Most likely country to be nuked by Al Qaeda
- Thread starter Instigator
- Start date
- Status
Instigator
Banned
Fight for Freeform said:
Jyllands Posten is not an international paper either.
They didn't "go around freely insulting things". It was a private party. We can certainly agree it wasn't a smart thing to do but at the same time what kind of world do we live in if we can't even have a little fun (however immature) at a private gathering?kevm3 said:
Iran recently held a contest where people were invited to make fun of the Holocaust? Did the West go berserk over this? Of course not. Civilized people deal with humiliation in a civilized manner.
MetalAlien
Banned
Fight for Freeform said:
It's shown all over the world, more people see it than the paper in question I'm sure.
Instigator said:
Actually yes your right, at that time it wasn't, it was only earlier this year when they were trying to get bigger.
But I look at the site now and it doesn't look like they've changed their status at all. According to their subscription stats they are still a domestic paper, my bad!
Everyone. Papers are supposed to have standards for journalism, accuracy, and such.
Sure, you can have editorials and satire, but if that is based on complete falsehood and leads to ignorant speech, there is no reason to have it.
And so according to these guidelines, they shouldn't have been printed.
Heck, not too long earlier they had some sense when they rejected some cartoons about Jesus because they thought that it would result in an "outcry".
Instigator
Banned
They probably figure most Muslims don't speak Danish and would most certainly not want to anyway.
Chairman Yang
if he talks about books, you better damn well listen
I'm mixed on this issue. While, in theory, what these Danes did was okay (really, no different than if they dressed up as caricatures of Soviets and made fun of Communism), the probable fact is that they're just a bunch of right-wing, bigoted zealots who care more about hating Muslims than actually critiquing Islam as an ideology.
I wish I had a solution to strife between the Muslim world and everybody else. I mean, I have a bunch of ideas that I think would work, but there's no way they'd actually be carried out. The political will just isn't there.
I wish I had a solution to strife between the Muslim world and everybody else. I mean, I have a bunch of ideas that I think would work, but there's no way they'd actually be carried out. The political will just isn't there.
MetalAlien
Banned
My prediction is that not one person will change thier mind in this thread.
Those who believe we (even major publications) have to freedom to make fun of whatever ever we want without the fear of being killed.... loss of subscriptions yes, but killed no....
Those who believe an idea can be so important that even printing something bad about it justifies any reaction the offended people see fit.
Those who believe we (even major publications) have to freedom to make fun of whatever ever we want without the fear of being killed.... loss of subscriptions yes, but killed no....
Those who believe an idea can be so important that even printing something bad about it justifies any reaction the offended people see fit.
LizardKing
Member
http://www.politicalcortex.com/keyword/Jesus%20Bush
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1582426/posts
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49925
maybe you should do a basic search before you start talking.
cybamerc said:
By freely, I meant insulting things without any regard for the reactions it may have on others. It may have been done in private, but it was eventually broadcasted on STATE television. And that contest was held in Iran. Try holding that contest in America and see how long it will last. The people may not be killed, but see how long they hold political power or any prominent career position. I assure you, this won't merely be laughed off and forgotten.
And civilized people also know not to go about insulting things people hold sacred.
Kevm3 said:
Making fun of someone who was born of a certain skin color and has no way of changing and that makes no difference whatsoever is not the same as people who freely choose to follow a certain ideology. Surely you can see the difference.
It doesnt matter how seriously they take themselves the two are not comparable.
Instigator
Banned
malek4980 said:
Must have been a clearance sale.
MetalAlien
Banned
Prine said:
fixed
LizardKing
Member
i can't believe how many people in here do not give a shit about sacrificing their rights. freedom of speech limited to what a majority of the people agree with is not freedom of speech. and all that.
MetalAlien
Banned
Prine said:
Hey that's secret code for - eejiat ( IDIOT ) - I am going to bomb you! Bomb with you water balloons! That will teach you, because you will be wet and you will know why you are wet!
Millions of people hold President Bush as a sacred figure. Many hardcore religious Christians think he speaks directly to Jesus. I think all people caught mocking and ridiculing him should not be surprised if their family is killed and their house gets burned down. I'm not saying I agree with that response but I can't say I blame them. Free speech is great but you should expect violence if you mock a leader held so highly by so many.
Nothing wrong with that statement is there?
I feel like I'm in the twilight zone reading some of these replies today. Abslolutely amazing.
Nothing wrong with that statement is there?
I feel like I'm in the twilight zone reading some of these replies today. Abslolutely amazing.
MetalAlien said:
That's completely wrong.
You have to recognize that there were multiple reactions:
After they printed the cartoons, Muslim leaders and organizations called for an international letter writing campaign to the paper. -Good Reaction
The paper, for months, ignored these letters and acted as if they didn't exist.
The reaction to that, was to speak to the Danish government, and the government was unwilling to meet. Hey, what's wrong with this reaction?
And then some Danish Muslims sought legal action, which was unfairly turned down. Again, nothing wrong with this reaction.
And then Muslim Danish leaders write up a whole document on this event and others and tour the Middle East with it. And again, nothing wrong with this reaction.
Finally the Jyllands-Posten, months later, finally addresses the issue because now it involves more than just Danish Muslims. And so at this point we must high five those Danish Muslim leaders. *high five*
And there were some great reactions from the Middle East. One of which, was not that great, and the focused to be far more effective. At first one Imam said that Muslims should boycott Danish products, and later a grassroots effort to boycott the paper's advertisers to hurt the paper rather than innocent Danish businesses.
And then you saw some violent reactions, mostly from poor, uneducated areas. Which is of course against the teachings of Islam, and after this reaction Muslim leaders spoke out against such a reaction stating the Muhammed himself never reacted violently to the insults and even physical beatings he recieved.
MAlien, you are claiming that people are justifying a backwards reaction, that is not the case.
Glad Freeform is here to add to the debate.
I think I should start a fundamentalist christian group. I think that I could become a type of demi-god if I just told them that it was their right to firebomb comedy central. Maybe since we're in the deep minority of Christians, and we're reacting after Comedy Central clearly ignored countless letter-writing campaigns requesting they get Trey and Matt to stop mocking Jesus, I could even get Freeform to defend me on GAF.
After all, the moral of the story is that rioting, murder, violence and crime is perfectly acceptable as long as it's following the rational reactions of the majority.
Freedom of speech is overrated.
Clearly we should stop teaching evolution, too. It obviously offends a small part of Christianity, and thus it is the responsibility of the educators to stop doing things that will make those in the small minority angry. Freedom be damned.
I think I should start a fundamentalist christian group. I think that I could become a type of demi-god if I just told them that it was their right to firebomb comedy central. Maybe since we're in the deep minority of Christians, and we're reacting after Comedy Central clearly ignored countless letter-writing campaigns requesting they get Trey and Matt to stop mocking Jesus, I could even get Freeform to defend me on GAF.
After all, the moral of the story is that rioting, murder, violence and crime is perfectly acceptable as long as it's following the rational reactions of the majority.
Freedom of speech is overrated.
Clearly we should stop teaching evolution, too. It obviously offends a small part of Christianity, and thus it is the responsibility of the educators to stop doing things that will make those in the small minority angry. Freedom be damned.
MetalAlien
Banned
Fight for Freeform said:
All of it was wrong, any action besides just not supporting the newspaper is too much. You don't like what they are saying... don't read it... don't support it... THAT'S IT! You reaction ends there.... but does it ever? It never seems to be enough, and it always ends with someone dying... they speak out against it... with little little being done beyond that.
I think both parties are at fault, really. People who just say, "Well, Muslims should learn to accept belittlement because it's a part of the Western World" just show a disgusting level of ethnocentrism. It's obvious that this stuff offends Muslims, and yet the Danes especially continue provoking when they know exactly what's going to happen.
Of course, the Muslims shouldn't be responding so extremely either, but it's more than the violent radicals who're being offended. Plus, if we're supposed to be trying to win these people's hearts and minds, to convince them that we're trying to help (har), this certainly isn't the way to go about it.
Of course, the Muslims shouldn't be responding so extremely either, but it's more than the violent radicals who're being offended. Plus, if we're supposed to be trying to win these people's hearts and minds, to convince them that we're trying to help (har), this certainly isn't the way to go about it.
whytemyke said:
The fact that you would equate the teaching of evolution, with the teaching of ignorace and hate...just confirms that you just don't know what you are talking about.
Cooter said:
Retarded post of the day. The point is to engage in dialogue and to react rationally...
MetalAlien said:
So I suppose the Jews living in Nazi Germany should have just "not read" those papers blaming them for controlling the World's money supply...Hmm?
LizardKing: I think there is only one of those three that one could claim to be on the same level as this situation, as there have been hundreds of more cases of cartoons insulting Muhammed (and Muslims) that's been done in small independant papers and magazines. But then again, we can't compare the reaction as we can't even compare the exposure. Also, they were all in response to this whole incident...I wanted a cartoon from a major paper during the whole Catholic Church molestation scandal. But thanks for sharing though!
Fight for Freeform said:
Missing the entire point post of the day. You are suggesting not printing something because it offends people. If that were the standard not much would get printed period. The fact that a certain religion is more sensitive than others doesnt give them special privlages others dont have. It's a free speech and tolerance issue.
If a paper in Iran or Egypt printed the most vile and disgusting portrayal of Jesus Christians would brush it off and ignore it. Why cant Muslims do the same? That is the question.
I still can't figure out why people get offended by stuff like this. It's like when somebody says your mom is a whore and people get angry. Why? I know my mom and they certainly don't, so why should I ever give 2 shits about what they think?
As for muslims(and people in general) lighten up - life will be a lot more fun.
As for muslims(and people in general) lighten up - life will be a lot more fun.
Cooter said:
Since we're going to use extreme examples to 'drive a point home' and to nullify a point made in a totally different context, let's do the same thing to that mantra that 'free speech should be held above all.' Since free speech is important above all, it's absolutely fine to bash homosexuals, slander the reputation of others, draw racist cartoons, type lewd things to minors as long as it stays textual, right? It doesn't matter how one particular party may feel because free speech must be preserved above all!
The situation between what you posted in your example doesn't parallel what is happening in this instance. President Bush's actions are having a direct effect on the inhabitants of this nation. There is a difference between reasonably critiquing someone who is in a leadership position and has effect on you and outrightly slandering someone without provocation.With free speech, can we go and just maliciously attack others?
There's a difference between offering a reasonable political critique against Muslim Holy figures and outrightly drawing up blasphemous things. There is a difference between publishing "President Bush is an idiot due to his policies" and publishing "President Bush is a flaming homosexual, pedophile and necrophile" for no other reason to provoke him to anger. Is the latter allowed under 'free speech' in this country?
Also, nobody is saying that its perfectly acceptable for the Muslims to engage in these acts of violence. What people are saying is that the reactions these cartoon makers may get is understandable and will have no sympathy for the cartoon makers. They KNOW what kind of reaction it will draw out of this particular crowd, and yet they go on to enrage them.
Sort of how someone walks up to an excon and starts insulting him for no apparent reason and gets punched in the face. We're not saying that the excon is exonerated from all blame for punching the guy in the face. We're saying that we have no sympathy for the guy who walks up and started insulting the excon because he knew what he was going to get before he engaged in the act.
MetalAlien
Banned
Fight for Freeform said:
Well this is where we both agree. The next step for the Danes are a series of Muslim death camps.
I can't believe you went there.../debate
Dr.Guru of Peru
played the long game
Cooter said:
So you're saying that certain skin colours should be made fun of, if it weren't for the fact that people had no choice in the matter? Gotcha.
Chairman Yang
if he talks about books, you better damn well listen
Fight for Freeform said:
Those Muslim leaders should learn the history of Muhammed, then, because they're quite incorrect on the issue. Muhammad not only reacted violently, he killed people for satirizing him, Asma bint Marwan being an obvious example.
Sadly, Muslims who fly off the handle when exposed to criticism or satire are acting fully in line with the founder of Islam.
Chairman Yang
if he talks about books, you better damn well listen
MetalAlien said:
Get used to this sort of thing from Fight For Freeform. Unlike most other GAF Muslims, he's not particularly interested in serious debate. His posts are riddled with inaccuracies, poor research, irrelevant information meant to get an emotional reaction, and occassionally even thinly-veiled ad-hominem attacks. And he loves making ridiculous claims without backing them up.
Chairman Yang said:
That is from Ibn Ishaq's Seerah, which isn't considered to be legitimate by Muslim scholars. So if Muslims don't consider it legitimate, it would clearly be wrong for them to follow it.
So if any Muslim were to follow that, they would be doubly misguided. Did I spell doubly right? Is it even a proper word?
As far as bashing homosexuals and drawing racist cartoons, it is allowed but in bad taste. If it happened there would be a huge out cry and the paper would probably go out of business. There might be some rioting in the black community but again race and religion are two different things. One cannot help being black so to make fun is cruel and disgusting. The other two, slandering others and typing lewd things to minors is in a different category. If someone slanders a person and it is untrue that person can sue for damages and if it turns out to not be correct he/she can win. Typing lewd messages to minors is illegal and therefore does not fall under free speech. You should know that.
Like making a movie with a mock assassination? Was that provoked? C4Lukins was right; I should have used the Pope as an example.
Yes, it is actually. If a story written as a factual piece claims these things it would be slander but if a comedian says those things there is no crime against it.
Right!?!? You're just saying you understand the reactions. Whatever dude.
- Status