That has obviously changed with culture and tradition however Mohammed, from an Islamic point of view, is meant to be a role model of how to be a good muslim so his actions should be timeless.
Anyhow your point falls flat considering we have established channel 4 were not broadcasting to provoke the EDL.
Secondly the "freedom of speech" comes with responsibility as already proven by laws in this country and recent high profiles arrests because of online comments.
Now I don't thinking freedom of speech would help my defence one bit if I thought it was funny putting up a cartoon drawing of Lee Rigby head rolling around the floor on Facebook with "lol" written across the top. Would you defend my freedom of speech to do that? Its only a cartoon right?
I didn't say they exclusively were, though we've been over this already - the point was that the intent of the broadcast was to be provocative.
A cartoon of an historic figure doesn't break any laws - your comparison is invalid.
It's a rather more distasteful cartoon (depicting someone's death) but it's still just a cartoon? If you were advocating people copy the act or the cartoon was detailed enough to be classed as obscene etc.. then perhaps it would be close to the boundaries - other than that it's still a cartoon.
In Spain the age of sexual consent in some regions is as low as 13 iirc.
Which one, you 're flip flopping between so many I don't know which you are referring too, I guess it's the Danish one. Putting up a cartoon drawing in a national news paper of a Prophet of another religion with a bomb on his head, whilst numerous Muslims countries were currently under occupation and a mass hysteria towards Muslims in general was not a sensible thing to do.
As it is distasteful doing the above, not sure where you picked up the advocating bit....
Why is it ok for JAPAN to have age of 12 in this day and age! just answer this?
it seems in your mind, you have totally ignored my post and picked on one thing out of context, same thing you did with Quran! open your eyes, learn to be open!
oh i am sorry, Japan has a legal age of 13 not 12! my point still stands.. and even if it was 15, (france et al) then to you it would still be paedophilia.. so go on why dont you lot do something about that?
dont beat around the bush, if the law says it is 13, it is 13!
That is disingenuous. From an Islamic perspective the actions of Mohammed were within the law of the time, so it is reasonable to assume as long as a Muslim follows the law of this time then they are following Mohammed's example. Not that a Muslim is required to follow each specific act of Mohammed in the first place, only use his life as a guide in the form of the Sunnah.
Most Islamic Countries have a higher age of consent then the UK anyway.
I don't think it is being disengenuous at all as Mohammed also created a whole bunch of laws. If God really was having a chat with Mo do you not think he would have taken the time to say "Good work on the whole Islam thing so far, but I don't think banging a 12 year old is all that good a thing to do."?
Obviously child welfare was much less important than stopping people eating bacon an making them pray five times a day.![]()
If Islam isn't divinely inspired then there is no issue at all with Mohammed's actions because it was culturally acceptable at the time. If it is divinely inspired then we have problems as God really isn't all that bothered about old blokes having sex with kids!
Your answer here is also disingenuous....
I didn't say they exclusively were, though we've been over this already - the point was that the intent of the broadcast was to be provocative.
A cartoon of an historic figure doesn't break any laws - your comparison is invalid.
It's a rather more distasteful cartoon (depicting someone's death) but it's still just a cartoon? If you were advocating people copy the act or the cartoon was detailed enough to be classed as obscene etc.. then perhaps it would be close to the boundaries - other than that it's still a cartoon.
And you would be wrong. Disrespectful, flippant and skipping details for the sake of brevity, definitely! But in no way am I being insincere or anything but candid in my views.
doesnt matter if it is a cartoon or not when it will hurt sentiments of millions of people.
if i said "holocaust didnt happen" - why is that a crime? it shouldnt matter it is still "free speech"
If Islam isn't divinely inspired then there is no issue at all with Mohammed's actions because it was culturally acceptable at the time. If it is divinely inspired then we have problems as God really isn't all that bothered about old blokes having sex with kids!
Holocaust denial isn't a crime in the UK...
I think you are being disingenuous in reply, I think you know better and are misrepresenting the level of knowledge you have, not that your stated position on Islam is insincere or that you are not being candid on your dislike for Religion, Islam in particular, but rather your responses to questions and comments.
...You also did it with the Japan AoC, which does have a AoC of 13, and then each Prefecture sets its own laws regarding the "corruption of minors"...the laws, both at federal and prefecture level are quite complex and not always very clear and are not always specific to an AoC...if you had read up on this, as I suspect you must have before commenting, then you would realise that.
doesnt matter if it is a cartoon or not when it will hurt sentiments of millions of people.
As has been pointed out - that isn't a crime in the uk.if i said "holocaust didnt happen" - why is that a crime? it shouldnt matter it is still "free speech"
And you would still be wrong. I was condensing for the sake of brevity and the fact I am on my tablet so have no desire to write a well thought out and extensive essay that will likely be ignored by our resident Islamists anyway. In short I am treating this topic with the (lack of) respect it deserves. If it was a topic on the ethical morality of religious actions and their role models in SC I might put more effort in to it, but for this thread? No, not worth the time.
Jesus H Christ have you seen the semi literate frothing loon I am replying to? Do you honestly think he has the intellectual capability to decipher the nuances of the Age of Consent laws in Japan?
My very first post on Japan's AoC laws mentioned the federal being 13 but then I generalised the many differing prefecture laws to a general 18. Which isn't far off the truth.