Muhammad Cartoon Controversy (1 Viewer)

[Generator]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

Loneshadow, please look into the notions of freedom of speech and political satire. As for the rest... Moderate your tone from this point on, please - as I said yesterday, the odd swear word is fine, but I'm not going to stand by and let members throw around swear words that are used for the sole purpose of causing offense and/or harm.

 

[withoutaface]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

You ignorant waste of DNA, I'd like to see anyone making a public joke about gay people or Jews. In fact I think John Laws had made some comments about gay people. I think he's in court now. When not talking in the interest of a group of people, whom not many support, you go to court in this country. But when it comes to values of one fifth of world's population, it's OK.

Papers in the Middle East rubbish Jews all the time. Also Jews and homosexuals can't change the fact that they are Jewish/homosexual, you chose your belief in Islam and thus I have the right to criticise that choice.

 

[LoneShadow]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

Papers in the Middle East rubbish Jews all the time. Also Jews and homosexuals can't change the fact that they are Jewish/homosexual, you chose your belief in Islam and thus I have the right to criticise that choice.

There's a different between political flaming and insulting beliefs and values.

Homosexuality and Jodaism is as much as a choice as is Islam. If you want to criticise, go ahead as long as you back it up with rational evidence and reasons. But swearing is not criticising. It's jsut simply ignorance and stupidity.

It's easy to sit in your room and type up any rubbish you want. But if you have a single grain of brain and any moral values, you'll think before you write. Swearing at the religion of Islam without slightest knowledge of its teachings is not the way to go for self-aclaimed intelligent people.

Anyone is free to choose their religion, and believe in anything they want as long as it's not walking over values and rights of others. Muslims are free to believe in Islam as much is Christians to believe in Chritianity, or Jews or any other religion. No religion tells people to commit acts of terrorism or harm innocent people for no reason. If some imoral people like those of folowers of bin Laden commit crimes against humanity in the name of Islam, it does not give anyone the right to criticise Islam or any of its followers. Islam does not encourage bombing of innocent people. What bin Laden has done has nothing to do with Islam. No muslim country or major scholars of Islam has accepted their actions. Not only that but they have condemned it as well.


You will not find a religion where everyone follows the teaching of that particular religion. Many followers are just in name. Nothing more. In Christianity as far as I know, sex before mariage is not allowed. What percentage of Christians follow that? Osama bin Laden an example of those none-believer, in Islam.

It's a good idea to learn and understand something before starting to criticise it. If something has been done in the name of religion; first research whether that religion allows or preaches the actions taken in its name or not.

 

[withoutaface]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

There's a different between political flaming and insulting beliefs and values.

People insult my beliefs and values all the time, but don't cop shit for it.

Homosexuality and Jodaism is as much as a choice as is Islam. If you want to criticise, go ahead as long as you back it up with rational evidence and reasons. But swearing is not criticising. It's jsut simply ignorance and stupidity.

I didn't say Judaism, I said being Jewish. The latter is a race. And the beauty of a liberal democratic system is that people are allowed to say whatever they want, no matter how ignorant or stupid it may be.

It's easy to sit in your room and type up any rubbish you want. But if you have a single grain of brain and any moral values, you'll think before you write. Swearing at the religion of Islam without slightest knowledge of its teachings is not the way to go for self-aclaimed intelligent people.

I understand that its teachings are overtly restrictive, and I've seen enough of the results of its teachings (ie sharia law) to know that it is not desirable that they be enforced upon society in general.

Anyone is free to choose their religion, and believe in anything they want as long as it's not walking over values and rights of others. Muslims are free to believe in Islam as much is Christians to believe in Chritianity, or Jews or any other religion.

And I'm free to criticise you for that belief.

No religion tells people to commit acts of terrorism or harm innocent people for no reason. If some imoral people like those of folowers of bin Laden commit crimes against humanity in the name of Islam, it does not give anyone the right to criticise Islam or any of its followers. Islam does not encourage bombing of innocent people. What bin Laden has done has nothing to do with Islam. No muslim country or major scholars of Islam has accepted their actions. Not only that but they have condemned it as well.You will not find a religion where everyone follows the teaching of that particular religion. Many followers are just in name. Nothing more. In Christianity as far as I know, sex before mariage is not allowed. What percentage of Christians follow that? Osama bin Laden an example of those none-believer, in Islam.
It's a good idea to learn and understand something before starting to criticise it. If something has been done in the name of religion; first research whether that religion allows or preaches the actions taken in its name or not.

Relevance?

 

[ur_inner_child]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

Loneshadow, I'm not willing to get involved right now, but saying things like "if you have a single grain of brain and any moral values" or "you ignorant piece of shit" merely makes you sound unbelievable.

Try to refrain from that, you could make your argument sound a whole lot better.

 

[Tudders]

What I don't understand is that they protest when thier prophet is abused, but they share the same God as the Christians, (ie: the God of Abraham) but they don't make a fuss when he/she is abused

 

[SashatheMan]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

U can go shove that freedom of speech up ur fkn arse.
.

that would involve gettign the fuck out of civilized countries and living in fear in some shitty middle east country.

it seems your the only one who wants that , so why not make the first move

 

[davin]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

What bin Laden has done has nothing to do with Islam. No muslim country or major scholars of Islam has accepted their actions. Not only that but they have condemned it as well.

and the protesters in...Sudan i believe...that were chanting for bin laden to attack denmark? bin Laden, if no other reason, is tied to islam simply because he justifies himself with it

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

Loneshadow, please look into the notions of freedom of speech and political satire. As for the rest... Moderate your tone from this point on, please - as I said yesterday, the odd swear word is fine, but I'm not going to stand by and let members throw around swear words that are used for the sole purpose of causing offense and/or harm.

It was only one explosion in the entire thread, which I think is pretty good given some of the replies

 

[derukureetsu]

I would easily say, like the rest of the people in this topic that Muslims should all just F*** themselves.

However, if you think about it, those who believed in Christianity was like this a few hundred years ago as well during the Crusades and what-not. Muslims now are no different from what Christians were like before.
Only difference is that Muslims don't have slaves whilst Christians did.

If you were to go against God and Christianity, against the King during that time in Western history, you'd be whipped to death amongst other horrors.

I believe the Muslims reaction to the depiction of Mohammad is no different from what Christians were like back a few centuries ago. If you were to draw and post to millions of people a cartoon of Jesus or God with a timebomb on their heads, I'm sure the Christian community would have been in uproar.

But now Westerners don't appreciate or believe in their religion as much as Muslims these days do, and that's why we don't accept these recent riots/etc.

If you talk about 'Freedom of speech' and how Muslims should accept it, then I'd like to see the cartoons that the Muslims produce and whether it would have any effect on avid Christian believers/etc.

And for the common man, an easy example would be if somebody were to say something bad about your mother/boyfriend/girlfriend/etc. I'm sure you wouldn't just smile and think "Freedom of speech. I accept what he/she just said."
Or, would you punch them or punish them in one way or the other for saying such things?

The Muslims are just doing that on a larger scale. And it is just that period of time in which Muslims are closely attachd to their religion; far more than other religions in the Western world are.

 

[withoutaface]

The flaw in your argument is that hardly any of the people in this thread are Christian.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

And if you want the thoughts of someone who is, I'd tell you that it's absurd comparing the values and norms of the Medieval world to today.

People seem to throw around "The Crusades" a lot without knowing much about the period. Let's see... Rise of Seljuk Turks, Battle of Manzikert, ambitions of Pope Urban II, all in a world where declaring war on someone was a day-to-day thing VS Cartoons in the year 2006, where we have "diplomacy".

It's already been covered several times in the 100 pages how often and commonplace it is to depict Jesus or any other various Biblical icons with significance to Christians and/or Jews in any way one feels to. If you, umm, draw cartoons on my right cheek, I'll turn the other.

The reason we don't accept the riots isn't because we don't believe as strongly in religion; even if we did they would still be condemned because they are quite simply wrong. Are you suggesting that if the West was devoutly religious we would condone violence?

As for the girlfiend analogy, if you punch someone for insulting her you'll [theoretically] be arrested for assault and such, which is why sensible people don't throw punches (or molotovs) every time they are insulted, and those that do are [theoretically] delt with by the law.

So once again, are you trying to say that the Muslim rioting is justified because they are highly religious? If so, does the same apply to any other crime someone might want to commit because of their religion? Is a suicide bomber justified because he honestly believes America is the Great Satan?

 

[davin]

And for the common man, an easy example would be if somebody were to say something bad about your mother/boyfriend/girlfriend/etc. I'm sure you wouldn't just smile and think "Freedom of speech. I accept what he/she just said."
Or, would you punch them or punish them in one way or the other for saying such things?

i accept freedom of speech....when people have said negative things i felt were wrong about people i care about (friends/family/etc) i'll argue the point and defend them, definitly. but i've never said they should be prohibited from saying what they said, and certainly would never be violent.

 

[ur_inner_child]

davin has a point.

As insulting as the cartoon might be, if the reaction didnt occur, I'm sure some educated individual would've wrote to the newspapers saying in an educated manner that it was offensive, and people reading would realise it, and then the newspapers would apologise.

Happens all the time.

Rioting is merely shifting the media's attention from the cartoon to the behaviour.

 

[LoneShadow]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

And I'm free to criticise you for that belief.

Do it rationally. Not filled with ignorance.

Relevance?

Source of hatred of likes of you towards Islam. While you know absolutely nothing about Islam or its teachings.

 

[ur_inner_child]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

Do it rationally. Not filled with ignorance.




Source of hatred of likes of you towards Islam. While you know absolutely nothing about Islam or its teachings.

Please. I'm not sure whether you're suited for this thread if you are only going to stand there and say "no you don't understand" and thats it.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

Do it rationally. Not filled with ignorance.

What the hell? This is just name-calling, this doesn't further the argument at all. I can say the same thing to you, it has no meaning... we have to use logic to argue not just rhetoric crap like this.

 

[withoutaface]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

Do it rationally. Not filled with ignorance.

So you suggest we have a rationality police? If that was so then the unproven claims of the Bible/Qu'ran etc would cause them to stop being published.

Source of hatred of likes of you towards Islam. While you know absolutely nothing about Islam or its teachings.

Again, I only need to look at the result that its teachings have had in the middle east to know that I don't want sharia law rammed down my throat.

 

[LoneShadow]

davin has a point.

As insulting as the cartoon might be, if the reaction didnt occur, I'm sure some educated individual would've wrote to the newspapers saying in an educated manner that it was offensive, and people reading would realise it, and then the newspapers would apologise.

Happens all the time.

Rioting is merely shifting the media's attention from the cartoon to the behaviour.

and I can assure you not every single Muslim went rioting. Not even a considerable fraction of them.


....and yeah it was not proper to swear.

 

[LoneShadow]

What I don't understand is that they protest when thier prophet is abused, but they share the same God as the Christians, (ie: the God of Abraham) but they don't make a fuss when he/she is abused

what are you talking about?