Danish Muhammad cartoon

ya but I cant compete for top slag (?) cuz the wife would kill me
 
CptStern said:
yes ...but I dont see how this relates ...that event didnt lead to riots that killed several people
Click to expand...
I'm pointing out that there is a slight double standard, for someone who's denied organised religion the right to be offended previously, to staunchly defend a different organised religion's right to be offended.


For the record, I disagreed with you in the Christian thread, saying they had a right to be offended, and I'm agreeing with you here, saying Muslims have a right to be offended.
 
There are a few things I don't understand about some people's opinions on the matter..

Why is it some people are saying political cartoons starring Jesus or the Christian god would "never be printed?" I don't know what planet you're from-- I've seen plenty of cartoons starring religious characters from just about every religion ever, at least in the States. There's even an NBC primetime sitcom starring Jesus. People do complain about it a lot, but those people don't burn and break thigns, and form angry violent mobs. I hear somewhere that people are saying that Denmark has refused to print Jesus stuff, but I haven't found proof in this thread, because I only skimmed it.

That being said, how is it possible for the printing of these cartoons to be considered "wrong?" It's a little thing called "freedom of speech" that anyone who lives should know and adhere to.

I'm waiting to see the mobs, burnings, vandalism, and deaths occur after Iran has its pretty little "contest." Actually, I'm willing to bet that won't happen. People will complain like crazy, naturally, but I am willing to bet that no one will die.
ComradeBadger said:
I'm pointing out that there is a slight double standard, for someone who's denied organised religion the right to be offended previously, to staunchly defend a different organised religion's right to be offended.


For the record, I disagreed with you in the Christian thread, saying they had a right to be offended, and I'm agreeing with you here, saying Muslims have a right to be offended.
Click to expand...
Everyone has the right to be offended. No one has the right to vandalize and burn things in angry mobs because of that. And just because something offends you doesn't mean that anyone deserves an apology.
 
Obviously, they have a right to feel offended and to voice their opinions. The problem is that, in this case, some of them think their opinion should be the law for the entire world. When it's taken to the level of violence, damage of property, death threats, and various other criminal acts... that right no longer applies. I have the right to think that religion is stupid and voice my reasoning as to why I think that way. Religious people have the right to think I'm stupid for not believing in God and explain their reasoning. We all have the right to be offended when someone disparages our beliefs and we can express our distaste in a lawful manner. We don't have the right to kill people or burn down buildings if someone doesn't agree with us.
 
ComradeBadger said:
I'm pointing out that there is a slight double standard, for someone who's denied organised religion the right to be offended previously, to staunchly defend a different organised religion's right to be offended.
Click to expand...

yes but they're not comparable because the publishing of those cartoons led to the deaths of real people ...the christian thing was an ad in a video game magazine and the only people offended were non-gamers concerned of undue influence on kids ..btw could you link to the thread ..I find it odd that I'd say they didnt have a right to be offended ..I do recall thinking it was silly of them to be offended.

I think many of you are misunderstanding me when I say the "freedom of speech" was a bullshit excuse ...I didnt mean that freedom of speech doesnt apply to this situation ..what I meant was that they cant use freedom of speech to justify their actions when in the past they purposefully avoided publishing material that would offend the predominant religion in that country ...they had no such qualms about the minority group. Again I'd like to point out that there is a strong anti-muslim/anti-immigrant movement in denmark ..they could just be pandering to the masses


edit: Erestheux: the same newspaper that published the muslim cartoons refused to publish cartoons about jesus because they felt it might offend people. Oh and christians are just as capable of violence as anyone else


I'd also like to point out that the people who react violently are NOT the norm ..it's like everyone who protested the war is a criminal because a small group of them committed crimes during the protests
 
I think many of you are misunderstanding me when I say the "freedom of speech" was a bullshit excuse ...I didnt mean that freedom of speech doesnt apply to this situation ..what I meant was that they cant use freedom of speech to justify their actions when in the past they purposefully avoided publishing material that would offend the predominant religion in that country ...they had no such qualms about the minority group. Again I'd like to point out that there is a strong anti-muslim/anti-immigrant movement in denmark ..they could just be pandering to the masses
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but the organized violence by no means scares me away from posting Mohammed Cartoons -- nethire do beheadings, nor suicides. Political Cartoons are either meant to be stupid, witty, funny, or not funny, and however the coin is tossed and figured its noones right to assume we all follow the Islamic Religion, and declare our rights to be "unconstitutional" to the Prophet.
 
CptStern said:
yes but they're not comparable because the publishing of those cartoons led to the deaths of real people ...the christian thing was an ad in a video game magazine and the only people offended were non-gamers concerned of undue influence on kids ..btw could you link to the thread ..I find it odd that I'd say they didnt have a right to be offended ..I do recall thinking it was silly of them to be offended.

I think many of you are misunderstanding me when I say the "freedom of speech" was a bullshit excuse ...I didnt mean that freedom of speech doesnt apply to this situation ..what I meant was that they cant use freedom of speech to justify their actions when in the past they purposefully avoided publishing material that would offend the predominant religion in that country ...they had no such qualms about the minority group. Again I'd like to point out that there is a strong anti-muslim/anti-immigrant movement in denmark ..they could just be pandering to the masses


edit: Erestheux: the same newspaper that published the muslim cartoons refused to publish cartoons about jesus because they felt it might offend people. Oh and christians are just as capable of violence as anyone else


I'd also like to point out that the people who react violently are NOT the norm ..it's like everyone who protested the war is a criminal because a small group of them committed crimes during the protests
Click to expand...
I agree with you on the last point, that's not what I was debating.

Yes, you stated you felt it was stupid that they were offended - and while you didn't deny their right to be offended you stated that they should 'mind their own buisness'

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=93255&

Here is the thread - while you didn't deny them the right to be offended and complain in a lawful manner - you seemed to think it was wrong that they should interfere.
 
K e r b e r o s said:
Perhaps, but the organized violence by no means scares me away from posting Mohammed Cartoons -- nethire do beheadings, nor suicides. Political Cartoons are either meant to be stupid, witty, funny, or not funny, and however the coin is tossed and figured its noones right to assume we all follow the Islamic Religion, and declare our rights to be "unconstitutional" to the Prophet.
Click to expand...


so why did they refuse to run the christian cartoons?


comradebadger: after reading my posts I think I was one of the least offensive
 
CptStern said:
edit: Erestheux: the same newspaper that published the muslim cartoons refused to publish cartoons about jesus because they felt it might offend people. Oh and christians are just as capable of violence as anyone else


I'd also like to point out that the people who react violently are NOT the norm ..it's like everyone who protested the war is a criminal because a small group of them committed crimes during the protests
Click to expand...

Yeach. I didn't know that. Is there a source or something on that newspaper doing that? Pretty bad. I'd like to see the content of the Jesus one's, too.

But, I wouldn't say "don't publish the Muslim-related cartoons" because of that. Rather, I would say that they should have just printed the Christian-related cartoons, too.

But please don't assume that I'm defending Christians or any other religious group. Anyone who acts violently and destructively, whether Muslims, Christians, or 9-toed albinos, to such a thing as a cartoon is giving humanity a bad name.

Stern, it doesn't seem like a "small group" of the protestors are turning to violence. Many people are dying because of this, Western-related buildings are being destroyed and burnt all over.
CNN.com said:
In Lahore, protesters burned more than a dozen buildings, including the provincial assembly building, two banks, the offices of Norwegian cell phone company Telenor and a KFC.
Click to expand...
Seriously, its not "just a few." It's "a whole f*cking lot." :|
 
Erestheux said:
Yeach. I didn't know that. Is there a source or something on that newspaper doing that? Pretty bad. I'd like to see the content of the Jesus one's, too.

But, I wouldn't say "don't publish the Muslim-related cartoons" because of that. Rather, I would say that they should have just printed the Christian-related cartoons, too.

But please don't assume that I'm defending Christians or any other religious group. Anyone who acts violently and destructively, whether Muslims, Christians, or 9-toed albinos, to such a thing as a cartoon is giving humanity a bad name.

Stern, it doesn't seem like a "small group" of the protestors are turning to violence. Many people are dying because of this, Western-related buildings are being destroyed and burnt all over.Seriously, its not "just a few." It's "a whole f*cking lot." :|
Click to expand...


ever hear that song by Black Sabbath called "the Mob rules"?

"You've nothing to say
They're breaking away
If you listen to fools...
The Mob Rules
The Mob Rules

Break the circle and stop the movement, the wheel is thrown to the ground
Just remember it might start rolling and take you right back around

You're all fools!
The Mob Rules!"

and the jesus cartoon

"I don't think Jyllands-Posten's readers will enjoy the drawings. As a matter of fact, I think that they will provoke an outcry. Therefore, I will not use them."


http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1703501,00.html
 
But... uh... didn't the Muslim cartoons provoke an outcry?

If they were published, can you see hundreds of angry Christians flowing through the streets burning things?
 
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...

With Muslims I think you can generalise to a point Stern. There are Muslims who grew up in the West and there are Muslims who didn't.

The Muslisms who did seem to be a great deal more tolerant of Western 'values' than the Muslims who live in the Middle-East.
 
The cartoons of muhammed were a supplement to an article about how many authors had turned to self-censorship. If they had published the jesus cartoons there really wouldn't have been much of an article. Just pointing this out.
 
the jesus cartoons were 3 years prior to this incident ...so no
 
Erestheux said:
Yeach. I didn't know that. Is there a source or something on that newspaper doing that? Pretty bad. I'd like to see the content of the Jesus one's, too.

But, I wouldn't say "don't publish the Muslim-related cartoons" because of that. Rather, I would say that they should have just printed the Christian-related cartoons, too.

But please don't assume that I'm defending Christians or any other religious group. Anyone who acts violently and destructively, whether Muslims, Christians, or 9-toed albinos, to such a thing as a cartoon is giving humanity a bad name.

Stern, it doesn't seem like a "small group" of the protestors are turning to violence. Many people are dying because of this, Western-related buildings are being destroyed and burnt all over.Seriously, its not "just a few." It's "a whole f*cking lot." :|
Click to expand...


Agreed.


But Stern, I hope you got my main point that I described earlier.
 
I think so ..while the perceived insult is the same the reaction to the insult is not. Probably a mix of radicalism, reactionism, mob mentality and misplaced rage at being a target. You only have to look at their anger towards the US, even though they had absolutely nothing to do with the cartoons.
 
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...
Oh noes I are political incorrectzorz.
 
theSteven said:
Oh noes I are politically incorrectzorz.
Click to expand...

No, you're just plain incorrect. You cant simply make sweeping, baseless accusations of an entire religion on the actions of a minority.
 
CptStern said:
I think so ..while the perceived insult is the same the reaction to the insult is not. Probably a mix of radicalism, reactionism, mob mentality and misplaced rage at being a target. You only have to look at their anger towards the US, even though they had absolutely nothing to do with the cartoons.
Click to expand...

Yep .
 
You guys read the reports of the Danish Imam Ahmad Abu Ladan who apparantly faked 3 extra cartoons/prints and traveled to islamic countries to incite revolts?
There supposingly are several prints of Mohammed being presented as a pig, the prophet as a pedophile devil and a dog raping a praying muslim, which this Imam faked cause the 12 newspaper cartoons apparantly werent "offensive enough".
Then he went on some nice visits to spread the prints and incite this revolt..

Going to look into this some more, if its true then thats immensely sick and that guy should be put on Al Jazeera so all the muslim world will see him admit he faked those 3 extra cartoons and deliberatly spread the other 12 cartoons for his anti-west propaganda trying to polarize the world.

After unsuccessfully attempting legal proceedings against the government and newspaper, Abu Laban took the images on a tour of the Middle East in December to rally support for his protest, distributing them as examples of an "anti-Muslim environment" in the European country.
Click to expand...

Source

Anybody read about this? or know more?
 
no canadian muslims set fire to any embassies, there was no violence, no rioting no angry demonstrations
Click to expand...
Ugh, like everything is just perfect in Canada and you are all fine, upstanding, peaceful, happy world citizens, right? Most muslims in Western countries didn't have a violent reaction to this issue. Its only in the countries that have a more radical fundamentalist view that you find the worst problems. Please don't use this as yet another attempt to state how Canada > the rest of the world.
 
VictimOfScience said:
Ugh, like everything is just perfect in Canada and you are all fine, upstanding, peaceful, happy world citizens, right? Most muslims in Western countries didn't have a violent reaction to this issue. Its only in the countries that have a more radical fundamentalist view that you find the worst problems. Please don't use this as yet another attempt to state how Canada > the rest of the world.
Click to expand...


wtf victemofscience? stop putting words in my mouth ..I mentioned canada because that's where I'm from, I am more than qualified to comment of what's going on in my country ..never have I put forth the argument that canada is superior to any other country ..that's just ****ing stupid
 
I posted the reason, the editor said it would offend people ..but thanks for reading everything I wrote
 
CptStern ... sigh ... I knew you did. Now, don't expect some Chees-eros response about how I wanted to test to see if you knew ... no, none of it.

But by far, I was just posting for the sake of giving a reply. I can't let a question go unanswered, even if it makes me appear forgetful or apathetic.
 
CptStern said:
I posted the reason, the editor said it would offend people ..but thanks for reading everything I wrote
Click to expand...
Did you just ignore what I said?

The cartoons of muhammed were a supplement to an article about how many authors had turned to self-censorship. If they had published the jesus cartoons there really wouldn't have been much of an article.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11179140/site/newsweek/

ROSE: I was concerned about a tendency toward self-censorship among people in artistic and cultural circles in Europe. That's why I commissioned these cartoons, to test this tendency and to start a debate about it.

It was not a media stunt. We just approached that story in a different way, by asking Danish cartoonists to draw Muhammad as they see him. I did not ask for caricatures. I did not ask to make the prophet a laughingstock or to mock him.
Click to expand...

And here's something in danish:
http://www.bt.dk/nyheder/artikel:aid=418560:fid=100300456/

Chief editor(?) Carsten Juste says he doesn't know why they didn't print the jesus cartoons. He does say he gets a lot of non-encouraged drawings and suggestions from outside drawers on his table. Most of it is returned because they have their own drawers, and most of it is crap anyway.

When asked if he would have brought drawings that could offend christians, he said they've probably already done it, but he can't remember.

Sorry - I just can't let misinformation like this spread. Nih out :cheers:
 
Nih said:
Did you just ignore what I said?
Click to expand...

umm no I was speaking to kerberos

I answered you here ..the post right after yours

Nih said:
The cartoons of muhammed were a supplement to an article about how many authors had turned to self-censorship. If they had published the jesus cartoons there really wouldn't have been much of an article.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11179140/site/newsweek/



And here's something in danish:
http://www.bt.dk/nyheder/artikel:aid=418560:fid=100300456/

Chief editor(?) Carsten Juste says he doesn't know why they didn't print the jesus cartoons. He does say he gets a lot of non-encouraged drawings and suggestions from outside drawers on his table. Most of it is returned because they have their own drawers, and most of it is crap anyway.

When asked if he would have brought drawings that could offend christians, he said they've probably already done it, but he can't remember.

Sorry - I just can't let misinformation like this spread. Nih out :cheers:
Click to expand...

you are incorrect, the cartoons of jesus were from 3 years ago, Carsten Juste wasnt the editor then, Jens Kaiser was and he said this about the cartoons:


"I don't think Jyllands-Posten's readers will enjoy the drawings. As a matter of fact, I think that they will provoke an outcry. Therefore, I will not use them."

so the only misinformation was that you misunderstood me :cheers:


http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,,1703500,00.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060208/wl_nm/religion_cartoons_denmark_jesus_dc
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,18090019%5E23109,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1703501,00.html
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L08408258.htm
 
gick said:
No, you're just plain incorrect. You cant simply make sweeping, baseless accusations of an entire religion on the actions of a minority.
Click to expand...
My God, of course I meant the whole ****ing religion.

That's flame bait isn't it? You knew I diden't mean the whole religion.
 
Well things have taken a turn for the worse, it seems that this issue just keeps on snowballing out of all control.
Recently, another hardline sect has gotten involved with the protests. If their previous activities are anything to go by, this could lead to years of bloody turmoil.

link
 
Thats because the Canadian Gov have censored the information.
Its that extreme.
 
Angry Lawyer said:
Because JESUS IS METAL?

-Angry Lawyer
Click to expand...


sigged.

NOTE: This would not be sig material coming from anyone else.
 
it is, actually.:|
now that i think of it, i see that what one of the iranians did- painting a picture of the holy mary with his mouth, (because he had no hands and feet due to the injury in the war between iran and iraq), in front of the embassy- is far more meaningful and beautiful, rather than burning the embassy down.
however, i still do not agree with the danish cartoonist, drawing a prophit in front front of nue women, is not, in my opinion, "freedom of speech".
 
jerkasaur said:
i still do not agree with the danish cartoonist, drawing a prophit in front front of nue women, is not, in my opinion, "freedom of speech".
Click to expand...

Why isn't it?
 
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
592
CptStern
CptStern
Insano
Belgium, and what's wrong with it
Replies
2
Views
689
Insano
Insano
Tollbooth Willie
Crazy kraut throws a puppy at some queers
Replies
6
Views
486
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Back
Top