Security guard injured in Texas Muhammed cartoon conference

[Raz]

No, it highlights the absurdity of religion, that people will make death threats over a cartoon. It's also to show that we won't tolerate bully tactics by religious fanatics.

It's very easy to take a stance when you don't appreciate the issues involved. A non-Muslim cannot generally understand the status the Prophet has to Muslims so cannot understand why they are offended. Now, as with any group of people, Muslims take offence and react in different ways. There are ways a Muslim can respond which don't involve violence.

Another example - some people would kill another human being for their country, while others wouldn't...

Hitchens has spoken publicly about death threats and was offered protection when he gave speeches.

I did not know that. Muslims or others?

 

[dowie]

God knows? crapping on a union jack at a soldiers funeral, slashing on a war memorial ? Im sure some people get riled by such things?

rather poor analogies again

if someone wants to go and buy their own union flag and do that at their own event then they can go ahead, this was after all a private event

slashing on a war memorial is rather different and more akin to one of these right wing type going and slashing on a mosque - it is interfering with other people's property rather than just free speech/expression...

 

[Tefal]

I don't, you dont, im sure thems some God fearing ultra patriotic EDL BNP ***** that if they had easy access to a gun would do it?

well this lot showed they will find guns even in a country like the uk or France and attack and kill people in the street so that kinda screws that theory doesn't it?

the EDL coule have attacked in just the same way but they havnt yet have they?

 

[Efour]

rather poor analogies again

if someone wants to go and buy their own union flag and do that at their own event then they can go ahead, this was after all a private event

slashing on a war memorial is rather different and more akin to one of these right wing type going and slashing on a mosque - it is interfering with other people's property rather than just free speech/expression...

I know they are poor, I said that. I generally cant come up with anything as a British raised, non Christian/Church of England person that could offend me to such a degree as i needed to "kill"

 

[Raz]

nah but it gets to the point.... lots of people find lots of different things 'offensive' trying to say that people shouldn't mock beliefs doesn't really work when those beliefs themselves are offensive to others

freedom of speech is protected, unfortunately for naturists freedom to go around naked isn't... though maybe in the future it perhaps should be - albeit with some hygiene rules in place re: bus/train seats

And this is where it becomes a bit more complicated - I can understand your argument/logic but I'm specifically talking about actively being offensive, which I just don't see as being required for intelligent people. Remember, sinning in religion is akin to breaking the law of the land, and so some people are always going to be offended.

But I wouldn't say it's appropriate to mock others generally because of the harmful effects - for what it's worth, there's a verse in the Quran about how to react in such situations:

The good deed and the evil deed cannot be equal. Repel (the evil) with one which is better (i.e. Allah ordered the faithful believers to be patient at the time of anger, and to excuse those who treat them badly), then verily! he, between whom and you there was enmity, (will become) as though he was a close friend.

I don't think it's a verse a lot of Muslims are aware of...

 

[sports_brah]

It's very easy to take a stance when you don't appreciate the issues involved. A non-Muslim cannot generally understand the status the Prophet has to Muslims so cannot understand why they are offended. Now, as with any group of people, Muslims take offence and react in different ways. There are ways a Muslim can respond which don't involve violence.

Another example - some people would kill another human being for their country, while others wouldn't...



I did not know that. Muslims or others?

I'm religious as well, and yet it would never enter my mind to even consider such acts. Anyone that needs to lash out in defence of something, obviously must think its weak in some way....

The only other conclusion I can come to is that maybe.....just maybe Muslims have an ideological point to this which is so strong that it actually points to a greater problem.........that fundamentally Islamic beliefs are incontrovertibly different to the judo-christian countries of the west...just like we would consider saudi arabia the same for islamic beliefs and Christian influence?

 

[Efour]

well this lot showed they will find guns even in a country like the uk or France and attack and kill people in the street so that kinda screws that theory doesn't it?

the EDL coule have attacked in just the same way but they havnt yet have they?

This lot? 2 "mental" untrained lone gunmen ? or is this lot Extremist Muslims? or Just Muslims? Ill ask all my muzzie mates at language lessons tomorrow if they think what these 2 guys did was justified.

EDL no they haven't yet, no ? I guess not, whats your point ? lol
Tip off the police if they are planning something maybe ?

its weird how i associate religious fanatics with patriotic fanatics... I guess fanatical type people are driven by the similar motives?

 

[Danthus]

I don't think anyone has an issue with Muslims being offended, what they have an issue with is the utter disproportionate reactions we see.

 

[dowie]

And this is where it becomes a bit more complicated - I can understand your argument/logic but I'm specifically talking about actively being offensive, which I just don't see as being required for intelligent people.

well in the context of the 'draw mohammed competition' I'd agree, it isn't required - it seemed to be just a tasteless event designed to have a dig at muslims for the sake of it

on the other hand satire is a useful tool for making a point regarding politics, religion etc.. people also get offended by it

the 'jesus and mo' cartoon series for example makes quite a few valid observations about organised religion and is deeply offensive to some religious people - people who would want to restrict that sort of thing would be very much in the wrong IMO

I think asking people to not mock beliefs is very unrealistic, beliefs are inherently open to challenge, criticism and some of that is going to come in the form of mocking. Some of that mocking is going to be in the form of well thought out arguments, cartoons etc.. from people with genuine and quite reasonable ideological objections on the other hand some is just going to be crude rubbish based in bigotry - though you can't separate the two, stupid people are entitled to free speech as much as the rest.

 

[Efour]

The only other conclusion I can come to is that maybe.....just maybe Muslims have an ideological point to this which is so strong that it actually points to a greater problem.........that fundamentally Islamic beliefs are incontrovertibly different to the judo-christian countries of the west.

Its true. Western religions are already diluted to obscurity in most countries. 100 years of capitalism has completely polished it smooth.
Theres no way for it to be compatible with a medieval religion that still teaches its follows to live their very lives by a 1000 year old code with no exceptions.

The only Muslims that thrive in the west are those religiously diluted down and culturally adapted.

Im sure we all have Muslim mates that smoked your dope and drank your beers at weekends then pretended to be saintly during Ramadan.

 

[Mynight]

I had a Muslim coworker that tried to give me coke as he "couldn't have it during Ramadan". I found it rather amusing.

I have yet to meet a so called radical and I've met a fair few muslims. It's no different to Christianity there's always going to be a few that live to the letter of their own definition of the book. They're the ones the news focus on not the vast majority who follow their own version and don't really care what others make of it.

 

[ElliorR]

I just heard on the news he was an unarmed security guard. Unarmed security guard in Texas? Hell, unarmed in Texas? What is he, a pinko commie?

 

[Mynight]

Unarmed means just a handgun in Texas, armed is semi auto rifle and above .

 

[Raz]

on the other hand satire is a useful tool for making a point regarding politics, religion etc.. people also get offended by it

the 'jesus and mo' cartoon series for example makes quite a few valid observations about organised religion and is deeply offensive to some religious people - people who would want to restrict that sort of thing would be very much in the wrong IMO

I think asking people to not mock beliefs is very unrealistic, beliefs are inherently open to challenge, criticism and some of that is going to come in the form of mocking. Some of that mocking is going to be in the form of well thought out arguments, cartoons etc.. from people with genuine and quite reasonable ideological objections on the other hand some is just going to be crude rubbish based in bigotry - though you can't separate the two, stupid people are entitled to free speech as much as the rest.

I can see the point you're making and don't disagree entirely, but to reiterate my earlier point, I think it's fair to criticise religion, or challenge certain beliefs but it's how we go about it which is the key thing. But I accept your last point.

 

[Raz]

I'm religious as well, and yet it would never enter my mind to even consider such acts. Anyone that needs to lash out in defence of something, obviously must think its weak in some way....

The only other conclusion I can come to is that maybe.....just maybe Muslims have an ideological point to this which is so strong that it actually points to a greater problem.........that fundamentally Islamic beliefs are incontrovertibly different to the judo-christian countries of the west...just like we would consider saudi arabia the same for islamic beliefs and Christian influence?

The question really is whether or not there is a basis for it in Islam. There's a difference of opinion on whether those who mock the Prophet or God are punished by death, but even if that were true it could only be done in a state following sharia. In that case it would be against the law and therefore a criminal act. In non-Muslim countries Muslims have no right nor justification to shed blood.

I wont go into details, but there's quite a lot of debate by Muslim scholars on this, and whether it's an Islamic injunction supported by the Quran. The other issue is context - mocking Allah and the Prophet at that time was done only by the enemies who directly opposed him and the early Muslims and things aren't quite the same now...

 

[Danthus]

People always try to get a rise out of others, the problem is you now risk getting hot for it.

 

[Amnesia]

The question really is whether or not there is a basis for it in Islam. There's a difference of opinion on whether those who mock the Prophet or God are punished by death, but even if that were true it could only be done in a state following sharia. In that case it would be against the law and therefore a criminal act. In non-Muslim countries Muslims have no right nor justification to shed blood.

They know the law of the land yet choose to live here and kill its citizens when citizens exercise their freedom.
If it's incompatible with a persons religion then surely moving to a country that practiced barbaric crap would be a better solution than taking up arms.

 

[SciNeT]

They know the law of the land yet choose to live here and kill its citizens when citizens exercise their freedom.
If it's incompatible with a persons religion then surely moving to a country that practiced barbaric crap would be a better solution than taking up arms.

I don't understand this either, this happened in America, in America if your religion goes against their laws then it cannot be practised. You can be a practising Muslim, but if free speech makes you a homicidal maniac, you will be arrested. Or as these fanatics found out yesterday, pumped full of lead. There's plenty of 3rd world hell holes where it's OK to behave like barbaric animals, DO IT OVER THERE.

 

[doofer]

If Religion wasn't so ridiculous it wouldn't be ridiculed.

 

[spoffle]

It seems that most people just don't understand that freedom of speech isn't freedom of consequence.

It's very obvious that this event was organised specifically to have this sort of response, you'd be an idiot to think otherwise. People who are claiming it was just an exercise in freedom of expression are utterly delusional.

When you know crazy people react very badly to something specific, you only organise a public event doing that very thing to get crazy to react like you know they will.

I have no sympathy whatsoever for the guys that got shot and killed, because on the flip side of that, it's clearly bait, and if you gear up and are looking to shoot people up for harming your delicate sensibilities, then there's a very strong chance you'll end up getting shot yourself. After all, putting a gun in your own hands, with mal-intent significantly increases the likelihood of bullets being sent your own way.

It's really a case of, if you want to play with fire, getting burnt is a possibility, which leads back to the above that freedom of speech isn't freedom of consequence and that applies to both parties.