denouncing the act is too late. if a small group is ruining it for everyone they've got to be proactive and deal with it before the acts occur. be proactive no reactive, save your beloved religion. that is unless you agree with the acts and are only showing lip service so as not to get called out. you know, let the others get their hands dirty while you denounce
I do not agree with it. No one should be jailed for speech unless it is intentionally made to incite violence or illegal actions.
FYI, some 19k French websites have apparently been attacked by Pro-extremist hackers with thousands being taken down including a french defense website. Watch out clutchfans!
Couldn't it be argued that's what the cartoonists are doing...??? Just the same you're putting stipulations on 'FREEDOMS'... And that's understandable because everything comes with a price tag.
Donald Sterling's price was that players threatened to not play, and he had to sell his team. The cartoonist price is that people could choose not to buy their product. That is how people can punish them. Being murdered however, is not an appropriate punishment no matter how much someone is offended.
how the fruck can you argue drawing a cartoon of a character from a 2000 year old book is inciting violence and illegal activities.
Being murdered however, is not an appropriate punishment no matter how much someone is offended. Being murdered however, is not an appropriate punishment no matter how much someone is offended. Being murdered however, is not an appropriate punishment no matter how much someone is offended. Being murdered however, is not an appropriate punishment no matter how much someone is offended. Thank you. This is the point, people.
it can be argued in the sense of "ohh mum burntt the toast, should I punch her in the face" "No Jimmy..." "But why-" "No." But nobody deserves to die for merely holding an opinion.
People seems to think like 90's Compton gangsters in here. An eye for an eye. Guess what? No you're gonna have conciquences. A cycle of stupidity and ignorance. Both ways.
I don't know what is stupid about satire and criticism of a man who lived 1400 years ago who is deemed infallible by many but also raped a child and by his order murdered thousands. I call it legitimate criticism.
I have no problems with satire. It's THIS overreaction of people effectively rubbing the comic in the face of Muslim culture (the majority peaceful) like a pet's face in a puddle of piss. It's childish and sad. it doesn't make the world better. This is revenge, plain and simple.
The "good" Muslims shouldn't have any issues with the media printing images of Muhammad especially when most of the images actually pose no criticism to the man himself. The ones who are offended are the ones who deserve to be offended as they probably hold similar literal interpretations of the fundamentalist who tangibly carry out the violent acts such as blasphemers deserve corporal punishment. Why should I feel bad about a individual being offended when they believe that someone like me deserves death?
Not saying violence is ever the answer, but why even draw Muhammed in the first place? It's like going to a gay pride rally and screaming f****t. Sure, I'm afforded such a right to believe and say that, but why do it? Just because we believe in freedom of speech doesn't mean we have to routinely test its limits to know its there.
Let's say I drew an image of Jesus condoning or even engaging in Gay sex. To them and their belief system the prophet should not be represented pictorially. You may not understand it, and by no means does it mean it gives anyone the right to kill, but come on, you're crossing a line when you do it.
If there was a group of individuals who deemed Hitler infallible and also deemed that no images of him should be conjured and would be offended if such an image was drawn, should we respect their "right" to not be offended? A group of individuals arbitrarily deeming an individual as infallible without any legitimate evidence that suggests that individual should be deemed infallible especially if that individual has raped a child and by his order murdered thousands does not mean that individual deserves to be off limits to satire.
The character of Jesus never raped a child or personally or by his order killed. Just because someone believes that the character is infallible doesn't mean he is. Muhammad deserves criticism, disgusting harsh criticism that should be offensive because he was an offensive human with regards to modern secular morality.
