Religious intolerance or freedom of speech.

[Watchman]

I doubt it. Lame jokes mainly just get sneered at around here, methinks.

[Devastatin Dave]

Are the cartoons freedom of speech? Well, yeah. Of course you have the right to print ******, racist cartoons that serve no purpose but to inflame Arab sentiment and make racist right-wingers feel good about themselves. You have the right to show a black man hanging from a tree or a buck-toothed Asian, too. But in any of those cases you don’t have the right to feign petty self-righteous faux-amazement that people got upset about it. Instead of saying “these are controversial but we uphold a standard of free speech, regardless of ones personal tastes,” they claimed that people getting outraged were simply being ridiculous. Le Monde made this their cover today- they might as well have printed “darn it, we LOVE mocking Arabs and **** you if you don’t!” as the headline.

The cartoons were drawn for one single purpose: to attack Muslims and provoke their ire.

By the same token Soly the pictures you take of scantaly clad women and posing them and publishing them would be controversial enough for these people to call for your hand to be cut off or maybe your head? Sure you have the freedom to and the right to print these pictures but in the eyes of these Muslims they might consider it to have, "racist cartoons that serve no purpose but to inflame Arab sentiment and make racist right-wingers feel good about themselves."

[solypsist]

nah. everybody likes teh pr0n. i haven't heard of any fatwahs being issued against Maxim or Playboy - have you?

By the same token Soly the pictures you take of scantaly clad women and posing them and publishing them would be controversial enough for these people to call for your hand to be cut off or maybe your head? Sure you have the freedom to and the right to print these pictures but in the eyes of these Muslims they might consider it to have, "racist cartoons that serve no purpose but to inflame Arab sentiment and make racist right-wingers feel good about themselves."

[Papewaio]

nah. everybody likes teh pr0n. i haven't heard of any fatwahs being issued against Maxim or Playboy - have you?

Zing: Playboy of Western world upsets Muslims

JAKARTA: The 200-plus demonstrators from the student group Concerned Muslims who had gathered in light drizzle at one of Central Jakarta's main roundabouts had a simple message for passing motorists. "Reject Playboy! Reject Playboy!" they shouted. "Don't publish that filth here. Keep the Indonesian nation clean."

"We don't need that sort of porno here," said Muhammad Salim. "There's enough vice here already."

Yesterday about 500 protesters - all members of a conservative Muslim political party - demanded the parliament quickly pass tough laws now under debate to crack down on existing girlie magazines and pornographic DVDs, which are widely available throughout the country.

[solypsist]

Zing! is right. There goes my livelihood.

If anything, Islam should be criticized for the way it refuses to let their women be as beautiful as they really are.

[Redleg]

With Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press comes responsibility. Chosing to print something because you can - does not necessarily make it the "right" thing to do.

On that note however just because a paper prints something you find offensive as an individual or even as a group does not give premission to throw a stone through the paper's window.

As I said in another thread - Freedom of Speech is a double edge sword, it cuts both ways.

The only issue that I have with the Muslim outrage about the pictures being printed is that some are threatening and/or have done violence because they dislike the pictures.

Burning flags in protest, boycotting goods, asking for an official apology from the paper, and any other civil non-violent protest because someone stated or printed something you find disagreeable are all within the scope of voicing one's opinion under the concept of Freedom of Speech.

Violence and threats of violence on the other hand is something else. The Islamic Religion has some growing pains to confront. In this instance their actions and protests are actually making them look worse in the exchange.

Now I know this has been said by others, but it looks like after reading the last few pages, that it needs to be said again.

I wonder if some one was to speak to one of the Muslem leaders that are advocating violence because of the cartoon drawing and ask them, Why do you hate freedom? What there reaction to the question would be.

[InsaneApache]

What there reaction to the question would be.

Allah Akbar. There is no law but Gods law.

There again the majority of the Muslims learn the Koran by rote. Most of these can't read and write in their own language, never mind Arabic.

Education is the key, but how? If everything is Gods will what's the point in doing anything?

[kataphraktoi]

On the DOme of Rock, there is an inscription which insults and castigates Christians for believing that God has a Son. Thats as bad as the Danish Cartoons simply because its done in a place like Jerusalem that Muslims know full well is holy to Christians as well. Funny isn't it that the Crusaders were ignorant of Arabic to tear it down hahaha...who looks tolerant now

Navaros's startling mindless assumption Christians dont react like Muslims becaue they're not as dedicated is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Do you have to react violently to show how devout you are?

Right, tomorrow, I'm going to burn an embassy just to show that Jesus is Love.....

Insane Apache is right, most Muslims are uneducated and are easily swayed by the preaching of hyped up imams and mullahs. Education is key.





"Poverty is a weakness that is always exploited" - Kataphraktoi

[Adrian II]

The cartoons were drawn for one single purpose: to attack Muslims and provoke their ire.

Brother Solypsist, it seems that like other Americans who share the Bush administration's point of view that the cartoons are 'unacceptable', you haven't the faintest idea what this is all about.

One of the cartoons in Jyllands-Posten actually made fun of the newspaper itself. It showed a Persian schoolboy by the name of Mohammed who had just written in Farsi on a blackboard that the Jyllands-Posten are a bunch of 'reactionaries'. Satire, you know.

The real issue is that the whole cartoon contest was Jylland-Posten's answer to a most disturbing fact. This most disturbing fact is that a writer of childrens' books could not find a good illustrator because good illustrators are afraid to be killed by Muslim fanatics. Because the good artists are afraid for their lives, the mediocre steal the show. The lack of quality of the twelve cartoons is a symptom of Muslim terrorism, not of right-wing provocation. This state of affairs in neither normal nor acceptable in a democracy.

Maybe some Americans don't understand the implication of the murder of Van Gogh. The '9/11' victims were anonymous, they were targeted because of who they were or where they were. Van Gogh was singled out as a victim because of what he stood for. This means our artists, the best and most ebullient users of the freedom of thought and espression, run the risk of being killed on their own doorstep in broad daylight by a Muslim fanatic.

[Beirut]

There again the majority of the Muslims learn the Koran by rote. Most of these can't read and write in their own language, never mind Arabic.

Actually, in real life, the majority of predominatly Muslim countries have literacy rates in the high 70% range with many being in the 80% range and some in the 90% range.

Indonesia, for example, has an 88% Muslim population and an 89% literacy rate.

[Adrian II]

If everything is Gods will what's the point in doing anything?

Except for killing of course. There is always room for another killing. I mean someone needs to be killed to keep the faith alive, right? Beheaded, burnt, blown up, stabbed, cut open with lots of blood pouring out to make sure you mean business in the name of the Prophet, no?

[Navaros]

This means our artists, the best and most ebullient users of the freedom of thought and espression, run the risk of being killed on their own doorstep in broad daylight by a Muslim fanatic.

They could always stop instigating Muslims. Problem solved.

[Watchman]

You know, I'm under the distinct impression many ethnic minorities, particularly those of darker skin tones, have for a long time been existing daily under a very real threat of violence against their persons solely for what they are in the West. It just occurred to me that the anxieties of artists appear somewhat minor in comparision.

Just a thought.

[Adrian II]

They could always stop instigating Muslims. Problem solved.

Imagine, if you will, that there are artists with convictions just as deep as yours. Problem addressed.

[InsaneApache]

Actually, in real life, the majority of predominatly Muslim countries have literacy rates in the high 70% range with many being in the 80% range and some in the 90% range.

Indonesia, for example, has an 88% Muslim population and an 89% literacy rate.

And they speak Arabic in Indonesia do they? Because that's how the Q'ran is taught, in Arabic. Or how about Bangladesh? or Pakistan?....perhaps Albania?

In the Arabic speaking countries what is the literacy rate there?

I live in a city with over 80 000 Muslims in it. None of them has Arabic as a native tongue. None of which understand the language of the Q'ran as it taught.

[Beirut]

And they speak Arabic in Indonesia do they? Because that's how the Q'ran is taught, in Arabic. Or how about Bangladesh? or Pakistan?....perhaps Albania?

In the Arabic speaking countries what is the literacy rate there?

Iran, Syria, and Kuwait show literacy rates of 77%, 79%, and 84%.

Oh... by the by, Albania is 87%.

[Kralizec]

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/

Egypt: 57.7
Morocco: 51.7
Syria: 76.9
Iraq: 40.4 (my guess is that literacy must be pretty bad among Kurds)

That's actually a whole lot worse then I expected...

[Adrian II]

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/

Egypt: 57.7
Morocco: 51.7
Syria: 76.9
Iraq: 40.4 (my guess is that literacy must be pretty bad among Kurds)

That's actually a whole lot worse then I expected...

Literacy numbers don't even tell half the story of Arab backwardness. Arabs who can read have very little that is worthwhile to read, very little that informs them about the outside world, current affairs, sophisticated subjects, free newspapers. Almost no books are translated into Arab, almost no scientific literature. And almost no media are free; outside news and occasional translations or foreign sources are 'adapted' to Arab audiences by the authorities, etcetera. It is sickening.

[Adrian II]

It just occurred to me that the anxieties of artists appear somewhat minor in comparision. Just a thought.

Just don't let it strike any root.
1. Racism does not justify religious obscurantism.
2. There are artists who are of 'darker skin tone'.
3. There are mixed audiences for many an artist these days.
4. The freedom of artists is highly symbolic of all the freedoms we cherish.

[Watchman]

Just pointing out that things are relative. Besides, #2 and #3 at least are very much beside the point.

[Adrian II]

Just pointing out that things are relative. Besides, #2 and #3 at least are very much beside the point.

They are not. Imagine you are an Arab artist in Europe and after years of racial slurs and threats over your 'darker skin tone', you are now receiving death threats from zealously religious fellow Arabs over your work as well. Sheesh, what an improvement!

[Devastatin Dave]

They could always stop instigating Muslims. Problem solved.

Do you believe that playing nice to people that will murder someone over a cartoon would end hostilities? Interesting...

[Devastatin Dave]

Wow Adrian, people are going to start calling you racist and close minded. You've made good valid points and I salute you, of course my agreement with you on many of your points probably won't win you much of a popularity contest here in the Backroom. Sorry, but I found your views on this issue with much agreement to my own feelings. I apologize for agreeing with you, i hope you can forgive me.

[Redleg]

Well it would seem to me that Freedom of Speech issues are often not understood by both the people who react with violence on an issue of speech, and those who believe that Freedom of Speech means the individual does not have to accept the consequences of their speech.

Brother Solypsist, it seems that like other Americans who share the Bush administration's point of view that the cartoons are 'unacceptable', you haven't the faintest idea what this is all about.

Are you posing that Freedom of Speech means that the one can write and draw anything that one wants without accepting responsiblity for the words.

There is a venue for such type of writings - normally found on the walls in bathrooms where little children write and draw racist comments about others.

One can understand why the drawings were done, and still call it unacceptable. A concept that it seems some in Europe have forgotten.

[TinCow]

They could always stop instigating Muslims. Problem solved.

That certainly might work, but is it in the best interests of society? Freedom of speech exists to protect the expressions that you don't like, not that ones that you do like. If you start demanding that everyone restrict what they say so as not to offend anyone else, then you are severely limiting free speech. There's a reason why the ACLU has defended the KKK and the Aryan Nation. It's not the message that counts, it's the ability to say it.

I firmly believe that freedom of speech is the only thing humans have developed that has any possibility of creating and maintaining freedom and human rights. Anything that infringes upon that runs a risk of creating far more serious consequences in the long run. Having to let people say things that you disagree with or even that insult you is far better than losing the most important elements of modern society.

[rory_20_uk]

I agree with what you say Adrian.

Muslims should realise that only a 4 year old puts their own values above all others and throws a tantrum when they don't get their own way. If they don't like it, they don't have to read it.

I get offended when I see Mulim women walking in London covered head to foot in black material. that's my view, and although I don't like it I feel that it is a good aspect of my society that they are able to do that without fear of persecution.

Can I go and drink a bottle of Jacky D in Saudi Arabia? I'd probably get flogged. So much for tolerance there, eh?

[Devastatin Dave]

I get offended when I see Mulim women walking in London covered head to foot in black material.

Why in the world would that offend you? I get more offended when a Londener smiles at me and I have to look at their lack of dental care.

[rory_20_uk]

Me it's looking at an American and having to stop looking for the scars from the way they've reconstructed their features.: can they really be that ugy on the inside?

[Kralizec]

I get offended when I see Mulim women walking in London covered head to foot in black material.

The other day I had a naughty thought:

walking up to women dressed in burqa's and telling that you find their clothing strangely arousing. I'd like to see their reaction

[Devastatin Dave]

The other day I had a naughty thought:

walking up to women dressed in burqa's and telling that you find their clothing strangely arousing. I'd like to see their reaction

Just tell her she's got sexy ankles, just watch out for her man six paces ahead of her!!!