[skattabrain]

it's a tough subject ... it's not cut and dry ... sure you don't want censorship but at the same time people abuse the real reason why the law was created. ban this album, i dunno if a country should go that far ... but for a walmart to not carry it is different.

if anything, i think we live in a world that for the most part doesn't censor. look at hardcore rap.

Originally Posted by JJ Rodriguez

I wonder how this will affect their touring

ha ha

[distressed_romeo]

Blowing up buildings is abusing the reasons the law is in place. An album cover is not. People still have the option of not buying the damn thing if they don't like it.

[Metal Ken]

Originally Posted by skattabrain

they cry foul but push the envelope constantly ... what do they expect? i'm gonna release an album with santa claus raping kk's mom on the cover ... and i expect him to not mind because it's my right to do so.

If Alex Gregory can put out an album with himself pictured pissing on Yngwie, Vai & Satch's graves, why not?

[Vince]

This is mega-ironic, considering the majority of Slayer's fans in the Southwest live on reservations, if you know what I mean

[metalfiend666]

So they're recalling all copies eh? Does that mean they're gonna be coming to peoples houses and forcing them to return the cd? I still think it's taking the piss that a minority group (as Christians are in India) can get an album withdrawn. Then again seeing the things we conceed to minority groups in this country maybe it doesn't surprise me all that much.

[The Dark Wolf]

Originally Posted by skattabrain

it's a tough subject ... it's not cut and dry ... sure you don't want censorship but at the same time people abuse the real reason why the law was created.

I'd hardly call Slayer's commentary on modern religion and social issues to be a misuse of freedom of speech. What they have to say is entirely why these laws were created anyway.

And laws, like people, evolve over time. If laws and legal interpretation remained static over time, then voting in our country would still be reserved for land-owning white males.

[Ancestor]

Looks like their plan to use controversial material is working perfectly. There it is guys. This is how you do it. Proliferate a bunch of material that you know to be highly offensive and then distance yourself from it by claiming artist license.

[Lozek]

I heard the new Slayer album, I think it should be banned the world over. They should then be made to go back in the studio and write something more worthy of the name Slayer

[The Dark Wolf]

Originally Posted by Ancestor

Looks like their plan to use controversial material is working perfectly. There it is guys. This is how you do it. Proliferate a bunch of material that you know to be highly offensive and then distance yourself from it by claiming artist license.

Somehow I don't see Slayer as falling into this category.

More like these guys.

[Ancestor]

Originally Posted by The Dark Wolf

Somehow I don't see Slayer as falling into this category.

More like these guys.

I don't know. To me, I just expect it from a group like 2 Live Crew. But Slayer can actually play. That's what makes it disappointing. And, yet, I admire the ruthlessness of it. It does what it's supposed to do.

*edit*
See, I found this: http://www.metalhammer.co.uk/news/article/?id=44658

Hanneman says, "But as with 'Angel', we're not endorsing anything. [Jihad]'s just not an 'anti' song, either."

It seems to me that it's a clever attempt to divorce themselves of any responsibility. Ultimately, I shouldn't even bother mentioning it. They do it to attract attention and sell CDs. No big deal.