gotone Posted October 7, 2012 Share Posted October 7, 2012 Rubbish- it has nothing to do with Freedom of Speech. In every single society freedom of speech is restricted- you have libel laws, perjury, contempt of court, hate speech laws- to just name a few. There is a whole list in European and American culture about this. What I find very hypocritical from the likes of the French magazine Charlie Hebdo (that seems to love to provoke Muslim sentiments), is that they sacked one of their own cartoonists/writers in Maurice Sinet after he had written an article on the son of the ex President Sarkozy. http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2012/09/27/charlie-hebdo-and-french-government-islamophobia/ What about the Duchess of Kent and these topless photo's - certain magazines fought on the 'freedom of speech' bandwagon but the French government ended up apologizing for hurting her feelings. So what about the feelings of billions of Muslims?? Hope you now get the point. I recommend you and others read the article in the link. tough, about time they learned the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baz1 Posted October 7, 2012 Share Posted October 7, 2012 tough, about time they learned the truth. Typically no intellectual response. Be on your way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natjack Posted October 7, 2012 Share Posted October 7, 2012 @Baz1, I think the point is that most other people can't see why the feelings of any Muslims, let alone billions, would be hurt, and with our sort of Western poking fun at everything sense of humour, we don't even begin to understand why a cartoon would be worth killing people and causing mayhem over. Sarkozy's son and the Duchess of Cambridge, are real, living people with families and feelings to be hurt and humiliation to be caused. Mohammed lived thousands of years ago and doesn't even have any living relatives, does he? It's a totally different situation. And companies like Ikea pandering to prejudice for the sake of coin, that's just wrong. I hope they get boycotted in the West for what they did. It's a fundamental difference in culture and attitude and that's why never the twain shall meet, really. Unless Muslims learn to modify their behaviour and reactions to this sort of thing, we're never going to reach an understanding. Having a murderous, wrecking spree everytime someone hits a nerve ... come on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baz1 Posted October 7, 2012 Share Posted October 7, 2012 @Baz1, I think the point is that most other people can't see why the feelings of any Muslims, let alone billions, would be hurt, and with our sort of Western poking fun at everything sense of humour, we don't even begin to understand why a cartoon would be worth killing people and causing mayhem over. Sarkozy's son and the Duchess of Cambridge, are real, living people with families and feelings to be hurt and humiliation to be caused. Mohammed lived thousands of years ago and doesn't even have any living relatives, does he? It's a totally different situation. And companies like Ikea pandering to prejudice for the sake of coin, that's just wrong. I hope they get boycotted in the West for what they did. It's a fundamental difference in culture and attitude and that's why never the twain shall meet, really. Unless Muslims learn to modify their behaviour and reactions to this sort of thing, we're never going to reach an understanding. Having a murderous, wrecking spree everytime someone hits a nerve ... come on! Firstly, no one should act in the manner some of these people have done (whoever they were or represented) which ended in the death of the ambassador and whoever else. The correct way to respond is via dialogue and education- unfortunately not everyone subscribes to this method. Muhammad himself never acted this way when he was physically or verbally abused- so some Muslims need to take lessons from this. As for your point on when Muhammad lived etc is baseless- you would be rightly upset if some one made allegations or verbally insulted one of your deceased relatives. Why should Muslims not feel hurt/offended as this is an ongoing and continuous habit of provoking Muslims-some sensible people have spoken about this as deliberate ways to stir tensions. I hope you read the article I linked to- I don't wish to add anything more to this thread other than to say that learning about what you don't know is always a good start to eradicate any fears or uncertainty you may have on something. Peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OPEN BORDERS Posted October 7, 2012 Share Posted October 7, 2012 Having seen some of the so-called "cartoons", which prompted the riots a couple of years ago, with their pornographic nature, and having seen for myself the obscenities contained in some of them, I can actually understand why some people were grossly offended by them. There is a right to freedom of speech/ freedom of opinion, sure, but I do think that many of those so-called "cartoons" took that far, far beyond the pale, and were deliberately intended to provoke extreme reactions from even the mildest of people. Glad you highlighted ''cartoons'' P.T. A few years ago it was a ''Teddy Bear'' that upset certain muslims. They wanted a teacher stoned to death for daring to name it Mohammed. Its 2012, the age of computer technology. www etc. Muslims must adapt accordingly im afraid and speak up against Islamic fantaticism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natjack Posted October 7, 2012 Share Posted October 7, 2012 Firstly, no one should act in the manner some of these people have done (whoever they were or represented) which ended in the death of the ambassador and whoever else. AgreedThe correct way to respond is via dialogue and education- unfortunately not everyone subscribes to this method. AgreedMuhammad himself never acted this way when he was physically or verbally abused- so some Muslims need to take lessons from this. Don't know because he's a historical figureAs for your point on when Muhammad lived etc is baseless- you would be rightly upset if some one made allegations or verbally insulted one of your deceased relatives. a. he's not their relative b. I wouldn't care about a relative who lived thousands of years ago never having known them. This must be a muslim thing.Why should Muslims not feel hurt/offended as this is an ongoing and continuous habit of provoking Muslims-some sensible people have spoken about this as deliberate ways to stir tensions. They need to learn to grow a thicker skinI hope you read the article I linked to- I don't wish to add anything more to this thread other than to say that learning about what you don't know is always a good start to eradicate any fears or uncertainty you may have on something. The more I know about it, the less I like it, tbh.Peace. Thanks for that, I'm very peaceable. The muslims I 'know' seem ok, but then they're quite westernised, although sometimes they'll make a remark and you wonder what they're really thinking. Islam as an entity and most of its members world-wide has started to scare me. If as we're often told, its membership is growing, it's not a future I really want to look forward to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygardener Posted October 7, 2012 Share Posted October 7, 2012 Rubbish- it has nothing to do with Freedom of Speech. In every single society freedom of speech is restricted- you have libel laws, perjury, contempt of court, hate speech laws- to just name a few. There is a whole list in European and American culture about this. What I find very hypocritical from the likes of the French magazine Charlie Hebdo (that seems to love to provoke Muslim sentiments), is that they sacked one of their own cartoonists/writers in Maurice Sinet after he had written an article on the son of the ex President Sarkozy. http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2012/09/27/charlie-hebdo-and-french-government-islamophobia/ What about the Duchess of Kent and these topless photo's - certain magazines fought on the 'freedom of speech' bandwagon but the French government ended up apologizing for hurting her feelings. So what about the feelings of billions of Muslims?? Hope you now get the point. I recommend you and others read the article in the link. It does actually have to do with freedom of speech. There are as you say numerous laws which restrict absolute freedom of speech in all contexts, however that does not mean that just because such laws exist further such laws should be introduced to further restrict freedom of speech. This is particularly the case when it comes to religions, which are by nature matters of belief rather than fact and inherently contradict each other (sometimes offensively). So to preserve freedom of religion it is essential to preserve freedom of criticism and even mocking of religion. If we accept the principle that if one set of people are easily offended so we must legislate to protect their feelings we open the floodgates to every other group to demand legal protection for their hurt feelings. Of course it's better that people don't set out to hurt others feelings, but it happens and unless we want to live in a society where nobody ever says anything for fear of offending someone else then hurt feelings should never be a matter of law. As for the article, consider the source. A political islamist who's rather keen on the return of the global islamic caliphate who just happens to have a new book to plug (about how the global islamic caliphate is bound to return and how that would be just brilliant) writes an article in which he concludes that France is deeply anti-muslim but can be scared into stopping being anti-muslim by......you guessed it..the return of the global islamic caliphate. Not what we'd call a reliable source of impartial analysis is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Talker Posted October 7, 2012 Share Posted October 7, 2012 tough, if you or anyone was offended. freedom of speech is a hard won right. So it's "Freedom of speech" to show illegal pornography, now? It wasn't the last tlime I looked! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Talker Posted October 7, 2012 Share Posted October 7, 2012 After a double check, it is illegal to depict a minor in any image of sexual behaviour, under the coroners and Justice act 2009. that's a law I am more than happy with... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OPEN BORDERS Posted October 7, 2012 Share Posted October 7, 2012 After a double check, it is illegal to depict a minor in any image of sexual behaviour, under the coroners and Justice act 2009. that's a law I am more than happy with... Does that apply to ''cartoons'' ? Whats the law regarding ''Teddy Bears'' being named Mohammed ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.