|
Long story short, my question is:
Should Sweden (and other countries) prohibit any more depictions of Muhammad in the interest of public safety?
Long story:
From LINK:
"Minutes before the detonations, Swedish news agency Tidningarnas Telegrambyra received an email also addressed to police that promised retribution for Sweden sending a 500-strong military contingent to Afghanistan, and for the country's failure to condemn cartoons of the prophet Muhammad drawn by the Swedish artist Lars Vilks."
In this case, a primary reasons that the suicide bomber blew himself up was because of a cartoon drawn by Lars Vilks (Vilks has been assaulted by individuals who claimed to be defending the honor of Muhammad and Islam and has also been threatened with death several times. He also has a price on his head. His blog: Vilks BLOG). The other reason was because of swedish troops, via NATO, in Afghanistan. Can it be doubted that depicting Muhammad in a cartoon would be enough to justify other suicide bombers? And if so, should Sweden clamp down on any more depictions of Muhammad in the interest of public safety?
The general attitude on TL seems to be: "Freedom of speech is not an absolute. There are justified limitations. At the same time, prohibitions on freedom of speech can go too far."
So where do Muhammad depictions fall? Over the line or acceptable? Have attitudes toward this issue (which was discussed in detail in Muhammad cartoons thread) changed as a result of the recent bombing?
|
No. Bending to the will of a bunch of bloodthirsty savages only encourages them and shows them that their violent methods and oppression is effective.
|
T.O.P.
Hong Kong4685 Posts
Where are you going to draw the line if you're willing to give up your Freedom of Speech for the sake of safety? Muslims, like every minority group, will just demand more and more special rights. Are the Swedish going to acquiesce to every demand from the Muslim community so extremists won't feel so angry towards westerners and commit acts of terrorism? At some point, westerners will be sick of giving minority groups special rights and then some crazy extremist will commit terrorism again. Then westerners will be angry and invade Iran for revenge and then some extremist will commit terrorism again. The problem is that these extremists exist in the first place. If the Muslim community want to gain acceptance from the international community, they'll have to pacify these extremists and teach them not to hate westerners. Or else United States will eventually invade all of the Middle East just to take care of the terrorism problem.
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
The principle of many countries is to never negotiate with terrorists. The reason for that policy is to discourage terrorist groups to attempt acts in the first place. For the same reason, no country should enact any policy in response to terrorist attacks. Doing so would encourage future terrorist acts.
|
No change at all. Freedom of experession and freedom of speech MUST be maintained at all cost. They are the single most important value of enlightened societies.
|
You have three options against Radical Islam.
1. Kill them.
2. Get killed.
3. Convert to Islam.
Banning cartoons falls under option 2.
|
Islamic extremists are really getting on my nerves. They need to understand that their Religion is not special. Their culture is not special, and Allah is not special. Western nations do not care about Sharia Law. Western Nations believe in gender equality, freedom of (and from) religion, freedom of speech etc.
If its a problem for extremists then they shouldn't go to a Western nation in the first place.
|
Why can people not stand up to their right to express freedom of speech. Of course the images drawn by Mr. Vilks is degrading to Islamic people and he should be rightfully punished but he is not at all deserving of the death threats and whatnot he is getting.
![[image loading]](http://striderweb.com/blog/images/dogbody.jpg)
One of the drawings by Lars Vilks.
If any government puts the opinions and expressions of any radicals over the freedom of speech of their own people, it is clear that government is not fit to take care of its people. Any country faced with threats of this nature should stand up against it and not cower before the demands radicals like the extremists
|
On December 13 2010 18:36 Lightswarm wrote:Why can people not stand up to their right to express freedom of speech. Of course the images drawn by Mr. Vilks is degrading to Islamic people and he should be rightfully punished but he is not at all deserving of the death threats and whatnot he is getting. One of the drawings by Lars Vilks. If any government puts the opinions and expressions of any radicals over the freedom of speech of their own people, it is clear that government is not fit to take care of its people. Any country faced with threats of this nature should stand up against it and not cower before the demands radicals like the extremists
How should he punished? So what if it's insulting to Islam.
|
Freedom of speech should never, ever be restricted just because someone is butthurt, let alone non-indigenous migrants who refuse to adapt to their host CULTURE. I don't bloody care anymore. When you step to the lows some of these people have stepped to, they have lost all moral high ground they might have had in the first place.
Why would you even imagine restricting free speech due to "safety" concerns? That's the dumbest thing possible, that's WHY terrorists blow shit up to begin with, giving incentives to terrorists is NOT smart, specially when they're butthurt about a few drawing. Boo hoo, cry me a river.
|
On December 13 2010 18:23 Mr. Nefarious wrote:
No. Bending to the will of a bunch of bloodthirsty savages only encourages them and shows them that their violent methods and oppression is effective.
aye.. this kind of maniacs should not be encouraged to find new things to view as blasphemy..
i say draw more of them.. treat muhammed with the same respect that jesus gets eh?  that poor fellow have been pretty much everything except publicly raped with a piece of heavy mining equipment.. and no christian fundamentalist wacko have blown up anything yet.. as far as the world know..
or we could sink to their level.. every time they hint towards any other religion as bad/wrong.. we could send a tactical nuke down a cave.. we would find them in the end right?
|
On December 13 2010 18:26 T.O.P. wrote:
Where are you going to draw the line if you're willing to give up your Freedom of Speech for the illusion of safety?
I'll refrain from correcting your thorough historical and geopolitical misconceptions, but I fixed this for you.
Somehow I don't believe the story though, YEARS after the commotion died down, more than half a year after DMD... a guy fails at planting bombs somewhere in Sweden trying to accomplish what exactly? I don't think so. Now I've witnessed stupidity before, but this is just a little too nonsensical.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Of course we shouldnt, if we do Im giving up on this world.
|
um... guys, i dont think we should be posting those images here. you know, for the same reason that NSFW images are banned.
|
On December 13 2010 18:52 dybydx wrote:
um... guys, i dont think we should be posting those images here. you know, for the same reason that NSFW images are banned.
i cant see how viewing that picture could be dangerous for work...
if a picture came up with Hitler hanging on a cross with his family jewels hooked up to a car battery.. everyone would laugh and not care... well.. depending on how detailed the picture is ofc 
|
The thing is that all these Terrorists use the Freedom of Speech the same way we do it so why should WE because they threaten us give up on this right?
|
I think T.O.P has some good points on his side.
One of the biggest problems with those extremists is, they hide themself under the sheet of the muslims. They may say, they belong to this certain group, but the things they do, do not have anything in common with the Qran.
|
Seems to be a double-edged issue. On one hand, restricting depictions of Muhammad arguably protects people. On the other, it sets a dangerous precedent of appeasement for terrorists. What happens when they demand Sharia law?
|
United Arab Emirates660 Posts
You guys are retarded, I don't get it, you are refusing to do something about people who insult other peoples religions? I mean would you be okay with it if you were a Christian and somebody made stupid drawings of Jesus or something and spread it around the world? By saying "Many countries have a policy of not negotiating with terrorists" do you mean that all the Islam religion and Muslims are terrorists just because of the doing of some retarded suicide bomber who thought he is something but really he isn't and he deserved to die? if you are then you've got serious problems, every single country and religion has some fucked up people! you cant judge everyone by the doing of one person. I'm not going to argue about this here because I'm easily out numbered... but seriously! grow the fuck up!.
User was temp banned for this post.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On December 13 2010 18:52 dybydx wrote:
um... guys, i dont think we should be posting those images here. you know, for the same reason that NSFW images are banned.
That makes no sense. NSFW images can be pornographic, and would get you in trouble at work. That image won't get you in trouble for anything.
Just wait, once you start self censoring images of muhammad, they will then ask (just kidding, they will kill more people and threaten others) for more. Don't bitch when you lose all freedom.
On December 13 2010 18:58 PaPoolee wrote:
You guys are retarded, I don't get it, you are refusing to do something about people who insult other peoples religions? I mean would you be okay with it if you were a Christian and somebody made stupid drawings of Jesus or something and spread it around the world? By saying "Many countries have a policy of not negotiating with terrorists" do you mean that all the Islam religion and Muslims are terrorists just because of the doing of some retarded suicide bomber who thought he is something but really he isn't and he deserved to die? if you are then you've got serious problems, every single country and religion has some fucked up people! you cant judge everyone by the doing of one person. I'm not going to argue about this here because I'm easily out numbered... but seriously! grow the fuck up!.
You are incredibly ignorant if you believe there are no insulting pictures of any other religion other than islam, or that most people give death threats to the people who make them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
