|
| Thread: More on Mohammed and the freedom of speech issue |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
Russ
Promising
Supreme Hero
blah, blah, blah
|
posted February 22, 2006 06:03 PM |
|
|
Quote:
To change the islamic world we must support the people working to bring it down from the inside and reform the fundementalist thinking of the people...
Great Idea! To undo the damage the western world did over the years bringing those religios fanatics in power! I think a logical first step would be to stop supporting some of the abovementioned governments. (i.e. Saudi Arabia, etc)
|
|
Nidhgrin
Honorable
Famous Hero
baking cookies from stardust
|
posted February 28, 2006 09:40 PM |
|
|
Though in the past I had difficulties accepting there should be limits to freedom of speech I now realize that freedom of speech is only allowed to go as far as to where it starts limiting the freedom of others. In each community there are certain formal and informal rules and laws. When you communicate with people who belong to other communities, other moral codes and rules apply.
If you don't respect other people's way of life and let it show hard, don't be surprised those people start disrespecting your way of life back as a result. I hear people speak about muslim fundamentalism every day, and the threat it is for world peace. Well honestly for a non-christian like myself, I can see christian fundamentalism growing just as fast and just as strong, and it seems like an equally serious threat to me.
While all fundamentalist or extremist behaviour is dangerous in my opinion, the thing that worries me most is the impending clash between the christian world and islam.
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted March 02, 2006 10:53 PM |
|
|
Quote:
the thing that worries me most is the impending clash between the christian world and islam.
So you're a Huntingtonian? Check out Toynbee's theories on "Crash/Collapse of Civilizations" instead. Not only is it immensely more plausible, it is, unlike "Clash", actually something more than just a simplistic and flawed model meant to replace the bipolar world view of the Cold War.
In light of Toynbee, the troubles in the Islamic world today isn't so much part of a conflict between Western and Islamic "civilizations" as it is an internal struggle between different forces within Islam who fight for control over the developement of their "civilization".
The way I see it, a "Clash" between "Christian" and "Muslim" civilizations will only come into being through provocation.
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
posted March 03, 2006 03:19 AM |
|
|
. . . Perhaps . . .
Quote:
The thing that worries me most is the impending clash between the christian world and Islam.
Christians aren't going to launch nuclear missiles on muslims . . . but India might. That is the true danger. That is why Gandhi's historical significance is so great.
____________
Roses Are Red And So Am I
|
|
maretti
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 03, 2006 11:24 AM |
|
|
quote: These cartoons and other incidents are just fuel for the fundamentalist, to show that the west hates them, to prove that the people here are evil. That's why I belive that that these cartoons were an act of incredible stupidity and ignorance.
Could you please explain to me what exactly is so insulting in these cartoons? I dont see it and the ones who made them suddenly didnt intend them to be so insulting.
quote: In each community there are certain formal and informal rules and laws. When you communicate with people who belong to other communities, other moral codes and rules apply.
These cartoons were brought in a danish newspaper. This was internal danish communication. Whoever can read that paper though, so with your logic everyone around the world have to take in consideration 6 billion peoples moral codes and rules nomatter how crazy they are when they print something even for the local school magazine.
____________
Crag rules, Orrin and Ivor suck
|
|
Nidhgrin
Honorable
Famous Hero
baking cookies from stardust
|
|
posted March 06, 2006 08:33 PM |
|
|
@Terje
Quote:
So you're a Huntingtonian? Check out Toynbee's theories on "Crash/Collapse of Civilizations" instead. Not only is it immensely more plausible, it is, unlike "Clash", actually something more than just a simplistic and flawed model meant to replace the bipolar world view of the Cold War.
In light of Toynbee, the troubles in the Islamic world today isn't so much part of a conflict between Western and Islamic "civilizations" as it is an internal struggle between different forces within Islam who fight for control over the developement of their "civilization".
The way I see it, a "Clash" between "Christian" and "Muslim" civilizations will only come into being through provocation.
Hmm, I don't like to think of myself as sitting in this or that box. Honestly before you mentioned it, I'd never heard of Huntington. The origin of my statement is purely observational, so it may be flawed or wrong due to not looking far enough.
I fully agree that a clash between Christean/Judean and Muslim civilization will only come into being through provocation, but isn't this what is happening more and more each day? The entire middle-east region is destabilized, and though I can't speak for all European countries, in Belgium 'Islam' has become not much less than a swearword among atleast a third of the population. Speaking about the US, when you hear Bush's speaches for instance, to the less educated it sounds like every muslim is a terrorist. Now unless I didn't pay enough attention to this genre of information in the past, hard lines are being drawn and though these themselves may not be provocations yet, I have a bad feeling about it. That's all I meant to say.
@Consis:
Quote:
Christians aren't going to launch nuclear missiles on muslims . . . but India might. That is the true danger. That is why Gandhi's historical significance is so great.
Honestly I'm under the impression that the current US government is not that reluctant towards the use of nuclear weapons, and I'm not convinced they would not use them tactically in a large scale armed conflict.
I wasn't talking about a nuclear war though when I mean clash. Imagine a dozen of suicide bombers in new york every day  it's not because you're world's largest military power that you can't be hurt. If there is to come a war, they will fight back with different weapons - guerilla style - all in my opinion of course.
@Maretti
Quote:
These cartoons were brought in a danish newspaper. This was internal danish communication. Whoever can read that paper though, so with your logic everyone around the world have to take in consideration 6 billion peoples moral codes and rules nomatter how crazy they are when they print something even for the local school magazine.
Hmm, but it isn't internal danish communication now, is it? 
And it did violate a number of key moral codes, otherwise how do you explain the magnitude of this reacion?
So yes, it was a mistake not to take atleast the key moral codes it could interfere with into account.
|
|
maretti
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2006 10:17 PM |
|
|
Quote: Hmm, but it isn't internal danish communication now, is it?
No but it was when they were first printed, so whats your point?
Quote: And it did violate a number of key moral codes, otherwise how do you explain the magnitude of this reacion?
So because people react like morons that proves the cartoons violated a number of key moral codes? You just have to argue better than that. Maybe there is something wrong with the people who reacted that strongly. I suggest you tell me exactly what the problem is with these cartoons. Did you even see them?
____________
Crag rules, Orrin and Ivor suck
|
|
frakel
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2006 10:43 PM |
|
|
@Maretti: Even if you accept the cartoons as an internal danish communication, they were still an insult to the many muslims living in Denmark...
____________
|
|
maretti
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2006 11:00 PM |
|
|
I can only repeat myself. They were not intended as an insult and I dont see that they are insulting. The one that has recived the most criticism is the one with bombs in the turban. It just tried to illustrade that islam is misused by some muslims to legitimize terror. Whats wrong with that?
____________
Crag rules, Orrin and Ivor suck
|
|
frakel
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2006 11:29 PM |
|
|
What determines wether something is insulting: the intent of the one making the statement or the feeling of the one who receives the statement?
I know several danish muslims - people who have been living in denmark for more than a decade. When the cartoons were originally printed (that is: before the Imams went to the Middleeast, and before muslims in other countries knew about the cartoons) some of them told me about their view on the whole matter. And I can asure you that they did feel insulted. I recall one of them saying something like this: "Now I have been living in Denmark for twenty years. I pay my taxes. I speak the language. I work full time. I do not receive social security. Why must I every day in the media read that muslims are terrorist. That muslims are backward. That muslims are violent. That muslims exploit the danish society. And now a danish newspaper prints insulting pictures of our sacred prophet. What have we done to deserve this?"
I believe the cartoons should be seen in this context. In a sense they were only the last drop who made the cup flow over (as a danish prover says). Among muslims in Denmark as well as in the Middle east. The cartoons are seen as just another in a line of insults against muslims.
____________
|
|
maretti
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2006 11:49 PM |
|
|
There are huge problems with (some) muslims in this world. I think that its very naturel and important to comment this. The fact that some muslims (who are not part of the problem) feel insulted by this shouldnt stop people from commenting the problems. Its important that these people realize that just because the term "muslim" is used it dosent nessesarily include them and they should stop being so sensitive.
____________
Crag rules, Orrin and Ivor suck
|
|
frakel
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted March 07, 2006 12:33 AM |
|
Edited by frakel on 6 Mar 2006
|
Agreed - it should be possible to comment on serious issues. But there are many ways to do this. And, at least in danish media, there has been a tendency to generalize and view all muslims as one homogenous group. This has improved lately however.
And about being sensitive...
This evening danish television brought an interview with Desmond Tutu - the south African Arch Bishop who used to chair the Truth and Renconciliation commitee following the end of apartheid. He was asked to comment on the cartoons. He expresses my point of view on the whole matter better than I could say it myself:
Desmond Tutu: "I was very saddened that we (ed: the christian community) could have been responsible for something that another group of people found offensive. I don´t think we responded well to this sense of outrage that was felt by the muslim community. Because - I am a libertarian I believe very firmly in human rights - the right we have of freedom of speech etc. etc. But I also believe very firmly, that freedom is not license. Freedom caries with it a very considerate responsibility. Especially in a time of such high tension, so explosive, we need to be particularly sensitive to others sensitivity. [...]
I don´t have a right to say: "Why are you so sensitive?".
If we are serious - in a world community - we have to say: people have different sensibilities and susceptibilities. And the good person, the cultured person, is the one who respects the traditions, the morals of others."
Don´t get me wrong here. I do not say, that because people feel offended it is ok for them to burn down embasies or issue death threats. What I am saying is, that we should take this feeling of insult serious - and respect and acknowledge the fact, that other people may be offended by an act that would not offend our selves. It is not just the fanatics and extremists who are utilizing this incident. Ordinary, ´moderate´, muslims have been offended as well. This is not something to easily brush aside.
------------
EDIT: @Maretti: How can you be so certain that the cartoons were not intended as an insult? I have seen them all. Some of them are quite innocent, some are very neutral and some of them gives me the impression, that the cartoonist have wanted to prove to the muslim community in Denmark, that absolutely no consideration should be taken to their religious beliefs and feelings (this is my personal impression of course). Newspaper cartoonists are often provocateurs... If a few of the ´harsher´ cartoons were not directly intended as insults, they certainly were intentionally provocative.
You also asks what is wrong with the Turban drawing. After all it just illustrates that some people utilize islam for violent purposes, right?! This is true. But is it so hard to imagine why ordinary muslims might interprete that drawing differently. It is as if someone made a drawing of Jesus, depicting him as a torturing, witch-burning inquisitor (just to mention one of christianity´s less than noble manifestations). True: those hiddeous acts were performed in the name of christianity - but I as a christian do not like to se my religion, or Jesus, identified with those acts.
____________
|
|
maretti
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 07, 2006 08:00 AM |
|
|
I wouldnt have the slightest problem with a drawing of Jesus, depicting him as a torturing, witch-burning inquisitor. Actually if I could draw I would do it myself.
____________
Crag rules, Orrin and Ivor suck
|
|
frakel
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted March 07, 2006 08:04 AM |
|
|
Well, thats good for you. However my point was another one: is it so difficult to understand why other people might have a problem with such a drawing?
____________
|
|
maretti
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 07, 2006 08:08 AM |
|
|
I will have to repeat myself again: Yes, I dont understand it.
____________
Crag rules, Orrin and Ivor suck
|
|
rychenroller
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 07, 2006 08:30 AM |
|
|
Maybe for the same reason the western world has a problem with muslim religion scare tactics. Its a case of levels and degrees.
No excuses.
____________
Myctteakyshd
|
|
Madmartigan
Bad-mannered
Famous Hero
who will never walk alone
|
|
posted March 07, 2006 09:52 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I wouldnt have the slightest problem with a drawing of Jesus, depicting him as a torturing, witch-burning inquisitor. Actually if I could draw I would do it myself.
Actually this is where all the conflicts arise. We all tend to think that what is "valid" for us must be "valid" for others too.
We tend to think that x is good for me, so it must be good for the others too.
We tend to think that x is bad for me, so it must be bad for the others too.
We tend to think that x is fun for me, so it must be fun for the others too.
etc.
Some think that democracy is good for them, and try to impose their ideal on others.
Some think that killing heathens is good for them, and try to impose their ideal on others.
-------------------------------------------------
Only if we could realise that there are DIFFERENT cultures on earth and MORAL VALUES differ from nation to nation/culture to culture.
|
|
Nidhgrin
Honorable
Famous Hero
baking cookies from stardust
|
|
posted March 07, 2006 08:28 PM |
|
|
Quote:
What determines whether something is insulting: the intent of the one making the statement or the feeling of the one who receives the statement?
I particularly like this quote from Frakel, which perfectly sums up what I tried to tell needing half a page...
To maretti, do you mean there is nothing in your life you would mind being insulted? Or do you simply have a difficulty imagining how their side of the story looks like?
|
|
Shiva
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 07, 2006 08:50 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
What determines whether something is insulting: the intent of the one making the statement or the feeling of the one who receives the statement?
I particularly like this quote from Frakel, which perfectly sums up what I tried to tell needing half a page...
To maretti, do you mean there is nothing in your life you would mind being insulted? Or do you simply have a difficulty imagining how their side of the story looks like?
Being insulted is nothing new. Any religion or religious
teacher that is worthwhile should be able to teach those
that follow how to deal with those things that go against
the grain of one's ideas. If a mere cartoon can cause such
anger, we are in big trouble. Anger is the true insult, an
affront to the very idea of peace on this world.
____________
|
|
Nidhgrin
Honorable
Famous Hero
baking cookies from stardust
|
|
posted March 08, 2006 06:34 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Being insulted is nothing new. Any religion or religious
teacher that is worthwhile should be able to teach those
that follow how to deal with those things that go against
the grain of one's ideas. If a mere cartoon can cause such
anger, we are in big trouble. Anger is the true insult, an
affront to the very idea of peace on this world.
I agree with the fact that anger, or the use of violence in general, is a major problem in todays world. To me it sometimes seems like though there have never been this many advanced ways of communicating, there has never been this few true communication... perhaps this is why many people are so frustrated and angry?
I disagree with your statement however. Sure, insults are nothing new. But the scale and magnitude of this sort of insults due to mass media and modern communication techniques is totally new for the information age.
Anger or violence shouldn't be the answer to this whole cartoon story, but what gives us the right to mock with another culture, another religion like this?
In my opinion this is not just a response to these cartoons as such, but they are used as an icon of what they see as the bad or evil influence of the west on their culture - hence the reaction seems completely out of proportion by us.
|
|
|
|
