So, the United States (the country of origin for the Onion) once invaded and controlled much of… the United States (the country of the offended), and continues to threaten cultural imperialism and military action against… The United States?
What I’m saying is that deliberate hate speech by first world countries against third world countries of another religion cannot be compared to satire from within the same country and culture, even if both are at the expense of religious figures.
Atticus Finch, this is not the Pit. Yet. Please refrain from personal insults, even implied.
To all: this thread has strong elements of both GD and the Pit. I’m going to leave it here for now, but I’d appreciate if all of you will remember what forum you’re in. Thanks.
The spelling error symbolizes the depth of thought which has been put into your argument (Religious leader 1400 years ago should have reasonably foreseen that a few lunatics would blow things up and kill people). The “offended by reality” line is just plain irony.
I apologize for using the word “idiocy” outside the Pit. However, it was an attack on what I see as a silly argument, rather than one on Kanicbird, who I don’t really know.
The Arab media are rife with hate speech towards Jews and Americans. You’ll see more hate speech in Arab print and electronic media in one day than in you will in an entire year in Western media. Arabs are constantly bombarded with hate propaganda while Western media often go to absurd lengths to avoid offending Muslims. Arab-Islamic complaints about “hate speech” in the West reek of hypocrisy.
IMO, this just shows that Islam is in its awkward and angry adolescent phase.
It’s hates its siblings (Judaism and Christianity) and is just pissed off at everything.
Silly teenagers. They’ll grow out of it.
I guess I agree it’s just as offensive; however, I don’t see the cartoon’s purported meaning as bigoted.
If it’s a literal statement about one person- Muhammed - I don’t see how that makes the cartoonist a bigot. Lots of non-Muslims - myself included - think Muhammed was a pirate and not a prophet.
I get that that would offend Muslims, but am I a bigot for looking at one individual’s actions and making a judgment about that one individual?
Likewise I regard Joseph Smith and L. Ron Hubbard as charlatans, and there’s just no polite way to tell someone that his religion was founded on fraud. Am I never supposed to say what I honestly think of these men out of fear of appearing bigoted? Does showing respect to Mormons and Scientologists mean that I must never speak my mind? I note that some of the people admonishing us that we must “respect” Islam seem to be very hard on Christianity themselves.
And you wouldn’t have world-wide tension and rioting resulting from Christian-bashing either. Christian intolerance is more acceptable and prone to be tolerated by Christians.
And what is “freedom of speech”, if some things cannot be said? Should the rest of the planet look to such paragons of civility as Syria and Iran for what is acceptable?
~
Or should we look at America? Is Janet Jackson’s boob worth a national a scandal? Should we agree abortion is wrong? Should we decide the death penalty is a good thing? Should someone elses homosexuality be our business? Should we decide that having a weapon that we have is wrong when some other country wants it?
Should we look elsewhere for our lessons? Should we elect a government the world disapproves of? (America did why can’t Palestian?)
I agree that the cartoon behaviour is totally out of control, but is it not pay back time? Surely the west has imposed it’s will. Totally and without compromise…did they ever expect the will swapping to be one way?
I think the cartoon is trying to say that if the religion is controlled by bombers, it’s going to destroy the religion.
. . .sort of in the vein of “cutting of your nose to spite your face”.
Exactly who got killed over Janet Jackson’s boob? Over The Last Temptation of Christ? Over Piss Christ?
Yes. The barbarians who currently rule Iran shouldn’t even be allowed to have conventional weapons, let alone nuclear ones.
I am sick to death of Arabs and Muslims in the Middle East behaving like angry, stupid children.
To clarify, this cartoon was drawn as an attempt to stand up to the perceived threat illustrators were facing from Muslims:
So the cartoonist, IMO, was drawing an image of the Prophet in defiance of this perceived threat (i.e., “All we want to do is our job–draw pictures of people–and someone’s threatening to kill us over that? Well, I’m not going to stand for it.”), and the bomb turban was partly about illustrating that threat and partly about playing up traditional negative stereotypes of Muslims.
A more spot-on cartoon from the bunch was the one with the Prophet menacing the camera with a scimitar, his eyes blacked out with a bar (referring to the threat against drawing his face) while he is flanked by two alarmed-looking women in burqas whose eye-slits match the bar across the Prophet’s face (referring to the widespread European disdain for styles of dress like the burqa, which many perceive as a means of oppressing and marginalizing women).
Personally (and I am, in fact, a full-time professional cartoonist), I think drawing the cartoons was a f—ing stupid idea, and reprinting them all in Europe this month was even stupider.
Free speech gives me the right to drive through Harlem with the words “LONG LIVE THE KKK!” painted on my car, but I shouldn’t be surprised at the response.
I like this interpertation also.
I agree, but why. Perhaps they are so used to it that it no longer phases them. Maybe this is what is needed Moslems as well.
I did not claim that he intentionally set this into motion 1400 years ago, just that what he sent into motion is set to blow up today, perhaps as a unintended consequence.
Or perhaps Christians believe they will get the last laugh in the end. 