All moral systems really boil down to “What I like is good, what I don’t is bad”.
That’s just intellectual honesty.
The key there is “boil down to” - all you see is the distillation of my morality and you assume there’s no reasoning behind it. Well, I don’t have the inclination to disabuse you of such a ridiculous notion in this thread - start another about the rational underpinnings of morality and I’ll be happy to indulge you, though.
Like those millions of moderate Muslims…
This really has very little to do with Islam. It has to do with theocracy.
Thousands of years ago, there were Jewish kingdoms in what is today Israel. If you went back in time and tried to show the wrong person offensive cartoons of Moses, I’m sure they’d execute you.
Four hundred years ago, there were plenty of Christian theocracies in western Europe. Again, if you went back in time and showed the wrong person offensive cartoons of Jesus, they’d execute you as well.
If there were such Christian or Jewish theocracies still around today, and people were emigrating from there to Europe, some proportion of those Jews and Christians would bring their theocratic ideology to their new homes, where it would be fundamentally incompatible with the modern western ideology. This would lead to violence.
Now, only a tiny portion of Muslim immigrants have this ideology. It is important for us in the west to welcome Muslim immigrants who aren’t followers of this ideology, so that they don’t become radicalized by it (and also because its the right thing to do).
Millions of moderate Muslims aren’t the ones telling everyone else how they should live their lives. A few fundamentalist ones are.
Millions of moderate Muslims still follow the tradition of not depicting Muhammad, though, and are hence targeted by the “satire”
… by publicly pissing all over their traditions, like nonrepresentation and modest dress…
So welcoming. No cognitive dissonance in that post at all…
Welcome them with their very own, limited edition, signed and numbered, picture of Muhammad butt fucking a goat.
They are welcome to continue their tradition of not depicting Muhammed. They are NOT welcome to tell other people that they must also follow that same tradition.
Absolutely. Any comments and criticism directed to Islam now could be equally directed to the other religions at various points in the past.
I agree that this is offensive, I don’t approve of it, but I don’t think it should be banned.
I also think that Muslims aren’t going to be as integrated a part of our culture if we don’t treat them the same way that we treat Jews and Christians. And we mock both of those faiths (even if some Christians get very angry about this).
You could have ended the sentence right here and it would convey the same message as the “satire”
…so, about that Giftpilz…
Do you get this butthurt about the Book of Mormon? Is that also horribly offensive to a traditionally oppressed minority, shows them they aren’t welcome in the culture, and is therefore wrong and shouldn’t exist?
They were. And people were shittier than. So is your argument is “It’s acceptable to do as the Nazis or Nero did”?
If any rational person thought that not publishing caricatures of Islam would be the end of radicalized Islamist terrorism, then that would be the end of it. But you know as well as anyone (or well you should) that caricatures are not the reason for the fundamentalism. Not by a long shot.
And millions of secular people follow the tradition of satire and ridicule and criticism and are deeply offended by the teachings of religions and the restrictions on free speech and personal autonomy that theocracies impose. They are “targeted” by those aspects of religion too. As they are mutually exclusive which should prevail and why?
No. Who is arguing for genocide of Muslims?
Is your claim that only something as Islamophobic as your anti-semetic children’s book would be a problem? So we’re good to go on a stoner comedy based around the life of Muhammed right? Hollywood is gonna greenlight the Muslim equivalent of The First Temptation of Christ any day now, right?
Or are you actually spewing irrelevant crap because the people you’re defending are against ANY representation of Muhammed, whether it intends to stoke Islamophobia or just be a stoner film.
I’m not “butthurt” about anything, buddy. So I don’t know what this nonsequitur is about - it’s a religious text, why should I care ?
Note that Christians were super offended by the film and demanded it be taken down. MILLIONS OF THEM!