<p>UCLari doesnt know the importance of Islam in these regions, and hence is undermining the effect of the cartoons in these regions.</p>
<p>Its true that you dont have to be a theist to have an opinion, but you need to understand Islam to realize why there was such an outrage over the incident. Not, I am all for freedom of speech, but the cartoons were unncessary and uncalled for. I have yet to see Muslims make such pictures on Moses or Jesus. Its true that Arabs print articles bashing Jews and Chritians, but there so do Westerners with Muslisms. I didnt see the Muslims protesting then. The Mohammed cartoons is a whole different story.</p>
<p>There were many Muslims (including my close friends) who protested terrorist activities, did you not listen then?</p>
<p>What on eath are ou talking about with respect to all of your terrorist comments. I never called you a terrorist.</p>
<p>"UCLari doesnt know the importance of Islam in these regions, and hence is undermining the effect of the cartoons in these regions."</p>
<p>I personally can't speak for UCLAri but I can say that I am well-educated with respect to modern Islamic theology. Yes, I agree that the Islamic faith is very important in the Arab world. However, that does not give anyone the right to loot and destroy buildings. </p>
<p>"Not, I am all for freedom of speech, but the cartoons were unncessary and uncalled for."</p>
<p>Actually, I believe that the Danish proved their point when so many thousands of Muslims ransacked the embassies. Their violent actions proved that there is little tolerance for freedom of speech in the Islamic community.</p>
<p>Freedom of speech must not be compromised to anyone or any religion or philosophy.</p>
<p>I don't think you may have realized this everkingly, but there are limitations to the freedom of speech. Someone can't yell fire in movie theater just for fun and cause a panick which can potentially kill people due to trampelling. One cannot call buildings and say that there is a bomb in the building just because they felt they had the freedom to do so. I don't think you realize these limitations to our freedom of speech, but there are some moral and ethical boundaries we should not cross. There is no point in offending someone and causing panic and uproar just becuase you are capable of doing it. </p>
<p>In a perfect world, no one would take offense to anything anyone would say and everyone could say things without worrying about the consequences. However, we do not live in a perfect world, certain people have special beliefs and people should think about the consequences of what they are doing before they actually do it and shouldn't do it if the action produces more harm than good.</p>
<p>Xe<em>Ln</em>Ag_A:
"i think what everkingly means is that more specifically, we should not be compromising our freedom of speech to appease other religions."</p>
<p>Yes, that was the intended meaning of my statement. Looking back at my post, I realize that the wording was inappropriate.</p>
<p>First of JamesN, my name is Ari, not Lari. Read my profile or...just pay attention.</p>
<p>
[quote]
UCLari doesnt know the importance of Islam in these regions, and hence is undermining the effect of the cartoons in these regions.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And how can you claim to know that? Who are you, Ms. Cleo?</p>
<p>I don't care how important a religion is in a region, it doesn't give them the right to threaten other people with bodily harm. It is both outside of the purview of Sharia and within the sovereign right of the European nations to publish critical material. Yes, any Muslim nation has the right to say "stop that!" but they do not have the right to condone violence. This goes against so many established rules it's ridiculous.</p>
<p>
[quote]
First of JamesN, my name is Ari, not Lari. Read my profile or...just pay attention.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I dont care about your name.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't care how important a religion is in a region, it doesn't give them the right to threaten other people with bodily harm.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>By you saying that you dont care about the improtance of religion there, you are indeed showing that you are ignorant. No wonder why Muslims try to avoid people like you.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Yes, any Muslim nation has the right to say "stop that!" but they do not have the right to condone violence. This goes against so many established rules it's ridiculous.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Did you know that I would go to jail if I denied the Holocaust in Europe?
What do you have to say about that?</p>
<p>I remeber when some Jewish kid told me that Mary was raped by a Roman and Jesus was the result. I was *<strong><em>ed, and millions of Christians would be *</em></strong>ed too if a nation published an article over it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
By you saying that you dont care about the improtance of religion there, you are indeed showing that you are ignorant. No wonder why Muslims try to avoid people like you.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Oh, enough with your silly assumptions. I know how important Islam is in the region. However, based on both Islamic Sharia and international convention, what happened in Europe is not something that allows for violence. Non-Muslims are not bound by Sharia in the same way Muslims are.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Did you know that I would go to jail if I denied the Holocaust in Europe?
What do you have to say about that?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think it's wrong. Way to go ASSuming stuff.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I remeber when some Jewish kid told me that Mary was raped by a Roman and Jesus was the result. I was *<strong><em>ed, and millions of Christians would be *</em></strong>ed too if a nation published an article over it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>More than likely, yes. But I would condemn any nation that used coercion and force to put down freedom of speech, no matter how awful it is. I think the Vatican is just as silly for attacking Dan Brown as Muslims are for burning embassies.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Originally posted by Biff:
I don't think you may have realized this everkingly, but there are limitations to the freedom of speech. Someone can't yell fire in movie theater just for fun and cause a panick which can potentially kill people due to trampelling. One cannot call buildings and say that there is a bomb in the building just because they felt they had the freedom to do so. I don't think you realize these limitations to our freedom of speech, but there are some moral and ethical boundaries we should not cross. There is no point in offending someone and causing panic and uproar just becuase you are capable of doing it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree with it whole heartedly.</p>
<p>First of all, freedom of speech and expression is not indefinite. Mentally hurting and torturing other people isnt an example of CIVILISATION ( many Western Countries think that they r superior and more civilised than the rest of the world). So, that Danish cartoonist has done very wrong to a particular community... he has caused mental pain and torture to millions of muslims (In Indian law as well as that of USA, as far as I know, causing mental torture or pain is an Offensive act and is liable for punishment).</p>
<p>Then, the violent protests by some Muslims is also unjustified. They should have resorted to a peaceful form of protest.</p>
<p>I dont know if many of u know about the depiction of Hindu gods and goddesses holding beer bottles in beer bars in places like Germany. It has hurt the sentiments of Hindu community, but the Hindus haven't burnt buildings or resorted to any violent protests... they r protesting against it through legal channels. (I dont mean to say that Hindu community is in any way superior to any other community. I m just giving an example. There r some extremist ppl in this community too.)</p>
<p>That Danish cartoonist should apologize for this heinous act. If someday some other newspaper will publish some morphed or real photographs of his personal moments with his wife or any other lady, then wouldn't he feel disgusted, offended and angry? Would it be right to put this publishing act under the right to freedom of speech?</p>
<p>The political cartoons are mental pain and torture? So what's next, suing musical artists you don't like because it hurts you to listen to them?</p>
<p>Holy crap, who knew that people could be tortured by obscure cartoons in Danish newspapers. I should start suing companies that make bad movies, since I've thought that the experience is sometimes akin to torture.</p>
<p>Funny how the depictions of Jews as bloodsucking vampires, eaters of babies, and general swine doesn't get the Muslim community up in arms. I guess the pendulum only swings one way when you're self-righteous.</p>
<p>First of all, those paintings were not political, but religious.
there is a big difference in listenting to a bad music and listening to someone's comments which hurts our inner self. Wouldnt u feel offended if that same cartoonist will make some wretched cartoons depicting your loved ones like parents, brothers or sisters in bad taste and light?? </p>
<p>Wouldnt u feel offended if tomorrow someone will print an article on how u sleep with a female dog? and then they will publish a cartoon depicting it... and then when u will try to argue ur point that they r wrong, nobody will listen to u? What will u do then? U will definitely protest, violently or peacefully, but u WILL protest... </p>
<p>(I m not pointing towards u, I m giving just an example so that u can understand my point. I have highest respect for u. :) )</p>
<p>If one community is doing something wrong then it doesnt imply that we shud emulate their act. Also, extremists r present in all the religions...</p>
<p>I might be upset, but I wouldn't consider it "torture." That's really taking a lot of liberties with the word.</p>
<p>The difference, however, is that while many people went and protested the Taliban blowing up important Buddhist artifacts in Afghanistan, there weren't too many calls for the decimation of the Middle East. On the other hand, pictures like these</p>
<p>weren't uncommon during this whole brouhaha. I see no problem with Muslims openly protesting the cartoons. I see a problem with the calls for violence.</p>
<p>But I also can't help but see this all as a case of self-righteousness. I'm sorry, but in the "modern" world, everything is fair game, including religion. Countries like Saudi want the TVs, cars, and air conditioning, but none of the political baggage that comes with modernization.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But I also can't help but see this all as a case of self-righteousness. I'm sorry, but in the "modern" world, everything is fair game, including religion. Countries like Saudi want the TVs, cars, and air conditioning, but none of the political baggage that comes with modernization.
<p>
[quote]
Oh, enough with your silly assumptions. I know how important Islam is in the region. However, based on both Islamic Sharia and international convention, what happened in Europe is not something that allows for violence. Non-Muslims are not bound by Sharia in the same way Muslims are.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, this isnt politics. This is religion. If you mess with one prophet, you better expect a response by the Muslim community.I wouldnt be shocked if Westerners did the same thing if s Muslim nation severely bashes Jesus. People there live and breathe Islam, abd bashing such a holy Islamic figure, would only incite violence. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I think it's wrong. Way to go ASSuming stuff.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So you condemnn Muslim response to the cartoons, but not people being jailed for denying the Holocaust? Freedom of speech is being blocked in both cases.</p>
<p>
[quote]
No, this isnt politics. This is religion. If you mess with one prophet, you better expect a response by the Muslim community.I wouldnt be shocked if Westerners did the same thing if s Muslim nation severely bashes Jesus.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Guess what? The second they started infringing upon the rights of people in another nation, it became politics. </p>
<p>
[quote]
People there live and breathe Islam, abd bashing such a holy Islamic figure, would only incite violence.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Violence from the "Religion of Peace?" Tsk tsk. </p>
<p>
[quote]
So you condemnn Muslim response to the cartoons, but not people being jailed for denying the Holocaust? Freedom of speech is being blocked in both cases.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I said that I think that people being jailed for denying the Holocaust is wrong. What else do you want me to say?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Guess what? The second they started infringing upon the rights of people in another nation, it became politics.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Its more of as religious matter than a political one. Since all this mess started based on Muslims feeling their culture and religion being attacked through the Mohammed cartoons.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Violence from the "Religion of Peace?" Tsk tsk.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Its interesting because all this resent was started by a "democracy."</p>
<p>
[quote]
I said that I think that people being jailed for denying the Holocaust is wrong. What else do you want me to say?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If thats the case, then why is there so much b1tching over Muslim nations preventing freedom of speech? After all, Europeans are the hypocrites here.</p>
<p>UCLAri:
"More than likely, yes. But I would condemn any nation that used coercion and force to put down freedom of speech, no matter how awful it is. I think the Vatican is just as silly for attacking Dan Brown as Muslims are for burning embassies."</p>
<p>I quite agree everyone has the inherent right to voice his or her opinion verbally and non-verbally. No nation has the authority to corrupt this inalienable right. I don't really see how your reference to the Vatican and Dan Brown fit in this discussion. The Vatican and any national government should be free to say whatever they want however they absolutely have to refrain from preventing anyone from voicing his or her opinion.</p>
<p>JamesN:
"Its interesting because all this resent was started by a "democracy.""</p>
<p>What are you talking about? Are you serious? You sound as if you believe that the Danish nation is responsible for all of the recent chaos. Newspapers published those cartoons not because the Danish government made them but because they FREELY wanted to see if Muslims respected freedom of speech. And guess what? The numerous Islamic protests, burnings and other violent actions proved that quite frankly a massive portion of the Islamic community cannot accept criticism.</p>
<p>JamesN:
The Holocaust was a political event and not a religious one. People of all races and creeds were violently exterminated by the Nazi regime. Although I agree that the European laws that bar individuals from criticizing the Holocaust are wrong, they are meant to prevent a similar event from occurring. The Holocaust should stand forever as a stark reminder of the extent of human cruelty.</p>
<p>How can you compare that to the Muhammed cartoon controversy?</p>
<p>everkingly, you don't criticize a religion by strapping a bomb to the head of its most revered prophet and displaying the idol to the mainstream media. You are basically asking to get assassinated by doing something that stupid when you could have instead critizized whatever reservations you have about Islam in a peaceful and non-confrontational manner.</p>
