Muhammad cartoons

[Fredrik]

Danish newspaper practices freedom of expression, religious lunatics worlwide take offense. Chaos ensues.

Discuss.

[Technician]

I heard about this some where. Agreed I believe they have every right publish some a strip, but I would have taken religious people into matter.

[myk]

What I think is that the people of the middle-east are going to regret it eventually if they don't get any more Danish butter cookies and Danish beer.

[Quast]

For those that don't know.

This is hilarious and sad at the same time.

[TheDarkArchon]

I'm mixed: While I see why offense is taken, it's a bit overkill trying to force an apology from the Government and burning Danish flags.

[ducon]

I find utterly crazy that these fanatics has more rights in our countries than I have in their countries. I’m agnostic/atheist and I don’t know how will I live in Iran or in Arabia. Why aren’t we as stupid as them and sue poor muslims whose only bad thing done is to be muslim?

[Quast]

ducon said:

I find utterly crazy that these fanatics has more rights in our countries

Such as?

[Psyonisis]

,

[Shaviro]

There is absolutely no reason to treat religion with more respect than any other thing. I find the reaction laughable.

[Enjay]

TheDarkArchon said:

it's a bit overkill trying to force an apology from the Government and burning Danish flags.

Unfortunately extremists do extreme things. Your average Muslim family man sitting in a semi-detached in a Parisian suburb may be offended but is unlikely to be kidnapping people or burning flags as a result. But then, he's not "newsworthy".

[Torn]

Well, in Denmark people have sent cell phone messages where they say people should stop going in pizzerias, etc... as they did with our danish products.

And I am really sorry, but I guess I have started to become a racist, because of this crap. Artists made those cartoons, not us danish people.

[Enjay]

Psyonisis said:

Where can I find the actual comic? They can't just talk about it without showing it! *scoff*

A quick Google turned them up.

http://www.di2.nu/files/Muhammed_Cartoons_Jyllands_Posten.html

I can see why, if it's important to you, offense would be taken but I've also seen far more offensive material on a whole variety of topics that did not have such an impact.

[Sharessa]

WTF? These Muslim crazies are starting to piss me off. First they start nationwide riots in France because one person is killed, and now they are threatening Jihad on Europe because of a stupid comic made in Denmark.

[Ralphis]

Aren't we having a glass shortage?

[Mancubus II]

Considering how many times any other religion's figures have been portrayed in some parodical fashion for centuries I find this to be a non-issue all together. This is just a way to exercise terrorism and give control to the radicals. If we don't listen to them (except perhaps if they're being civil), they have no power.

The innocent danish, norwegian and french people who have had no immediate say in such a publication do not deserve the disgusting treatment these animals are dishing out.

[Job]

Wow, for once Muslim fanatics aren't burning American flags. I'm just going to go and mark this one down on the 'ol calendar...

[Naked Snake]

Fredrik said:

Danish newspaper practices freedom of expression, religious lunatics worlwide take offense. Chaos ensues.

Discuss.

They may have freedom of expression but there is also this thing called tact.

For example, it wouldn't be a good idea to show a comic strip of a Hindu fucking a cow and then eating hamburgers from it. You may be ALLOWED to, but that doesn't mean you should.

[Fredrik]

BBG said:

They may have freedom of expression but there is also this thing called tact.

For example, it wouldn't be a good idea to show a comic strip of a Hindu fucking a cow and then eating hamburgers from it. You may be ALLOWED to, but that doesn't mean you should.

Yeah. For example, id Software shouldn't have made Doom. Just look at the offense it has caused to Christians and parents.

[Graf Zahl]

And yet again a bunch of hopeless nutcases is dragging an entire religion into the muck.

Sometimes I ask myself whether these idiots intend to be bombed into oblivion. Because that's the only end of this insanity I can see.

But the journalists responsible for this should have known better. Some of these images appear to be utterly tasteless and it doesn't require much intelligence to guess what kind of reaction they will provoke.

[Coopersville]

A certain dictators throughout the 20th century definitely tried to wiped out the wrong countries. These religious fanatics really need to stop being such bitches about the littlest things. Come on, now they're burning the flag of the top ranked country in the world.

[Psyonisis]

,

[myk]

Why not? To someone that believes in Hell it could be one hell of a trivialization. Plus if the benevolent religious figure is going to be seen as an excuse for censure, where's the benevolence?

BBG said:
For example, it wouldn't be a good idea to show a comic strip of a Hindu fucking a cow and then eating hamburgers from it. You may be ALLOWED to, but that doesn't mean you should.

Okay, they are allowed but shouldn't, and when they do, since they are allowed, what?

Isn't it the point of caricatures to bring up character issues and ridicule things or beings?

Curiosly the "don't name" or "don't picture" demands in religion have much to do with a self-criticism of dogma, being the ever present questioning where the believer cannot presume to have the true vision of God when God is supreme and man on Earth inperfect, but then it's going to be used in the exact opposite way, of harsh reprisal on anyone mentioning God in a way not accepted by popular and hegemonical religious practice?

[Naked Snake]

Fredrik said:

Yeah. For example, id Software shouldn't have made Doom. Just look at the offense it has caused to Christians and parents.

Doom is a video game, not a print medium, jackass :-P.

Okay, they are allowed but shouldn't, and when they do, since they are allowed, what?

I don't care, freedom of the press, but like I said, tact.

[Janderson]

Freedom of speech, my old friend.

I stand in the street, I scream "All you niggers should be pickin' mah crops, all you spics and greasers keep the fuck off our women, chinks, frogs, japs, limeys, yankys, aussies, gypsies, jews, arabs, pakis, krouts... you can all fudge off home, where y'all belong." I am promptly beaten up by a member of every race in the area. Who is in the wrong? Them of course, for censoring me... and GBH. Is that right? No. Because I provoked them.

[Nautilus]

Not everyone has adapted to freedom of speech, nor does everyone know what it is. Fanaticism combined with an entirely different society can certainly and sadly lead to such riots and flag-burning sessions, fueled by impervious doctrines with which, in societies found in the Middle East (and that can be found in many other parts of the globe), people knit themselves tightly as pious martyrs living for a religious and "righteous" cause through their own viewpoint.

[ducon]

ducon said:
I find utterly crazy that these fanatics has more rights in our countries

Quast said:

Such as?

Freespeach, of course.

[myk]

Janderson said:
No. Because I provoked them.

You might as well say that someone who attacks another person because they are of another race was provoked, since that person considers the other race offensive per se.

It's not like Denmark, Norway, France and Germany are muslim countries. There's no reason why they should follow the decrees of the Quran, and muslims don't own a copyright over everything Muhammad.

Also, flag burning isn't necessarily (legally) condemnable either; it's similar to "desecrating" Muhammad, after all.

[AirRaid]

Janderson said:

I stand in the street, I scream "All you niggers should be pickin' mah crops, all you spics and greasers keep the fuck off our women, chinks, frogs, japs, limeys, yankys, aussies, gypsies, jews, arabs, pakis, krouts... you can all fudge off home, where y'all belong." I am promptly beaten up by a member of every race in the area. Who is in the wrong? Them of course, for censoring me... and GBH. Is that right? No. Because I provoked them.

Technically you could get nicked for inciting a riot, in that case.

As for the whole Cartoon thing, I think it's fucking stupid, and I agree with Manc completely.

[Zoost]

Muslims (and most organised believers) are very good at taking offense. Humor is not one of their strenghts.

[fodders]

The arguement is that "No person should make an image of Mohammed" , but that is a declaration or rule to their "OWN" followers, they CANNOT dictate to other religions. And as far as I recall, there were many paintings of Mohammed in the 17th century etc.
I am a semi Christian, but I would be laughed out of any assembly if I called on people to boycott Islamic goods because Muslims eat chicken on a Friday, where my religion says only fish should be eaten on Fridays!
Do a Google see how many muslim papers have included God in a cartoon or Jewish icons.
Live and let live, but for my God's sake don't dictate to me!