Islam, from what I gather, says one cannot depict Allah . . .AT ALL. Other than PURE SPITE Why would you do it . . .other than to just piss them off? I detest that intentionally provoke people. I find it Rude and irratating. They wanted to Piss off the Muslims. . . guess what it worked they now have to face the consequences. . . while I may not agree with the extremes of the consequences. . . I think these folx can hardly claim ignorance after the whole Rushtie thing You cannot poke the bear with the stick then wonder why you got mauled Rocket River
Minor point - Dutch items are from The Netherlands. If people are boycoting Dutch things they are making an absurd mistake. They should be boycoting Danish products. Denmark is the southernmost Nordic country, the home of Vikings etc. Taking this logic to its conclusion, then we become subject to the worst kind of mob rule. For instance, it would have been inappropriate for people to speak out against the Nazi's in Germany as it would have caused a large portion of the population to freak out. It would have been O.K. to ban Martin Luther King from speaking in the south because it caused riots. Your criterion for banning speech doesn’t stand up to the test of universal consistency.
I agree with article that the papers should be allowed to publish the cartoons. I would be boycotting if they weren't able to publish the cartoons. But I don't think that means there is a war between Islamic, and Western societies. I think it means there are differences. That doesn't equal war. The only thing the NY TIMES article lists as there being war is the title of the cartoon. The title of a cartoon isn't the best evidence that it is war, or that it should be treated like a war.
I wonder what kind of protest will there be if a European country actually banned Koran and made it illegal for Muslims to become citizens.
They might have done it for other reasons than to piss off muslims. If there intended audience was people other than muslims, then it would be a by product. I don't mind people being upset and boycotting the papers that printed the cartoons. I do mind people boycotting all Danish products, because the Danish govt. refused to CENSOR A NEWSPAPER. Censoring the press should not happen. Free press is essential, even if it makes some people angry.
The short answer is .. . because they said so Must the justify why the feel that way? Feelings are rarely Logical. As others have stated I think it is idoltry but I find it interested that offense has to be explained by some and not so by others. Rocket River
I understand however. . that is your world view apparentl Muslims don't value the free press as much and there for. . . they are looking to impose their beleifs We think free press is good. . and despise countries with out They think Free press is overrated and dislike countries that all this kind of thing neither is RIGHT nor WRONG . . . just different perspectives hey one that works for you . . well works for you As JVG would say . . it is what it is Rocket River
There are more differences beyond a series of cartoons. But not anymore proof of a war going on. The only ones clamoring for war are the terrorists, and the reactionaries in the west who believe that terrorists represent the majority of Islamic society, and cry out for a war between the two. Again the only thing that talked about a war in that article was the title of the cartoons.
For context, here are a few Arab cartoons: Apparently it's ok to portray Jews as Nazis. More at :http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/ArabCartoons.htm
Would you feel the same if some country decided it was ok to engage in slave trade? Neither is right nor wrong, just different perspectives!
My belief(I admit it is only my belief) is that a free press is right no matter what religion people have. A free press is a step toward an enlightened society. That can't be a bad thing regardless of folks religion. I understand that it is not the way of many people. They want to live by religious rule. I think that is fine for them. If they are happy about that, then I don't have a problem with them doing it. But regardless of that it shouldn't erase the concepts of autonomy and free press.
probably much because most western countries claim religious tolerance these days and by doing this .. they would be hypocrits . . and singling out one Religion the Muslim countries do not claim such tolerance and are following their ideals . . . QUESTION Is it illegal to own a Torah, etc as well? If yes . .they are not just singling out Christians Rocket River
I do not see the enslavement of humanity and freedom of press in the same galaxy .. however . . . I get your point What I think you are saying. . [i maybe wrong] is that their are a set of UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS and Freedom of Press should be one of them .. . The are right regardless of race, religion, or creed am I correct? I agree in Universal Rights Freedom of press I'm not sure if it is a yes or no . . .. I will think on it more. . . . On the one hand. . I feel all governments practice some censorship which is good .. else slander/libel/etc would run rampant On the other hand . . . . not having the freedom to speak you mind with out government interference could be a form of enslavement in itself I will think on it further Rocket River . . I want to ask a question . . but I will use another thread to not derail this one much further
Exactly. While we shouldn't force all our views on other people at the same time we shouldn't sacrifice our principles on something so fundamental as this.
Then you shouldn't have a problem pointing some out. While I see many differences, and some extreme nuts who want there to be a war, and act on that in different ways, I don't see a war between the societies in general. I think we should be at war with those elements that act on those differences with violence and terrorism, and we should combat those that fuel and support that as a goal, I don't see a war between the general muslim society and the general western society.
RR, Yes I think you got my point. Definitely slavery is worse than losing the right of free press. But imagine if the US goverment said there was no longer an indpendent press- any tv, newspaper, and radio would be controlled by the government. If you attempted to even put out a flier criticizing the government you would be thrown in prison or worse. If you gave a speech in public it could be dangerous. Do you not think this violates a fundamental or universal right?
