EPTNew Prohibitions on Muhammad Cartoons? - Page 8
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
MiniRoman
Canada3953 Posts
| ||
|
Hatsu
United Kingdom474 Posts
On December 14 2010 01:08 PlaKen wrote: Funny that you say the following: "why should it be allowed to draw everything exept Muhammed?" You know...In Islam, it's generally not a good thing to draw any of the prophets (Jesus, Moses, Abraham). In fact, I don't EVER recall seeing a muslim representation of Jesus or a cartoon parody of the prophets drawn by a muslim in a newspaper or anything of the like. I might be wrong but those things are usually condemned. So it's not as though the Muslims are ASKING for it. What? This doesn't make sense. Of course there is no "muslim representation of Jesus or a cartoon parody of the prophets drawn by a muslim in a newspaper" since they are against it. Are you trying to say that since they don't draw parodies of Jesus then other cultures, including people who dont believe in any sort of God, should not draw Muhammed?! Also, I really like how everyone here is all for freedom of speech and how they love hiding behind its silky veil after insulting others for no valid reason. What are you saying? That it's fine to baselessly insult Jesus and other prophets like Muhammed for the sake of "humour" and then run back and hide behind the freedom of speech cloak? Please...I find it very unclassy for ANYONE to randomly insult someone else's religion or belief. This type of thing should NOT be supported. Of course, the retards at the other end (aka the terrorists) are looking for an excuse as well but I say, instead of pissing them off, we kill them off...But that's another topic that I don't want to get into right now. A lot of things are unclassy yet perfectly legal. It IS about freedom. Also, maybe you fail to see the fact that those drawings are not made for the sake of "humor". | ||
|
sekritzzz
1515 Posts
On December 13 2010 22:44 Hatsu wrote: You have got a point there, but sorry if I focus on this specific issue and lask you this: why should I, a non-Muslim individual who does not agree with this specific Islamic dogma, not act to show my disagreement? Why should I care about people getting offended by something that is a matter of opinion? The thing is, I personally am not asking anyone to care its really up to you. I'm talking about the hypocrisy of complete freedom of speech which a lot of people preach from the West. They preach human right violations in China yet they have guantanamo bay right in their backdoor. They talk about Taliban monsters, yet they've killed over 2 million muslims, scratch that 2 million terrorists since 9/11 according to them. Its sad how repetitive history is. Just a few centuries ago, the aborigines/blacks/native American Indians were the savages and the Europeans felt the need to save them by making them civil by completely destroying them. As much as I'd like this West-Islam tension to cool down and go down a peaceful road, I honestly believe it isn't going to happen. As sad as this sounds, I think this is just going to lead to something as big as the fight for black rights/jews during the holocaust, if not bigger before its ever resolved. | ||
|
Enervate
United States1769 Posts
| ||
|
jacen
Austria3644 Posts
NO. | ||
|
stenole
Norway868 Posts
Also, because islam and islamic institutions are strong forces politically, they should not be immune to political satire. To disallow it would mean to kick a leg of public debate's legs away. On the other hand, it could be treated the same way as flag burning, and in Norway there is a "sleeping" law forbidding it. We also have laws against harassment, but that is more aimed at protecting individuals than groups. People of public interest are also not protected from the media in the same way as a random person on the street. My view on this: No. | ||
|
Krikkitone
United States1451 Posts
Jail both Vilks and every imam in Sweden. (who has mentioned Mohammed).... Put islam under the same rules as child pornagraphy. Bad for public safety to be talking about that.[/satire] And as for flag burning... that needs to be encouraged more. | ||
|
bonifaceviii
Canada2890 Posts
| ||
|
Hizzo
United States193 Posts
On December 13 2010 23:49 iMAniaC wrote: + Show Spoiler + Seeing it from a slightly different view, I'm having a hard time seeing how such a law would be limited or phrased. Where would the line be drawn and what would be the reason for such a law? If you try to formulate it, you'll soon see where I'm going. Would it be "It is illegal to draw things that pisses Muslims off, because then they'll bomb us". You can't put that in the constitution, no one would stand for that kind of reasoning. Would it be "It is illegal to draw Mohammed, the founder of Islam, because Muhammed said so 1400 years ago. Addendum: It is illegal to draw Lars Vilks, because he also said so. Addendum: It is illegal to draw anyone in Sverigedemokratarne because they said so. Addendum: Except for Jimmie Åkeson. He can be drawn between 10 and 16 monday to thursday." etc. No, that won't work. Would it be "It is illegal to draw Mohammed, in keeping with the Holy Book of Islam and showing respect to Muslims. Addendum: It is illegal to draw Mohammed, Addendum: It is illegal to draw Mohammed, Addendum: It is illegal to draw Would it be "It is illegal to draw religious figures". No, because Christians are quite fond of having Jesus' drawings everywhere. Would it be "It is illegal to draw religious leaders that did not want to be drawn, like Muhammed. Addendum: And his immediate family. Addendum: And all the Caliphs Addendum: And all Ayatollahs Addendum: And bin Laden Addendum: It is illegal to draw Mulsims, in general" So, if you want to draw someone, you'd have to find out if they're Muslim first. I think it should be a general law about not insulting people very badly. At least in Norway, it's prohobited to spread information that is way over the line and I'm guessing Sweden has a similar law. And drawing a historic figure is not over the line. Drawing him as a dog is just bad taste, not funny at all, and a pity that someone should do anything like that, but still hasn't crossed the line. Drawing him in a guillotine and encouraing the killing on every Muslim on Earth, spreading hate among the population is way over line and should be punished. I don't believe in an absolute law, but rather that one has to consider each and every instance of drawing to find out if it merits punishment or not. In short: No, I do not believe a new law prohibiting Muhammed paintings should be implemented. I'd rather people used their noggins for a change. Well said post. | ||
|
Metalwing
Turkey1038 Posts
On December 14 2010 01:08 PlaKen wrote: Funny that you say the following: "why should it be allowed to draw everything exept Muhammed?" You know...In Islam, it's generally not a good thing to draw any of the prophets (Jesus, Moses, Abraham). In fact, I don't EVER recall seeing a muslim representation of Jesus or a cartoon parody of the prophets drawn by a muslim in a newspaper or anything of the like. I might be wrong but those things are usually condemned. So it's not as though the Muslims are ASKING for it. Also, I really like how everyone here is all for freedom of speech and how they love hiding behind its silky veil after insulting others for no valid reason. What are you saying? That it's fine to baselessly insult Jesus and other prophets like Muhammed for the sake of "humour" and then run back and hide behind the freedom of speech cloak? Please...I find it very unclassy for ANYONE to randomly insult someone else's religion or belief. This type of thing should NOT be supported. Of course, the retards at the other end (aka the terrorists) are looking for an excuse as well but I say, instead of pissing them off, we kill them off...But that's another topic that I don't want to get into right now. With that being said, all you freedom of speech people need to get off that pony of yours and smell the roses. EVERYTHING has its limits...Including freedom of speech. You sir, have gained my respect.. | ||
|
Emon_
3925 Posts
| ||
|
ParasitJonte
Sweden1768 Posts
On December 13 2010 22:08 Nyovne wrote: No you probably do not. You probably enjoy the respect others have for your life and goods. In exchange for that you gave up your freedom to steal, pillage, murder and rape etc and attributed that part of your personal "sovereignty" to the state to enforce. As such you give up personal liberties and freedom for a piece of security for yourself and your posessions if such things exist. Do not be too hasty with agreeing to things before having them thought all the way through and came to the conclusion that you are already doing something and most likely enjoying it  . Read some of John Locke or some other philosofer on this topic if you find it interesting.Freedom generally means the negative freedoms. | ||
|
Sanjuro
Indonesia252 Posts
On December 13 2010 23:07 KaiserJohan wrote: Out of all the misery that occurs in third-world countries, a muhammed cartoon is what really rally the people? People dying, people getting raped, oppressive governments and general misery, but an insult is way over the line. We can't accept that can we? Rally and throw out your corrupt manipulative governments instead sure man, look how that work out so well for the Iraq people | ||
|
MiraMax
Germany532 Posts
On December 14 2010 01:08 PlaKen wrote: PleAlso, I really like how everyone here is all for freedom of speech and how they love hiding behind its silky veil after insulting others for no valid reason. What are you saying? That it's fine to baselessly insult Jesus and other prophets like Muhammed for the sake of "humour" and then run back and hide behind the freedom of speech cloak?ase...I find it very unclassy for ANYONE to randomly insult someone else's religion or belief. This type of thing should NOT be supported. Of course, the retards at the other end (aka the terrorists) are looking for an excuse as well but I say, instead of pissing them off, we kill them off...But that's another topic that I don't want to get into right now. I hope you are just completely uninformed with regard to the whole drama about the Muhammad caricatures. Yes, randomly insulting somebody should and IS NOT protected by freedom of speech, since this is in direct conflict with a person's dignity. Denmark actually has a law against ridiculing religious practices and beliefs. Did you know that? Did you at least try to understand the reasoning which explains why said caricatures do not violate this law? | ||
|
summerloud
Austria1201 Posts
being able to say fuck jesus and muhammed was a camel fucking faggot is my right living in liberal europe, and no close-minded intolerant idiots should be able to take that away i found it especially interesting how when this muhammed cartoon fiasco surfaced for the first time right-wing religious catholics were actually on the same side as the muslims, wanting new laws to ban ridicule of religious icons for one, thats backdoor cencorship, and for two, if you live in an open society you better learn to deal with ppl making fun of something that you hold dear. so in short: no limits to caricature no limits for free speech making fun of anything is not against the law i think what angers these close-minded people the most is that they cannot offend a typical european back in the way they feel themselves offended. mohammed depicted in a comic? OUTRAGE! LETS BURN THEIR FLAGS AND TELL THEM JESUS WAS GAY. oh wait, no one cares | ||
|
themorningstar
United States22 Posts
For those of you saying there should be a limit on this, where do you draw the line? Is it how many people see the drawing? What the drawing depicts? The number of drawings? Who draws them? Why, then, should it be limited to just this? What if its deemed that you can't draw rainbows because that was god's promise to the world that he would never flood it again and drawing a rainbow because you think it's pretty is now considered a blasphemous insult to an entire group of people? It seems like anything is fair game if it offends enough people. When does it become prevention of artistic expression? In the end, nobody has any right to force anyone else to respect their faith-based beliefs through force or law. You don't have the right to not be offended. | ||
|
Offhand
United States1869 Posts
On December 13 2010 18:11 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote: "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." OK, OK, let's compare these two things. A) Sweden sending a 500-strong military contingent to Afghanistan B) the country's failure to condemn cartoons of the prophet Muhammad drawn by the Swedish artist Lars Vilks I know that maybe these two things are equivalent in some kind of bizarre religious doublethink. But I have the suspicion one may be the leading cause of anti-western sentiment and the other just a symptom of it. | ||
|
Batch
Sweden692 Posts
I wish the ones offended by the drawings would follow the phrase "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" and draw a couple of Vilks pictures instead of going crazy. | ||
|
inlagdsil
Canada957 Posts
I found this picture in the Random pics that make you laugh thread: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Bwtu5.gif) Anti-semitic pictures like the one on the left abound in the Muslim world. By the standards of those who would say that Sweden should not allow people to draw Mohammed, not only would only the left picture be tolerated, but the guy who drew this comic would be persecuted. Just think of the irony if people went after this artist for drawing Mohammed! Here's an example of an anti-semitic comic in the style of the one parodied up there. It comes from an Egyptian newspaper. I'm putting it here as an illustration of my point, obviously I don't agree with it: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://img805.imageshack.us/img805/1435/antisemeticcartoon.jpg) | ||
|
Electric.Jesus
Germany755 Posts
On December 14 2010 01:08 PlaKen wrote: Funny that you say the following: "why should it be allowed to draw everything exept Muhammed?" You know...In Islam, it's generally not a good thing to draw any of the prophets (Jesus, Moses, Abraham). In fact, I don't EVER recall seeing a muslim representation of Jesus or a cartoon parody of the prophets drawn by a muslim in a newspaper or anything of the like. I might be wrong but those things are usually condemned. So it's not as though the Muslims are ASKING for it. Also, I really like how everyone here is all for freedom of speech and how they love hiding behind its silky veil after insulting others for no valid reason. What are you saying? That it's fine to baselessly insult Jesus and other prophets like Muhammed for the sake of "humour" and then run back and hide behind the freedom of speech cloak? Please...I find it very unclassy for ANYONE to randomly insult someone else's religion or belief. This type of thing should NOT be supported. Of course, the retards at the other end (aka the terrorists) are looking for an excuse as well but I say, instead of pissing them off, we kill them off...But that's another topic that I don't want to get into right now. With that being said, all you freedom of speech people need to get off that pony of yours and smell the roses. EVERYTHING has its limits...Including freedom of speech. Maybe it has limits factually, but it shouldn't. Else the one who is most easily offended dictates the rules. Say I am offended whenever somebody says the word "allah". Does that means people should stop using that word so I am not offended? I hardly think so. Also, what most people here seems to miss is the crucial point. The comics are NOT meant to insult islam, they are meant to critizice some people's practice of it. For example, thequran like the bible and torah is basically peaceful, stating tzhat it is a sin to kill another human. On the other hand, people blow themselves and other up in the name of the very same religion that is AGAINST murder. Doesn't make sense, right? Is worth criticism I think and drawing a comic with muhammed wearing a bomb in his turban expresses that criticism. There will always be people who are offended by shit. For example that Fox Nwes lady who was pissed off because some local town renamed their christmas parade and it no longer seems christian enough to her. But in my opinion that is her problem and we should not bend over backwards to try to suit every notjob. Most muslims probabaly just did not care about the comics but since they are not out burning flags, no one cares about their opinion. Sad, in my eyes. | ||
| ||
