It’s pure arrogance that drives one to think that their freedom to say what they want when they want is okay.
Whoa, didn’t you get the memo? Mother Teresa was a hypocrite of the highest order, and is officially worthy of no respect whatsoever. Yep, you guessed it…she got the “Hitchens treatment.”
How true. 
People should know and stay in their place, right? 
Okay, so what crimes have been committed and by whom? Simple enough. Really, I find it unbelievabale people are so willing to pander to these tempestous children.
Like it or lump it, the real image of Islam in the west of late has been the extremely violent pornography of the aftermath of suicide bombers on innocent commuters and scenes of severing European heads accompanied by gleeful allah akbars. By contrast some vaguely humorous depictions of their prophet are small change indeed.
I’m also amazed at so called moderates with apparently a foot in the west and east yabbering on about how “hurt” they feel by these depictions. Do they really not get it? If they don’t get it, then fuck 'em! Let 'em play in the fucking sand dunes lobbing off heads and hands, stoning adulterers and gays while slicing up their womenfolks clitoreses. Fine, fucking do it all, just don’t come to our cities demanding we forget our heritage and pander to their petty childish concerns. I have no problem with that.
These depictions were published in Europe, not Saudi Arabia. They have absolutely no right attempting to come goose stepping into our cities threatening disorder over such a petty slight and we have no obligation to dumb down our own cultural heritage to appease their benightedness.
ImaniOU , go ahead, print your t-shirts and where them to church for all I care. In a mature society you have the right to do so. We can deal with it.
HG
A great read from The Times:
[quote]ELEMENTS WITHIN the British establishment were notoriously sympathetic to Hitler. Today the Islamists enjoy similar support. In the 1930s it was Edward VIII, aristocrats and the Daily Mail; this time it is left-wing activists, The Guardian and sections of the BBC. They may not want a global theocracy, but they are like the West
Just so we can be fair, from a christian to my friends. A video that mocks God’s word
[quote=“Namahottie”]Just so we can be fair, from a christian to my friends. A video that mocks God’s word
The Farting Preacher[/quote]
So…do you [i]really[/i] think someone is going to try and cut your head off now? 
Don’t worry Nama, as Voltaire once said: “I may not agree with what you
say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
A good article on this subject in The Times:
[quote=“Comrade Stalin”][quote=“Namahottie”]Just so we can be fair, from a christian to my friends. A video that mocks God’s word
The Farting Preacher[/quote]
So…do you [i]really[/i] think someone is going to try and cut your head off now?
l[/quote]
No but I may be excommunicated(sp?) now, well at least by my dad I would be 
if a newspaper in denmark (or anywhere else) wants to publish a cartoon (or anything else) that might be deemed offensive, it should base it on the prevailing moral standards there. it doesn’t properly effect anyone else, they should mind their own business. if you take something that seriously, do it in your corner of the world and don’t expect the rest of the world to adapt itself to your standards. as for expecting a government of an entire nation to apologize for one newspaper, that’s just ridiculous. deserves only contempt.
I think it should be fine to mock any superstition…
Let’s turn the tables for a second:
- What if any Christian group posted videos of people chanting “Praise the Lord” while blowing people up?
- What if any major elected politician in the West group started calling for the destruction of the Arab race? Or had the destruction of the Arab race as one of thier major policy platforms?
- How about the cartoons that one can read in any given Islamic newspaper at any given time regarding Christianity or Judaism? Should the West riot and burn
- Any good (Rushdai wasn’t that good) Islamic authors we can issue a death fatwa for?
The list could go on…
The difference is that Islam is an absolutist, xenophobic, violent and repressive religion that cannot accept/recognize the existance of any other religion. Even Ghandi couldn’t deal with them.
Until they day comes that Islam begins to actually deal with these issues is the day the Islam and the Middle East actually begins to move out of the dark ages.
If we had video back in the time of the crusades we could have decent footage of cutting people up while chanting “Praise the Lord”.
[quote=“Elegua”]
Until they day comes that Islam begins to actually deal with these issues is the day the Islam and the Middle East actually begins to move out of the dark ages.[/quote]
Exactly (the paragraph above is a little more strongly though, but not really wrong). As I wrote somewhere before, the Christian phase of enlightenment and reform is missing in Islam.
Thus acceptance of violence to enforce religious positions is much more accepted in Islam than in Christianity today.
Time for some hair splitting. A couple of random philosophical notes on freedom of speech:
(1) ‘My freedom to swing my arm ends where my neigbor’s nose begins.’ John Stuart Mill I think (???). He drew the line at hate speech and calls to violence. Other than that, everything was fair game. Organized religion got more than a small serve of his (and his wife’s) critical analysis. Not sure what he would have thought of lampooning, though the British cartoons of his day, in publications such as ‘Punch,’ pulled no punches…
(2) Calls to violence are pretty easy to identify, but what is hate speech? It’s a tricky area. I’m irrational in my dislike for Oz PM John Howard, and reserve the right to tip verbal shite on him when ever I get the chance. The new anti-terror laws in Oz might make this a subversive act, however (ditto for the Patriot Act in the US?). If it’s not easy to identify AND reasonable debate can get caught-up in it, then hands off is the best strategy in an open society.
(3) I agree with the tenor of the posts above made by HG, TC and Comrade Stalin, but worry the gents concerned have an absolute view of FoS. The original enlightenment thinkers patently did not sure such a view. For them, reason and the world of facts was a bottom line that should not be transgressed. You didn’t have, for example, a right to lie, even if there was a greater good to protect (national security, Clinton’s marriage).
(4) FoS doesn’t make a lot of sense to me if it’s not backed-up by a body of corresponding duties. If I publish a news article based on lies, then I should be liable under slander laws. How does lampooning fit into this? Messy area. I suspect the original liberal thinkers saw it as a ‘lower order’ matter - something reaonable men would brush off without much fuss.
Overall, I think the Danish cartoonists should have the right to say (or draw) whatever they like, but insofar as they are taking the piss, the traditional thinking behind FoS probably does not afford the kind of philosophical justification or protection that should be given to, say, Salman Rushdi (sp?). If the cartoons smell like a bunch of lies, incite violence, or are not attached to some kind of legal redress, they may be out of line.
GT.
[quote]If we had video back in the time of the crusades we could have decent footage of cutting people up while chanting “Praise the Lord”.
[/quote]
True, to some extent - since it went both ways. The Moors (Moops) didn’t exactly peacefully move into southern Spain. Back then we were the underdogd getting our buts kicked by a more advanced civilization.
But we’ve seem to have moved a bit foreward since then haven’t we…
[quote=“Elegua”] Even Ghandi couldn’t deal with them.
[/quote]
:roflmao: :roflmao: Now that shows we have a problem…
In America, Let’s apply some of you all’s logic to other situations which don’t involve Islam.
[quote=“Huang Guang Chen”]
These depictions were published in Europe, not Saudi Arabia.[/quote]
In the US, corporal punishment is still being practiced on kids. I don’t believe in beating children, but since other Americans do, by your reasoning, that means they have every right to beat mine.
So seeing as posting images that would offend others would call for at the minimum a warning and at worst a banning, that means forumosa is an immature society?
Or rather, seeing how admin supports the right to call for material is known to be offensive, I’m sure they will thoroughly enjoy my proposed thread - “How many chinks have you shagged?” I plan on also adding some jokes about blacks. I’ve got some really good offensive ones. And wait till you see some of the stuff I’ve dug up about white men in Asia…
Seeing as it’s only offensive about a minority of people who don’t even live here natively, that means those people can kiss my ass.
I wouldn’t do that, though, because unlike some of you, I do show respect for other cultures and people no matter what they have done to mine.
Now, getting that out of my system…
What honestly makes you think deriding someone’s beliefs makes you superior? That doing something you know would anger them makes them stupid for getting angry?
I am absolutely disgusted by the hypocritical Christians on this website who continue to mock other’s religions but will threaten to throw people out of their house for making jokes about Jesus. You know who you are.
I do see where you all are coming from on this… Yes, there is a group of people out there who are preying on the weak-minded to fall into step of their antiquated, racist, misogynistic beliefs. They blatantly refuse to recognize the cultures and beliefs of those around them. They go and bomb innocent people for not believing in doing things the way they do. They execute people daily after putting them through their strongly biased courts chiefly ruled by people who also share their beliefs. They force people to swear oaths to their god, sometimes on a daily basis and fight anyone who attempts to deviate from this practice…
It’s a shame they’re Americans.
Wow, it is easy to make an entire inherently evil if you put enough spin on it.
How many of those complaining about Muslims being offended by this whole thing actually know a significant number of Muslims personally? Know anything about Islam outside of what is on websites run by people who aren’t greasing their own viewpoints in as interpretation and commentary? I know, silly logic…except it’s the same one we use to dispel stereotypes of blacks, homosexuals, the Taiwanese…
Anyways, I doubt any of you do. I’d almost put money on it, but I’d feel bad for profitting on your collected ignorance.
The only people right in this whole thing are those who are seeking to keep everyone’s best interests in mind and resolve this peacefully. As they say, “If you’re not a part of the solution, then you’re a part of the problem.” I can’t see any situation where that would be more true than this one - for both sides.
[quote=“ImaniOU”]In America, Let’s apply some of you all’s logic to other situations which don’t involve Islam.
[quote=“Huang Guang Chen”]
These depictions were published in Europe, not Saudi Arabia.[/quote]
Lousy comparison.
So seeing as posting images that would offend others would call for at the minimum a warning and at worst a banning, that means forumosa is an immature society?[/quote]
Yes.
Cool! I have some good ones too.
Promises, promises. :lovestruck:
That’s very Christian of you. Muslims tend to do otherwise.
Not me.
[quote=“ImaniOU”]I do see where you all are coming from on this… Yes, there is a group of people out there who are preying on the weak-minded to fall into step of their antiquated, racist, misogynistic beliefs. They blatantly refuse to recognize the cultures and beliefs of those around them. They go and bomb innocent people for not believing in doing things the way they do. They execute people daily after putting them through their strongly biased courts chiefly ruled by people who also share their beliefs. They force people to swear oaths to their god, sometimes on a daily basis and fight anyone who attempts to deviate from this practice…
It’s a shame they’re Americans.[/quote]
You must live on a different planet. This is Planet Earth. I suggest you move to Saudi Arabia…you’ll get along there just fine.
I think a central point here is that the cartoons did not just depict Mohammed, they deliberately set out to mock the Prophet and therefore the religion. The argument really boils down to the Europeans saying, ‘we defend our right to deliberately offend you,’ and I think this is a serious skewing of the freedom of speech. Especially when blood will be shed, once again, over a point of law. I understand why people still wish to defend this right to say whatever, and to mock whomever, but essentially the cartoons were just plain bad judgement and an apology should have been made to the Muslim people’s of the world.
One surprising thing is that people who are recognized Christians on this site have argued for their right to blaspheme against God. These cartoons are fundamentally an attack upon God and upon religion, so I am confused as to how a Christian would find the cartoons anything other than offensive?
[quote=“TomHill”]
One surprising thing is that people who are recognized Christians on this site have argued for their right to blaspheme against God. These cartoons are fundamentally an attack upon God and upon religion, so I am confused as to how a Christian would find the cartoons anything other than offensive?[/quote]
Allah is not God. I think God can take care of himself.