The fish Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 I have only one gripe with what you said, and that is you said that Denmark is a place where you 'can take the piss'. Although it's taking the piss to you and me, to some people, it's insulting beyond belief. I think that's the essential difference that both sides need to acknowledge. I should point out that only one of the cartoons was of Mohammad, and it was also the only genuinely amusing one (the "we've run out of virgins" one). I cannot see, regardless of what view you take, in what way it is insulting enough to smash and burn embassies. It's a cartoon in a low-circulation magazine from, of all places, Denmark. Get over it. The few Muslims at my school thought nothing of it, so you can't pull the religion card (and I'd smite you for doing so too, it's a rubbish debating point). In a way, it's a very, very good thing that lots of Muslims got "deeply offended" by it. Maybe it'll teach them to lighten up a little, and stop pretending that they're living in a bubble in which they can only have good things said about them. Maybe the media in the Middle East will grow the fuck up, and stop printing genuinely anti-semitic cartoons daily, while going ape-shit over a bunch of shitty cartoons and some images take from elsewhere by an Imam trying to stir things up a bit. The whole point of the article was a critique of self-censorship by the paper, and the resulting protests proved it's point quite well, I feel. Oh, and as a point of solidarity for freedom of censorship: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 As I'm from Denmark and followed the case from when the cartoons were first published, I feel I should contribute to this. See, it all started because some artists refused to draw some pictures of Muhammed for a book about Islam because it according to the religion is forbidden to depict Muhammed and the artists feared the response of some the more religious Muslims. This prompted the Danish newspaper JyllandsPosten (JP) to write an article about the right of free speech and how Muslims in Denmark needed to learn about the Danish tradition of making fun of everyone and everything from religion to the royal family. To emphasize this, the paper asked a number of artists to draw comical cartoons of Muhammed. Many refused, but some agreed and drew the cartoons that "The fish" posted. In Denmark, no Muslims really got upset about it. Some people (both Danes and Muslims) thought the paper had crossed the line, but many also thought the paper had done the right thing in bringing up the topic of free speech. The problems really started when some imams took the pictures with them to the Middle Eastern countries. From here it all went down hill, as they also brought a picture of a man dressed like a pig with them and said that it was one of the cartoons, when in fact it was a picture from some sort of festival in Germany (I'm not 100 percent sure about that, though). The Middle Eastern countries asked for an apology from the Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen, but he refused as the newspapers are independent (i.e. have no connection with the government) and are protected by the right of free speech and press. From this time on, the debate in Denmark went on about if we should use the free speech to provoke in order to prove we had the right to do so, or if we should respect Islam's wishes about not making fun of Muhammed. The problems raged on in the Middle East as Danish embassies were being burned down and the imams who had brought the cartoons with them were being criticised here in Denmark for causing trouble for the country. It got even worse when one of the prominent imams had been caught in a French documentary saying on hidden camera "if someone wasn't going to bomb a certain popular Danish minister (who is a moderate Muslim) soon". After the airing of this documentary, the imam claimed that "it was a joke taken out of context". He was under heavy fire, but managed to evade being expelled from Denmark. Since then, the crisis has slowly faded out. My own opinion about all of this? I'm not really sure. I'm for free speech and against censorship, but at the same time I don't like when human rights are being misused. I always ask the question: "Is it right to do something just to prove that one can?" And that's where I'll leave it for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Day Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 My own opinion about all of this? I'm not really sure. I'm for free speech and against censorship, but at the same time I don't like when human rights are being misused. I always ask the question: "Is it right to do something just to prove that one can?" And that's where I'll leave it for now. Well Dannyboy, I really respect your post, and your closing comment and I fully agree. I really am for freedom of speech, why should another human-being have the right to stop impose when another human articualtes themself? But is it really right to do soething just because you can? there are always resulting factors of actions, especialy actions like that. But I'll leae that there. Am I racist... well when I find myself getting annoyed for someone stereotyping to a group of people (e.g. all Afro-Caribbeans, South Asians and Eastern Europeans cause crime in East London) then I know I'm not. Prejudice of any kind tends to get on my nerves and some people don't tend to see the hurt behind words and minor actions unless they become a major victim of it themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Well Dannyboy, I really respect your post, and your closing comment and I fully agree. I really am for freedom of speech, why should another human-being have the right to stop impose when another human articualtes themself? But is it really right to do soething just because you can? there are always resulting factors of actions, especialy actions like that. But I'll leae that there. Am I racist... well when I find myself getting annoyed for someone stereotyping to a group of people (e.g. all Afro-Caribbeans, South Asians and Eastern Europeans cause crime in East London) then I know I'm not. Prejudice of any kind tends to get on my nerves and some people don't tend to see the hurt behind words and minor actions unless they become a major victim of it themselves. Thank you for your nice comments. And I agree with you, too: I hate stereotyping and prejudice very much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Domo Kun Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 I should point out that only one of the cartoons was of Mohammad, and it was also the only genuinely amusing one (the "we've run out of virgins" one). I cannot see, regardless of what view you take, in what way it is insulting enough to smash and burn embassies. It's a cartoon in a low-circulation magazine from, of all places, Denmark. Get over it. The few Muslims at my school thought nothing of it, so you can't pull the religion card (and I'd smite you for doing so too, it's a rubbish debating point). In a way, it's a very, very good thing that lots of Muslims got "deeply offended" by it. Maybe it'll teach them to lighten up a little, and stop pretending that they're living in a bubble in which they can only have good things said about them. Maybe the media in the Middle East will grow the fuck up, and stop printing genuinely anti-semitic cartoons daily, while going ape-shit over a bunch of shitty cartoons and some images take from elsewhere by an Imam trying to stir things up a bit. Urm, okay. I don't want to offend you man, I'm just trying to have a calm discussion about this... I don't understand, what is the religion card exactly? I assume you mean when I said that to the very religious, this is offensive? I don't see why that isn't a valid point, please elaborate? I would argue that as religion shapes how you percieve the world, it can be just as important a factor as where you're born, your political beliefs, etc. I don't want to sound insulting, I'm not trying to 'get one back at you', but you've just proved my point a little by saying, 'maybe the media in the Middle East will grow the fuck up, and stop printing genuinely anti-semitic cartoons daily', because the media in the middle east doesn't print anti semitic cartoons daily. So now can you understand why people in the middle east found the anti muslim (as they saw it) cartoons so offensive? Don't you imagine people were saying things like 'I wish the Danish would just grow up and stop printing islamaphobic cartoons daily'. This is my main point, don't point the finger at people. Try and understand others. (p.s. I am NOT claiming anti semitic cartoons are in any way okay, just saying they're not a hugely frequent thing in the middle east) While I was in Syria I didn't see any anti jewish things. I saw anti-israel, but there's a difference (argueably not... Is there a difference to Syrians...? I think so, but I can't be 100% certain.). The anti Israeli things said stuff about the war in lebanon, as it had just ended when I went. I saw many jewish artefacts in the damascus museum, I don't think an entire country of nazis would allow such a thing as a dug up sinagogue in their national museum. Islam teaches tollerance of other religions. Although that's gone out of the window for a tiny minority, how would Syria and Lebanon function if this wasn't overwhelmingly the case? 20% of Syria, and 40% of Lebanon is Christian. Edit: I should add, I don't think you're racist or anything, I just don't belive anyone would ever hate another group of people if they truly understood them. No offensive, but I don't think you understand the middle east or islam very well. Hope you don't find that offensive... sorry... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Personally I think the muslims over reacted to this cartoon. If it insults you then that is fair enough. They say that the Danes should have respected their culture and religion but then should they have respected the Danish culture? My own opinion about all of this? I'm not really sure. I'm for free speech and against censorship, but at the same time I don't like when human rights are being misused. I always ask the question: "Is it right to do something just to prove that one can?" And that's where I'll leave it for now. The question is too vague. I think it depends on what you are doing. I think something like free speech then yes it is. However something like murder then no it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 No offensive, but I don't think you understand the middle east or islam very well. Hope you don't find that offensive... sorry... I think the main thing that has been misunderstood here is my post. I wasn't ranting at you; it was a general anti-hypocrite (which you are not) rant. It's unfortunate that you took it the wrong way, it would have saved you typing all that. I don't understand, what is the religion card exactly? I assume you mean when I said that to the very religious, this is offensive? I don't see why that isn't a valid point, please elaborate? I would argue that as religion shapes how you percieve the world, it can be just as important a factor as where you're born, your political beliefs, etc. To say "you can't say/do/think that because it offends my religion" is the ultimate trump card, but it is, when thought about properly, a useless argument. It's basically saying "I don't know exactly why I believe this other than because it says it in a very old, very unreliable book, so I'll just say you can't argue against it, and call you "intolerant" if you try to." The "it's my religion" card can't win you an argument: it only shows everyone that you don't actually know why you think that. I don't want to sound insulting, I'm not trying to 'get one back at you', but you've just proved my point a little by saying, 'maybe the media in the Middle East will grow the fuck up, and stop printing genuinely anti-semitic cartoons daily', because the media in the middle east doesn't print anti semitic cartoons daily. My friends who live in the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt would all beg to differ. While I was in Syria I didn't see any anti jewish things. I saw anti-israel, but there's a difference (argueably not... Is there a difference to Syrians...? I think so, but I can't be 100% certain.) In this case, anti-semitic and anti-Israeli are synonyms, actually. Edit: I should add, I don't think you're racist or anything, I just don't belive anyone would ever hate another group of people if they truly understood them. I have nothing more against Muslims that I do against most Christians! (Though, I'll admit I have a problem with most Christians...) I have a slight problem with your theory: I despise Creationists who want it taught in schools as Science, and I understand them perfectly. What they don't understand is that they are wrong. Creationism is not science, ergo it should not be taught as such. Also, I don't take kindly to the same group of people accusing those like me to be "in league with the devil" and accuse me of "insulting their children". In fact, typing that has made me realise that the only group is dislike are those who refuse to understand others, like Creationists, violent Animal Rights campaigners, or extremist Muslims. Personally I think the muslims over reacted to this cartoon. If it insults you then that is fair enough. They say that the Danes should have respected their culture and religion but then should they have respected the Danish culture? If "respect" for religion means never, ever accusing it of being intolerant. then no, I don't think the Danish paper should have. After all, this whole thing was started by the paper accusing Islam of being intolerant. Given the Islamic world's reaction, it seems the paper was totally correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Muslims don't have any right not to be offended, just like Christians don't, Jews don't etc. Muslims are not special, and do not deserve any special rights. If they don't like how other people talk about them around the world, then they should piss off to the moon, and if they threaten murder because their religion was insulted, then they should be thrown in prison. By the way, Muhammad was a child molestor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 That is the most intelligent point I've ever heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Muslims don't have any right not to be offended, just like Christians don't, Jews don't etc. Muslims are not special, and do not deserve any special rights. If they don't like how other people talk about them around the world, then they should piss off to the moon, and if they threaten murder because their religion was insulted, then they should be thrown in prison. This is exactly what I mean about the religion trump card, with regards to taking offence. You put it very well, may I add, and I love the "should piss off to the moon" touch. Nice. By the way, Muhammad was a child molestor. Now here we see an example of the moral zeitgeist. It was pretty much perfectly acceptable in 700AD to do such a thing. It was perfectly acceptable to be executed for theft in most times, and, until recently, perfectly acceptable to execute someone for murder. In some US states, it still is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaggis Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Muslims don't have any right not to be offended, just like Christians don't, Jews don't etc. Muslims are not special, and do not deserve any special rights. If they don't like how other people talk about them around the world, then they should piss off to the moon, and if they threaten murder because their religion was insulted, then they should be thrown in prison. I love you.:p Nah, in all seriousness, you make a really good point (best point in the thread might I add). Very true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Nah, in all seriousness, you make a really good point (best point in the thread might I add). Very true. It was my point! (albeit put in a much more amusing way...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaggis Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 It was my point! (albeit put in a much more amusing way...) I know, I was about to edit it saying that it was also your point. But yeah, good points from you and mikey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 This is what there should be more of on this forum, the praising of me. Really though, I just try to tell it how it is to the best of my ability. I don't walk on egg shells around minorities. I've been called sexist, homophobic, racist, and whatever by people, but I don't give a shit. I'm not afraid to say things which other people might tread carefully around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falcon_BlizZACK Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 I know, I was about to edit it saying that it was also your point. But yeah, good points from you and mikey. Meh, I made more points than them...Give me points. Points, points, points.... (is fairly high). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaggis Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Erm, King_V gets more points because he's...king! (Apologies lol) But, yeah, the religion thing. People are always going to take the piss out of one or another like Mikey said. People just have to deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falcon_BlizZACK Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Erm, King_V gets more points because he's...king! (Apologies lol) But, yeah, the religion thing. People are always going to take the piss out of one or another like Mikey said. People just have to deal with it. : peace: Agreed. Its just mindless ignorance in my opinion (regarding the violence after the cartoons). Its like that Shilpa Shetty in Big Brother issue where you had Indians in India burning 'effigies' of the BB producers...I mean COME ON! But I believe mindless ignorance is the core feature of all religions. ...So many people getting pwned. (IMO) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 But I believe mindless ignorance is the core feature of all religions. Well, yes: "faith" is seen as a virtue - it's how you stop people from asking questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Domo Kun Posted November 4, 2007 Share Posted November 4, 2007 Muslims don't have any right not to be offended, just like Christians don't, Jews don't etc. Muslims are not special, and do not deserve any special rights. If they don't like how other people talk about them around the world, then they should piss off to the moon, and if they threaten murder because their religion was insulted, then they should be thrown in prison. By the way, Muhammad was a child molestor. To that I'd say that everyone in the world is special and requires special rights, wether they be black, british, female, male, white, relgious, athiest, french... anything. I don't think muslims are special, but I don't think I am either, and I wouldn't want to be insulted by anyone. Oh and yes of course those who threaten murder should be put in prison. I'm worried you guys are going to think I'm defending the violent ones... Really though, I just try to tell it how it is to the best of my ability. I don't walk on egg shells around minorities. I've been called sexist, homophobic, racist, and whatever by people, but I don't give a shit. I'm not afraid to say things which other people might tread carefully around. But surely it's better not to be called these things because it means you haven't upset anyone... right...? That is, unless you actually are racist, homophobic, and sexist... To say "you can't say/do/think that because it offends my religion" is the ultimate trump card, but it is, when thought about properly, a useless argument. It's basically saying "I don't know exactly why I believe this other than because it says it in a very old, very unreliable book, so I'll just say you can't argue against it, and call you "intolerant" if you try to." The "it's my religion" card can't win you an argument: it only shows everyone that you don't actually know why you think that. Ah that's not exactly what I meant though. If I was using the 'it's my religion' (or, it's 'their religion', as I don't have a religion) card, I mean it in relation to perception. I suppose I would translate the card as, 'this is my perception of life and the world around me. I am very set in my ways, so please try to understand why I did what I did.' Hmm... that's a bit far fetched... Do you get me...? Those that were offended (not those who staged violent protests, I'm not defending them and wouldn't), were offended in a way that you and I can't be offended. There's this amazing thing that, to them, does exist and is more sacred than life itself, regardless of how much proof there is or isn't for it. Considering that we have people in this world that don't need hard proof in order to belive something, we need to work with them and try to understand them to stop violence and hatred. I say this assumeing that stopping violence and hatred is the most important thing in the world. Perhaps you'd consider free speech/democracy/ something else to be more important, which is fair enough, but in that case, my arguement doesn't really apply. My friends who live in the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt would all beg to differ. I don't know how to reply to this... I didn't see any evidence of it while in Syria, but it's not like I've lived there... I was only there 10 days. Egypt and the UAE? Surely not!? I suppose I'll have to take your word for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted November 4, 2007 Share Posted November 4, 2007 I think Mikey is right. Why should we have to walk on eggshells? Does anybody walk on eggshells around me? No they don't, and neither should I. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falcon_BlizZACK Posted November 4, 2007 Share Posted November 4, 2007 I think Mikey is right. Why should we have to walk on eggshells? Does anybody walk on eggshells around me? No they don't, and neither should I. In that case, f*** it, why should I respect anyone anymore? Come on, lets all try our best to be as offensive as we possibly can to the next person we meet. No one asked you to 'walk on eggshells', people just want to be respected and live a life of dignity. That 'eggshell' description is just a stealth term for people who can't handle the responsiblity of being respectful. I am not a devout Christian, but that does not mean I am going to call Jesus Christ a child molester and God a 'rapist' just because I can say it... But hey! I'm not walking on 'eggshells' for anyone right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted November 4, 2007 Share Posted November 4, 2007 In that case, f*** it, why should I respect anyone anymore? Come on, lets all try our best to be as offensive as we possibly can to the next person we meet. No one asked you to 'walk on eggshells', people just want to be respected and live a life of dignity. That 'eggshell' description is just a stealth term for people who can't handle the responsiblity of being respectful. I am not a devout Christian, but that does not mean I am going to call Jesus Christ a child molester and God a 'rapist' just because I can say it... But hey! I'm not walking on 'eggshells' for anyone right? Yeah let's all exaggerate throw other people's posts out of context. That's the best way to argue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Domo Kun Posted November 4, 2007 Share Posted November 4, 2007 Interesting... is this what modern racism comes down to, people not wanting to have to be too respectful to each other? It seems to be a hard balance. People must be able to criticize one another, but they can't be allowed to be horribly offensive to each other. Where's the line between those two? On this issue of political correctness gone mad, I find a few problems. There's the issue that, sometimes, it's pathetic. For example the arguement over 'black british', taking the american model of 'african american'... who cares? The rule should just be to be nice to everyone. Words develop negative connotations if we over evaluate them. Yet there's a counter arguement- political correctness has done so much good for this country. Surely everyone will argree here that the fact that television programmes now feature black people on it is a good thing. It reduces fear of other people that people, for some stupid reason, felt they couldn't relate to in real life. I personally belive... with not much evidence, so bear with me... that the rightwing newspapers overexagerate political correctness gone mad. If a government watchdog suggests an idea for making the UK a nicer place to live in which is quite farfetched, pointless, or a waste of time, the daily mail will jump on it and make it seem like a lobby of x minority have forced our government to give in to them. I think the daily mail rile up the masses in anger because they have nothing else to write about. Opinions on that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted November 4, 2007 Share Posted November 4, 2007 That 'eggshell' description is just a stealth term for people who can't handle the responsiblity of being respectful. You seemed to have missed the point here: it's not a case of not being bothered to be respectful, it's not giving respect were it is not due. Yes, all humans deserve a basic level of respect, but there is no need to respect someone's views if they hold them for a reason that doesn't boil down to "it's my religion" (again, there's that trump card). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey Posted November 4, 2007 Share Posted November 4, 2007 You seemed to have missed the point here: it's not a case of not being bothered to be respectful, it's not giving respect were it is not due.Yes, all humans deserve a basic level of respect, but there is no need to respect someone's views if they hold them for a reason that doesn't boil down to "it's my religion" (again, there's that trump card). Thank you for summarizing it perfectly. In that case, f*** it, why should I respect anyone anymore? Come on, lets all try our best to be as offensive as we possibly can to the next person we meet. No one asked you to 'walk on eggshells', people just want to be respected and live a life of dignity. That 'eggshell' description is just a stealth term for people who can't handle the responsiblity of being respectful. I am not a devout Christian, but that does not mean I am going to call Jesus Christ a child molester and God a 'rapist' just because I can say it... But hey! I'm not walking on 'eggshells' for anyone right? No, I'm not saying go around and treat each like shit, I'm saying don't be afraid to give your real opinion just because some idiot minority might cry racism at you. If muslims can't handle criticism in this country, they should fuck off. I don't like Islam, and I don't care what anyone else thinks of that. I'm not a fan of any religions in general actually, but Islam seems to attract the most idiots out of all of them Muhammad was a child molestor, not an insult - fact. Muslims are always making up excuses for it, that and terrorism. They need to be told to fucking behave theirselves, especially when they're over here, but they don't seemt to want to compromise. Again - muslims do not deserve special treatment. They can take it on the chin like everyone else, or get back to the dumps they came from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts