ClumsyMonkey.net

This is pretty damn scary

I understand why they're so pissed off, but I'm thinking they reacted just a little bit extremely...

Why in the hell did the papers print that anyway? They may have freedom of press but there are limitations! But yes, the burning was far to excessive.

Freedom of Speech Rusty.

There is nothing more sacrosanct in the Western World than the freedom to say what you like withoutbeing persecuted for it. Yes sometimes it can be tactless, but in the end they are allowed to.

Having said that I strolled over to Pickled Politics and lo and behold, to my non amazement there was evidence of Muslims on the saner side of Islam.

http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/275

Although their reaction was too far, you really can't blame them for being angry, the caricature made a mockery of their Religion

Yeah, while freedom of the press and freedom of speech shouldn't be limited, militant Islam is not exactly something you want to take lightly. And the quote about "the paper said it had asked cartoonists to draw the pictures because the media was practicing self-censorship when it came to Muslim issues" just makes it seem that they were deliberately trying to incite the Muslims, which I find rather ridiculous.

Religion is something that should never, ever be taken lightly, because it is quite possibly the greatest motivator in the world. Freedom of speech is important, but sensitivity to the values of others is too. I'm not condoning the Syrian attacks in any way shape or form, but I'm also not really that shocked by them. Those papers should've known they'd be getting this kind of response.

And a cynical part of me is somewhat relieved that at least it wasn't the US that screwed up this time...

There may be freedom of speech, but there is freedom of religion too. Also, there is free speech and hate speech. The papers should know when to draw the line.

Rusty wrote:There may be freedom of speech, but there is freedom of religion too. Also, there is free speech and hate speech. The papers should know when to draw the line.

Exactly.

I think the reason for the riots goes beyond just the cartoon. It's about the whole attitude behind the cartoons. This was, for lack of a better phrase, the straw that broke the camel's back.

At least protesters in Halifax were peaceful. The world's gone crazy.

I disagree entirely. As some of the blogs point out

Well, “Islam” is a concept, not a agent. Thus it’s not “Islam” that forbids anything, but the (human) authorities on Islamic law. And, it’s not the “depiction of the religion’s founder Muhammad” that is forbidden, but either the depiction of any of God’s creatures (but particularly humans) OR the slander of a prophet - be it Muhammad or Moses or Jesus or Abraham, etc.

Slandering a prophet would, however not fall under something like “slander” or “hate crime”, but actually be seen as “kufr”, i.e. unbelief/apostasy, as the assertion that a prophet was anything but a noble man . Of course, that only applies to Muslims. There is no provisio in Islamic law how to deal with non-Muslims who disparage a prophet, as they already are unbelievers. Also, the legal authorities in the Muslim world are quite unanimous in their verdict(s) that Muslims living in non-Muslim polities (i.e., states) should adhere to the law of the one in which they reside or travel.

and

“The protests in the Middle East have proven that the cartoonist was right,” said Tarek Fatah, a director of the Muslim Canadian Congress. “It’s falling straight into that trap of being depicted as a violent people and proving the point that, yes, we are.”

I ask why we are you defending them? They who would fly planes into buildings, they who would without a 2nd thought, blow your families sky high. It is these people who are the ones getting upset, those who would do violence upon us for our beliefs and way of life. Because its prefectly ok for them to denigrate us but not the other way around?

Three things occured to me when I heard about this.

1. The cartoons shouldnt of been printed
2. By burning and destroying various buldings, Islamic extremists are doing little to dispell the
notions that were portrayed in the cartoons. (as Korzic's quote points out)
3. The media publishes material that is offensive to religious groups right here in our own country. Of course, we label such groups as fundamentalists and right winged wackos so why should we pay attention to their objections.

Korzic wrote:I disagree entirely. As some of the blogs point out

Well, “Islam” is a concept, not a agent. Thus it’s not “Islam” that forbids anything, but the (human) authorities on Islamic law. And, it’s not the “depiction of the religion’s founder Muhammad” that is forbidden, but either the depiction of any of God’s creatures (but particularly humans) OR the slander of a prophet - be it Muhammad or Moses or Jesus or Abraham, etc.

Slandering a prophet would, however not fall under something like “slander” or “hate crime”, but actually be seen as “kufr”, i.e. unbelief/apostasy, as the assertion that a prophet was anything but a noble man . Of course, that only applies to Muslims. There is no provisio in Islamic law how to deal with non-Muslims who disparage a prophet, as they already are unbelievers. Also, the legal authorities in the Muslim world are quite unanimous in their verdict(s) that Muslims living in non-Muslim polities (i.e., states) should adhere to the law of the one in which they reside or travel.

and

“The protests in the Middle East have proven that the cartoonist was right,” said Tarek Fatah, a director of the Muslim Canadian Congress. “It’s falling straight into that trap of being depicted as a violent people and proving the point that, yes, we are.”

I ask why we are you defending them? They who would fly planes into buildings, they who would without a 2nd thought, blow your families sky high. It is these people who are the ones getting upset, those who would do violence upon us for our beliefs and way of life. Because its prefectly ok for them to denigrate us but not the other way around?

Were you referring to me? I wasn't defending their actions at all, just pointing out that I think it's an undersight to say that it's all about a few cartoons.

I understand the cartoons were out of order and would generate some sort of reaction. However, when Trey Parker and Matt Stone repeatedly mocked Jesus on South Park, was there this much of a retaliation? I am just asking an honest question and was wondering if there was a bad reaction to it in America especially.

Also, to what level of freedom of speech are we entitled to? Are we allowed to openly say that we disagree with the concept of a religion (Islam especially) and say why we think so? This is because whenever I have spoken against it, I have been thwarted by other people and called an 'Islamophobic'.

It is common people live their lives in fear when criticising Islam. This is true in other circumstances with Theo Van Gogh, who was murdered, and the Dutch Muslim female politician who provided the source material, who is now in hiding.

I agree that the retaliation from the Muslim world is hardly surprising, but when it concerns any criticisms on facts of the religion, people should not have to worry about anything, but unfortunately, they always do, and have every reason to.

Korzic wrote:

“The protests in the Middle East have proven that the cartoonist was right,” said Tarek Fatah, a director of the Muslim Canadian Congress. “It’s falling straight into that trap of being depicted as a violent people and proving the point that, yes, we are.”

i completely agree. they want to make their god more appealing, then maybe they should lighten up and develop a sense of humor.

Atleast he is not a hypocrite.. :\

"If you're wearing a short skirt that does not necessarily mean you invite everybody to have sex with you"

I hate people like that. Way to have no emotion or compassion for other living human beings. Whether or not it's REALLY your fault, you should have some remorse for helping throw something this horrible into action.

Oh, and who the FRIG thinks making fun of the holocaust is a good idea?

Well obviously anti-semitics. Anti-islamic people thought making fun of Mohammed was a good idea, it's equally as offensive. Atleast this paper, who defended the first cartoon on the basis of free speech, is going to print the holocaust cartoon, it proves they're not hypocrites.

*This does not mean I agree with the printing of either cartoon*

Actually they are no longer printing it as of today.