Danish Muhammad cartoon

Laivasse said:
Many of your points highlight the need for sensitivity, but as I said somewhere else, sensitivity is not a requisite. It is something you can request, but total freedom should remain to refuse it. Perhaps that would be in very bad taste in such situations where you were, eg. offending the families of terror victims, but in the case of a religion, where people choose some arbitrary holy symbol and defend it to the death, I think it's totally fair game.
Click to expand...

but they're not just insulting the religion but rather the culture

Laivasse said:
Muslims do not and should not have a monopoly on strength of feeling.
Click to expand...

I agree, However I also think that with all negative attention they've gained since 9/11 they should have been a bit more sensitive to negative portrayals based on cultural stereotypes



Laivasse said:
They do indeed. They should get angry at the cartoon, though, and not the fact that people are allowed to print it.
Click to expand...

I agree and if you listen to most mainstream muslims that's exactly what they're angry at ..it's the extremists who take it way too far, it's also the extremists who are most vocal



Laivasse said:
By publishing a satire which represents an opinion - not necessarily an isolated one, nor an overtly hateful one. I honestly don't see all that wrong with it. I probably get more offended by the subtle brainwashing that goes in newspapers like the Sun and Daily Mail than some muslims are getting offended by this Islamic thing, but I don't expect my personal values to be extended to society as a whole.
Click to expand...

I do too (the sun, canadian version) ...but we cant judge people by our morals or pov ..the "unwashed masses" are called that for a reason



Laivasse said:
If you're trying to say that the Western press think Islam is a softer target than taking on the government, then you're possibly right, but that's even more reason to encourage them to take on issues where they're going to face opposition, with a view to getting them to go on and tackle the government over sensitive issues. 'soft target' is a bad way to describe Islam, too - most people are terrified of criticising it, just because of the strength of potential backlash. I find that galling. Even worse are the people who claim their fear of speaking out is a matter of 'cultural sensitivity' (not referring to you). By doing this sort of thing, people are perpetuating this image of Islam as a religion where you offend=you die. It's far better to get moderate muslims to speak up for Islam instead, and challenging Islam is a way of doing this.
Click to expand...

I've heard this sentiment echoed a number of times by canadian muslims in the last few days but they feel utterly helpless because mainstream media doesnt want to depict them that way ...they're either depicted as terrorists or overly religious. It's a cultural stereotype (like any other) that they cant seem to overcome ...it doesnt help that mainstream media paint them as terrorists on almost a daily basis ..but they have a war to fight so it's in their best interests to paint them that way



Laivasse said:
His image is strictly forbidden...to Muslims. Denmark is not a society that operates under muslim laws and muslims should not expect it to.
Click to expand...

but I'm not asking it to ...it's like this: if you were to walk into a synagog would you not don a kipa? even though you may not be jewish? Or kneel with everyone else during a catholic marriage ceremony even though you may think it's absolutely rediculous? it's not always about protecting someone's rights but rather respecting them

Laivasse said:
There is also a fine line between pertinent and inflammatory. While it might be unreasonable to say that Islam is a 'religion of terrorism', it is wholly accurate to say that Islam is often used as a terrorist recruitment tool on impressionable young muslim men. If you choose a satirical cartoon as your medium, both messages can end up looking very much like eachother.
Click to expand...

yes but the same can be said about most religions ...White Supremacists are often very religious and use their religionto suit their needs. I find that the people who strap themselves full of explosives are the faithful ..the ones who give the order arent ..because if they were they'd be the ones strapping on the explosives

Laivasse said:
Even so, that's not a reason to say they shouldn't be published, or that you should automatically assume the worst possible interpretation. I do also think that many muslims are eager to be offended by read it in the most offensive way they can.
Click to expand...

I think in some cases you're correct ..however do you really blame them? they're constantly vilified in western press



Laivasse said:
It means that the government is naturally connected to anything that appears in the press.
Click to expand...


up to a point, there's both liberal and conservative media in iran, they're not all controlled by the government but rather by a quasi-religious organization that publishes guidelines they must adhere to ..kinda like the CRTC in canada only religious based
 
but they're not just insulting the religion but rather the culture
Click to expand...

Hmm, debatable. Very hard to infer something so precise from a satirical cartoon. This very ambiguity of message/potential to offend is offset by the fact that it is, after all, a humourous cartoon and not meant to be taken all that seriously.

I agree, However I also think that with all negative attention they've gained since 9/11 they should have been a bit more sensitive to negative portrayals based on cultural stereotypes
Click to expand...

Possibly, but then I'm not sure Denmark is exactly rife with anti-muslim feeling (? could be wrong) and like I said before, sensitivity is not a right, and nor were the cartoons particularly hateful, to my mind. Besides, the paper has apologised, where it didn't have to. That's where I stand.

I agree and if you listen to most mainstream muslims that's exactly what they're angry at ..it's the extremists who take it way too far, it's also the extremists who are most vocal
Click to expand...

I have to say I doubt that most Muslims think the paper should have been allowed to publish the cartoons.

I've heard this sentiment echoed a number of times by canadian muslims in the last few days but they feel utterly helpless because mainstream media doesnt want to depict them that way ...they're either depicted as terrorists or overly religious. It's a cultural stereotype (like any other) that they cant seem to overcome ...it doesnt help that mainstream media paint them as terrorists on almost a daily basis ..but they have a war to fight so it's in their best interests to paint them that way
Click to expand...

I'd say that's definitely true for some news outlets. I was just saying that holding off on criticising a religion is not necessarily good for it either, looking at the larger picture and the long term. Non-muslims being scared of Islam is not good for the religion's image.

it's like this: if you were to walk into a synagog would you not don a kipa? even though you may not be jewish? Or kneel with everyone else during a catholic marriage ceremony even though you may think it's absolutely rediculous? it's not always about protecting someone's rights but rather respecting them
Click to expand...

Isn't it the other way around though? Shouldn't Muslims respect the fact that as a part of culture in Denmark, people are allowed to criticise their religion and that they HAVE to take it?

yes but the same can be said about most religions ...White Supremacists are often very religious and use their religionto suit their needs
Click to expand...

Indeed, but the difference is that Christianity is constantly lambasted for the bigotry and prejudice it can be seen to encourage (Catholicism vs. gays, etc). I don't like the fact that people are scared to bring Islam to account for similar problems in that religion.

up to a point, there's both liberal and conservative media in iran, they're not all controlled by the government but rather by a quasi-religious organization that publishes guidelines they must adhere to ..kinda like the CRTC in canada only religious based
Click to expand...

Point taken, but how are you going to portray the complexity of that situation in a simple headline? Which is what we were relating it to in the first place. I don't think it points to a significant bias or attempt to mislead.

I've glossed some of the more minor points, but that's because much of this boils down to minor differences in perspective, and I don't have the time to debate this endlessly. I don't enjoy debating it either, because it makes me angry and I know most of the world doesn't and wont ever see this the same way as I will. I just hate inconsistency, which is what I see everywhere with this.
 
Denmark is run by a party called Venstre (Left), a right wing party, but still well within the borders of "respectable" politics. They're like the American Democrats. However, in order to stay in power they need the support of another party, called Dansk Folkeparti (Danish People's Party), a populist, anti-immigration party. Many people fear that the reactions of the muslim world to these cartoons may increase the racism and intolerance in Denmark, leading to Dansk Folkeparti gaining more grounds. That's what I'm most afraid of right now.
 
Next thing you know we're going to have another 100-years crusade. Or whatever they call it.

This has gone beyond ridiculous. Muslim reaction over this has gone way overboard. And you know what, now? What's left of the Taliban is offering rewards in gold for anyone who kills any of the cartoonists who published those cartoons.

And the reason I don't think Islam is lamblasted for its bigotry and prejudice it encourages is because it is inherantly a much more violent religion than any other on this earth. Well, more violent than christianism, anyway.
 
Im sad that several people actually had to die over this.
Anger is one thing, but now it has cost human lives.
How much is a life worth? Apparantly a cartoon is worth more...
 
Ome_Vince said:
How much is a life worth? Apparantly a cartoon is worth more...
Click to expand...
No, some idiots have been led to believe a cartoon is worth more.
 
VictimOfScience said:
Wrong. Check these out. The 3rd one down is particularly hilarious! And there's 52+ pages of funniness! :LOL: Enjoy!
Click to expand...

Those were great, what little i read of them before my brother started going 'why are you lagging me? Stop lagging! STOP LAGGING! Kya_YA!'
 
double standard:



"The Danish newspaper which first published caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad that have angered Muslims worldwide had previously turned down cartoons of Jesus as too offensive, the artist said yesterday...

In an email to Reuters, Mr Zieler said his drawings were rejected by the newspaper's Sunday edition three years ago."


http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2006/02/09/1139379578740.html




freedom of speech my ass
 
His excuse was that he didn't want to be harsh and say "No, your cartoons are of too low quality" or something like that.

But anyway, Jesus jokes are pretty funny, especially on Family Guy.
 
kirovman said:
His excuse was that he didn't want to be harsh and say "No, your cartoons are of too low quality" or something like that.

But anyway, Jesus jokes are pretty funny, especially on Family Guy.
Click to expand...

ya


j12.jpg



:LOL:
 
CptStern said:
double standard:



"The Danish newspaper which first published caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad that have angered Muslims worldwide had previously turned down cartoons of Jesus as too offensive, the artist said yesterday...

In an email to Reuters, Mr Zieler said his drawings were rejected by the newspaper's Sunday edition three years ago."


http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2006/02/09/1139379578740.html




freedom of speech my ass
Click to expand...

There's no need to put freedom of speech anywhere near your arse. The newspaper had the right to publish those cartoons of Muhammad, but they also had the right not to publish the cartoons of Jesus. You might call it bigotry if you want to, but they don't ask you to like it.
 
yes but the obvious question here is why is it ok to publish material that will offend one group yet refuse to publish something else because it may offend another group? ..it's a double standard

btw I meant they cant use freedom of speech as a justification here because they self-censored the jesus images ..so for them to say that it's their right to publish the mohammed cartoon because of freedom of speech is a crock
 
CptStern said:
yes but the obvious question here is why is it ok to publish material that will offend one group yet refuse to publish something else because it may offend another group? ..it's a double standard

btw I meant they cant use freedom of speech as a justification here because they self-censored the jesus images ..so for them to say that it's their right to publish the mohammed cartoon because of freedom of speech is a crock
Click to expand...

I don't defend the newspaper. ****ing idiots, I would say.

But you must also look at it from a commercial point of view. Don't you think provoking cartoons of Muhammad would sell more than provoking cartoons of Jesus? Denmark has over the last few years taken a huge step to the right, and the newspaper knows this, and they want to take advantage of it.
 
The Monkey said:
I don't defend the newspaper. ****ing idiots, I would say.

But you must also look at it from a commercial point of view. Don't you think provoking cartoons of Muhammad would sell more than provoking cartoons of Jesus? Denmark has over the last few years taken a huge step to the right, and the newspaper knows this, and they want to take advantage of it.
Click to expand...

yes I agree ..in fact I was listening to a program last night on that very fact ..seems there's a very vocal anti-muslim movement in denmark ..one of the ruling parties (coalition government) is openly anti-muslim
 
CptStern said:
btw I meant they cant use freedom of speech as a justification here because they self-censored the jesus images ..so for them to say that it's their right to publish the mohammed cartoon because of freedom of speech is a crock
Click to expand...

Well, it's hypocritical of them but the fact of the matter is they're allowed to do it and still claim free speech as a defence.
 
yes I know, just pointing out that they're being hypocrites
 
I'm Muslim, and this doesn't bother me. It really is quite retarded reading about all the fricken' riots and shit that's happening in Pakistan and elsewhere. I've been to Pakistan, lived there for a year...

I don't know why this stuff pisses people off. "OH, THE DISBELIEVERS HAVE MADE A SATIRICAL CARTOON OF PROPHET MUHAMMAD. OH NOES." It's sooooo stupid. It's like... alright guys. It's a fricken cartoon. On paper. For god's sake. Maybe why I don't have so many Muslim friends?

I still agree with Voltaire on this one. Common sense is not so common. :hmph:
 
I was talking with a Muslim work colleague on this matter over the weekend and basically he was understandibly taking the stance that the Danish newspaper should not have published the images out of consideration for the Muslims of the world.

I agreed, but I also pointed out that Freedom of Speech enables people to say (or draw) pretty much anything they want.

Basically the discussion ended there because we just ended up going round in circles.

All in all I think it was wrong to publish the cartoons, but the backlash from them being published is utterly astonishing.

On the subject of Family Guy I wonder what would happen if they used Muhammad in a sketch (much in the same way they have done with Jesus in the past). I can imagine there would be an enormous outcry as there was with the sketches.
 
where are these cartoons anyhow? I've looked all over for them!! besides, if they get all PO'ed about some drawings, imagine what they'd be like if someone made a video around those cartoons!
 
craig said:
I was talking with a Muslim work colleague on this matter over the weekend and basically he was understandibly taking the stance that the Danish newspaper should not have published the images out of consideration for the Muslims of the world.

I agreed, but I also pointed out that Freedom of Speech enables people to say (or draw) pretty much anything they want.
Click to expand...

yes while I agree they have the right to publish what they want I have to point out that they didnt publish similiar cartoons featuring jesus because they were afraid of offending christians
 
I think the way Muslims acted about this was shocking. There just re inforcing the idea that the cartoon would of given people about Muslims.
 
less generalizations please ..you cant lump all muslims into the same catagory ..no canadian muslims set fire to any embassies, there was no violence, no rioting no angry demonstrations
 
Lets not forget that most of these people haven't seen the cartoon, they've just heard about it through media and the iman. It is what they say that matters, not how insulting the cartoons were.
 
In my country, they're acting like we all must believe in Islam, and are practically stating it was not a right for the Danish or the American people to make Mohammed pictures. :rollseye:
 
I thought you were american? what country do you speak of?
 
CptStern said:
less generalizations please ..you cant lump all muslims into the same catagory ..no canadian muslims set fire to any embassies, there was no violence, no rioting no angry demonstrations
Click to expand...
Just saying 'Muslims' does not a total generalisation make. I mean, it's not as good as saying 'some Muslims' but it doesn't equate to 'all Muslims' or even 'most Muslims' I think. D:
 
heh I recall being lambasted by quite a few people here because I didnt put the word "some" in front of the word Christian.
 
If that's the one I bitched at you for, it was still a sweeping statement. :p

But yeah, just as people are too quick to make generalisations, so too are people too quick to think that others are making generalisations. Latter's considerably better than the former though.
 
Sulkdodds said:
If that's the one I bitched at you for, it was still a sweeping statement. :p
Click to expand...

yes I'm starting to see that certain rules only apply to certain members or certain ideology ;) ..of course, I'm not accusing you of this
 
Oh, so Stern knows, I live in America. But I just don't know what Americans are anymore. Except a few, however ...
 
Thinking about it, the generalisation is dependant on context. Saying 'the reaction of Muslims/Christians/Gays/Emos is a completely different thing to saying Muslims/Christians/Gays/Emos are stupid and they suck'. In the latter case, you'd definitely need a 'some' in there somewhere.
 
CptStern said:
double standard:
Click to expand...

Just pointing out, that when Christians protested about their cultural/religious icon being used to shift PlayStation games consoles, you posted:

CptStern said:
"Sony has apologised for an advertising campaign for its PlayStation games console which depicted a young man wearing a crown of thorns and the slogan “Ten years of passion”.

The advert, to mark PlayStation’s tenth anniversary, was pulled after the software giant was hit with scores of complaints from Italian Catholics within hours of it appearing in Italian newspapers and magazines.

“This time they’ve gone too far,” said Antonio Sciortino, editor of Famiglia Cristiana (Christian Family), a mass-circulation Catholic weekly."



whatsamatta for a you? no sense of da humour?



"Italian Cardinal Ersilio Tonini, among the first to speak out, denounced the ad as “an irreverent mockery”.

“The advert displays a lack of taste which conceals a lack of respect. Kids shouldn’t be induced into believing that the passion of Christ is a game,” he said"


wtf? do people honestly believe gamers are really that stupid? ...excuse me, i hear jesus speaking to me from the back of my computer ..I must go pray


earth to jebus freaks: MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS
Click to expand...






Now my opinion on the matter is much the same as Craig's

craig said:
All in all I think it was wrong to publish the cartoons, but the backlash from them being published is utterly astonishing.
Click to expand...
 
ComradeBadger said:
Just pointing out, that when Christians protested about their cultural/religious icon being used to shift PlayStation games consoles, you posted:
Click to expand...

yes ...but I dont see how this relates ...that event didnt lead to riots that killed several people
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bob_Marley
Izzies storm aid ship headed for Gaza
2 3 4
Replies
133
Views
10K
VirusType2
VirusType2
CptStern
Scientists create Artificial Life
2
Replies
49
Views
3K
15357
15357
Bob_Marley
Fancy a Job with highs and lows?
Replies
3
Views
594
CptStern
CptStern
Insano
Belgium, and what's wrong with it
Replies
2
Views
695
Insano
Insano
Tollbooth Willie
Crazy kraut throws a puppy at some queers
Replies
6
Views
493
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Back
Top