Muslims

[Brawny]

hm....It just is..... I don't know how to explain it. It is sort of innate for me.

 

[captainff]

Please try. It could be really helpful if you do. . . . .

 

[Brawny]

I think that squall hit it best when he said that you should limit yourself to respect others, don't offend people just because what offends them is not against your ethics. With today's society, I can see perfectly clear why people only care about themselves and don't worry about respecting people...

 

[captainff]

Respect is a two way street though.

In the same way that you ask that I respect your beliefs, I ask you to respect mine.

One of my employees is a teetotal vegan. I respect his beliefs and would never ask him to eat meat or drink alcohol, nor would I trick or force him into either of those things. Likewise, he doesn't stop me from enjoying a steak and a pint. We allow each other to exist with our own beliefs even though they are at odds.

With today's society, I can see perfectly clear why people only care about themselves and don't worry about respecting people.

Yes, I agree that the rise of the "F**k you" society has lead to a lack of mutual understanding and respect.

 

[Brawny]

Respect is a two way street though.

In the same way that you ask that I respect your beliefs, I ask you to respect mine.

One of my employees is a teetotal vegan. I respect his beliefs and would never ask him to eat meat or drink alcohol, nor would I trick or force him into either of those things. Likewise, he doesn't stop me from enjoying a steak and a pint. We allow each other to exist with our own beliefs even though they are at odds.




Yes, I agree that the rise of the "F**k you" society has lead to a lack of mutual understanding and respect.

Your example doesn't really carry over.... to do that, you would have to be offended by his being a vegetarian....

 

[captainff]

The comparison was with the restrictions you place on yourself.

I'm not offended by your belief either.

The point is that each of us can co-exist without imposing our ideals on each other. As a vegan his belief does not allow him to eat, drink or wear any animal product but he does not stop others from doing so.

 

[Brawny]

Islam is not stopping you from drawing it. YOU should stop it because it offends them. Just like you SHOULD not eat meat in front of your employee....

 

[captainff]

Sorry to sound dumb Brawny, but I just went back and re-read our discussion. You are a Christian not a Muslim? I would have pm'd you but............

Islam is offended if I draw Mohammed. Islam is not offended to the same extent if I drink alcohol. Both things are restricted by Islam, but one has a different reaction to the other. I am genuinely trying to find out why.

I am curious to know why you think that I should not do something if it is going to offend someone else? The logical extension of that argument is that there would be no music, no art, no cars, planes, comedy, computer games.. .. .. the list would be endless.

I agree that I should not go out of my way to be DELIBERATELY offensive but that is different because of the intent (Danish Newspaper) of the action.

 

[Squall7]

Sorry to sound dumb Brawny, but I just went back and re-read our discussion. You are a Christian not a Muslim? I would have pm'd you but............

Islam is offended if I draw Mohammed. Islam is not offended to the same extent if I drink alcohol. Both things are restricted by Islam, but one has a different reaction to the other. I am genuinely trying to find out why.

I am curious to know why you think that I should not do something if it is going to offend someone else? The logical extension of that argument is that there would be no music, no art, no cars, planes, comedy, computer games.. .. .. the list would be endless.

I agree that I should not go out of my way to be DELIBERATELY offensive but that is different because of the intent (Danish Newspaper) of the action.

I think it's a case of effecting others. If you drew Mohammed and kept it away from everyone, I don't think people would have a problem. If you drink, you're only doing it to yourself (within social boundaries of course), but if you show people something offensive, you're spreading your own views and ideas to people. I'm sure if you showed a Christian an up-side-down cross (i.e. The symbol of the devil), they would surely get offended. You may consider it within your freedom, but when it comes to the exhibition to others, it becomes different.

 

[captainff]

I think it's a case of effecting others. If you drew Mohammed and kept it away from everyone, I don't think people would have a problem. If you drink, you're only doing it to yourself (within social boundaries of course), but if you show people something offensive, you're spreading your own views and ideas to people. I'm sure if you showed a Christian an up-side-down cross (i.e. The symbol of the devil), they would surely get offended. You may consider it within your freedom, but when it comes to the exhibition to others, it becomes different.

Then, as I suggested earlier, we will end up in a very dark and lonely world as more things that one group or another finds 'offensive' will be banned.

I am not suggesting that my freedom has any more or less value than anyone elses does. However, the very point you make about spreading views and ideas to people is equally valid in either direction of this discussion. That a Muslim is offended by a picture of Mohammed seems to be an issue; that I am offended by censorship by a faith that I don't follow doesn't seem to bother anyone.

I'll say it again - I'm trying to learn why. I'm not trying to upset.

 

[Nitram]

I think it's a case of effecting others. If you drew Mohammed and kept it away from everyone, I don't think people would have a problem. If you drink, you're only doing it to yourself (within social boundaries of course), but if you show people something offensive, you're spreading your own views and ideas to people. I'm sure if you showed a Christian an up-side-down cross (i.e. The symbol of the devil), they would surely get offended. You may consider it within your freedom, but when it comes to the exhibition to others, it becomes different.

I wouldn't get offended. It's not againts the law to draw mohamed because it's offensive. Comedy is suposed to be offensive, that's the whole point. It's about pushing boundaries. It's againts the law because people are afraid the muslims will retaliate violently, NOT because it's offensive. Just look at south park, they showed jesus shitting on bush, they showed jesus being cut at the throat and dying. I bet a ton of people would have been offended by that. But nobody cares, people only care about dying. That's why it's illegal. Because people are scared of the muslims retaliating, and muslims acting like it's the end of the world, and getting pissed off, making it againts the law only contributes to people thinking of them as terrorist. Because laws like that aren't made out of compation, they are made out of fear. Making people fear you will not help your cause of getting people to understand you. Nobody forces muslims to look at those cartoons. Yes it's offensive, but being offensive is a big part of comedy. People get offended every day through comedy, and you're not more special than we are.

 

[Squall7]

Then, as I suggested earlier, we will end up in a very dark and lonely world as more things that one group or another finds 'offensive' will be banned.

Bah, there's too many people screaming anti-PC views out there to let that happen. Frankly, I think more is done on "behalf" of others than what others want. I also feel this is a deliberate ruse to get people to rally against others.

I am not suggesting that my freedom has any more or less value than anyone elses does. However, the very point you make about spreading views and ideas to people is equally valid in either direction of this discussion. That a Muslim is offended by a picture of Mohammed seems to be an issue; that I am offended by censorship by a faith that I don't follow doesn't seem to bother anyone.

So then you're basically saying that you're offended that they're offended? It's not merely censorship of faith, it's fundamental principle of what Muslims believe, and what the Koran (or Qua'ran, not sure which) teaches. When it comes down to it, are you offended through an entire belief structure, or are you offended that Muslims have such a powerful reaction to this?

I'll say it again - I'm trying to learn why. I'm not trying to upset.

Fair enough. Just as long as you remember that Muslims do not "subscribe" to the same satirical values that we do. I have never seen a Muslim make fun of anothers' religion. Is it that neccessary to make fun of theirs?

I wouldn't get offended. It's not againts the law to draw mohamed because it's offensive. Comedy is suposed to be offensive, that's the whole point. It's about pushing boundaries. It's againts the law because people are afraid the muslims will retaliate violently, NOT because it's offensive. Just look at south park, they showed jesus shitting on bush, they showed jesus being cut at the throat and dying. I bet a ton of people would have been offended by that. But nobody cares, people only care about dying. That's why it's illegal. Because people are scared of the muslims retaliating, and muslims acting like it's the end of the world, and getting pissed off, making it againts the law only contributes to people thinking of them as terrorist. Because laws like that aren't made out of compation, they are made out of fear. Making people fear you will not help your cause of getting people to understand you. Nobody forces muslims to look at those cartoons. Yes it's offensive, but being offensive is a big part of comedy. People get offended every day through comedy, and you're not more special than we are.

Only certain aspects of comedy are based on causing offense. South Park is an interesting example, as it often misses the point or aims to make fun of everyone. It's only some Muslims that are rioting about this. Heck, they're not the first rioters, and they certainly won't be the last. Chances are, most of those involved are just looking for destruction. We see it everywhere - there's always people willing to fight, even if there's no reason to. Heck, look at Chavs.

"Nobody forces Muslims to look at cartoons"? If somebody called you a really bad name, would it be okay if they just said it behind your back instead of saying it to your face? Why is it that you adopt a position of "offensive is funny" yet do not go on to say why it was neccessary to make Islam "funny"? What was the point of it? If it were to satirise Islamophobia, why didn't it happen in a different way? Surely one can cause a minor offense as opposed to a major one?!

The one thing I dislike is that reportedly, those pictures were created the year before it was picked up (or something like that). The media then reshowed everyone those pictures making things worse. If you've got an open wound, do you try and poke it a bit more? Surely they could have covered the story without antagonising people - but heck, then they wouldn't have got the coverage that they wanted...

 

[Nitram]

The point is it's either all ok or non of it is. Like I said, the rule is not built on common sense or compation, but on fear, and that is the problem here. And yes, people do laugh at my culture where I live, and they show comical things about it all the time, some things that would offend some people yes. But it's still comedy, should not be taken literaly, or seriously. And sometimes they take it too far and I do get offended. But I don't make a fuss about it. Because I respect that people have a right to express themselves in anyway they want, as long as it does not impose physical harm. Take it this way, sometimes I like to laugh at jewish jokes, and I'm, sure some of those would offend some jewish people. But I respect their ways. I hate to bring up south park again, but one of the creators is actually jewish, and they make plenty of stereotypical jewish jokes, that would certainly offend many people. But he finds it funny, and laughs about it. People who bring anger into such situations only make things worst. Witch is precisely why racisme againts black people still exists today.


and SP usualy doesn't miss their aim dude

 

[zeon9881]

....i havn't been following this thread could someone give me the aspect from my last post till now

 

[captainff]

So then you're basically saying that you're offended that they're offended? It's not merely censorship of faith, it's fundamental principle of what Muslims believe, and what the Koran (or Qua'ran, not sure which) teaches. When it comes down to it, are you offended through an entire belief structure, or are you offended that Muslims have such a powerful reaction to this?

I am concerned that censorship of action can be applied because of the belief set of one group of people, a belief set that I do not subscribe to.

Fair enough. Just as long as you remember that Muslims do not "subscribe" to the same satirical values that we do. I have never seen a Muslim make fun of anothers' religion. Is it that neccessary to make fun of theirs?

I do not wish to 'make fun' of any religion. I don't agree with many of the beliefs held by most of the worlds major religions but I don't want to be coerced into complying with them.

Only certain aspects of comedy are based on causing offense. South Park is an interesting example, as it often misses the point or aims to make fun of everyone. It's only some Muslims that are rioting about this. Heck, they're not the first rioters, and they certainly won't be the last. Chances are, most of those involved are just looking for destruction. We see it everywhere - there's always people willing to fight, even if there's no reason to. Heck, look at Chavs.

"Nobody forces Muslims to look at cartoons"? If somebody called you a really bad name, would it be okay if they just said it behind your back instead of saying it to your face? Why is it that you adopt a position of "offensive is funny" yet do not go on to say why it was neccessary to make Islam "funny"? What was the point of it? If it were to satirise Islamophobia, why didn't it happen in a different way? Surely one can cause a minor offense as opposed to a major one?!

No-one forces a Muslim to drink alcohol. Yet bars and pubs and clubs exist without causing offence.

The one thing I dislike is that reportedly, those pictures were created the year before it was picked up (or something like that). The media then reshowed everyone those pictures making things worse. If you've got an open wound, do you try and poke it a bit more? Surely they could have covered the story without antagonising people - but heck, then they wouldn't have got the coverage that they wanted...

I said this a couple of posts ago, and I'm going to say it again so that my positon is totally clear.
I AM NOT SUPPORTING THE INFLAMMATORY PICTURES THAT WERE PUBLISHED IN THE MEDIA IN SOME COUNTRIES. My whole purpose for this line of questioning was Islamic values and the restrictions it places on its followers, and why are some things that non-believers do more offensive than others. I have yet to have a rational answer as to WHY pictures of Mohammed cause so much offense ( not the ones where Mohammed is pictured as a terrorist - I can work that out for myself) to a Muslim.