar.

Colonel: What is it, son?

Radar Operator: I don't know, sir, but it looks like a giant--

Jet Pilot: Dick! Dick, take a look out of starboard.

Co-Pilot: Oh my God, it looks like a huge--

Bird-Watching Woman: Pecker!

Bird-Watching Man: [raising binoculars] Where?

Bird-Watching Woman: Over there. What sort of bird is that? Oh goodness, it's not a bird, it's--

Army Sergeant: Privates! We have reports of an Unidentified Flying Object. It has a long, smooth shaft, complete with--

Baseball Umpire: Two balls!

[looking up from game]

Baseball Umpire: What is that? It looks just like an enormous--

Colonel: Johnson!

Radar Operator: Yes, sir?

Colonel: Get on the horn to British Intelligence and let them know about this.

[fobobob]

One person complained?!

That's like... an entire person complained!

[John 110]

Re: One person complained?!

....and aren't they targeted ads? So if you get one...

[Swarthy]

Re: One person complained?!

I'm betting the complainer didn't actually get the e-mail - He saw it in his wife's email. Hence, the wailing and gnashing of teeth.

[Anonymous Coward]

So let me get this right...

...the will not be allowed to advertise any Christmas offers then?

Or do we now accept Christmas is just a money making scam, first invented by the Church, now run by the retail industry?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Or do we now accept Christmas is just a money making scam, first invented by the Church, now run by the retail industry?"

The ancients were there before Christianity made their take-over bid. The Roman Saturnalia festival was basically everyone having a good time eating, drinking, gift giving, and basically making merry round the Winter Solstice. Over-consumption was the norm.

[VicMortimer]

So, the UK has a problem with the jesus dildos too? Because here in the US, we have those.

[Anonymous Coward]

"So, the UK has a problem with the jesus dildos too?"

Shades of the scene from the Ken Russell film "The Devils" (1971).

Did a Google. Was surprised that the Jackhammer Jesus was effectively a crucifix. Had imagined it would have been more like this (SFW) - with the upraised arm a la Rabbit.

[Anonymous Coward]

Do whatever you like in the privacy of your home

But do not try to draw me into your delusion.

We have a PM that can't even accept her place in the universe, yet somehow people seem to trust her to run the country. Stop this shite.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Do whatever you like in the privacy of your home

"We have a PM that can't even accept her place in the universe, yet somehow people seem to trust her to run the country."

Someone coined the term "May-bot" to describe her communication style. Heard her on a R4 interview today. It was interesting how many times she answered a question about BREXIT by saying - "No deal is better than a bad deal". Reminded me of religious zealots who think that repeatedly quoting a phrase from their bible is a statement of unassailable blinding truth.

[EddieD]

I'm shocked.

I've just read two pages of comments and not one person has asked if they received a stiff sentence.

Reg readers, I'm disappointed.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I'm shocked.

Maybe they got a premature remission.

[d3vy]

Presumably the person who complained was on their mailing list so already a customer...

What an utter w*nker.

[scrubber]

Great decision

It should stay about the torture and execution of quite a nice bloke.

[Richard Freeman]

“We considered the use of the religious holiday of Easter [Sic] to advertise a sex toy was likely to cause serious offence and concluded that it was therefore in breach of the Code,” the ASA added."

Really?

Not sure I understand this thinking, I would have thought Sex toys would have been entirely appropriate to the Eostre Festival, is it because Sex toys are thought to discourage skin on skin sex? I mean they could be used for fore play or something....