Are Muslims overly sensitive about the Prophet Mohammad?

[Alaa]

You are correct.

Thanks for admitting it.

In American jurisprudence, censorship is FAR, FAR worse than depicting religious figures in sexual intercourse could ever be. The reason being that while you can always ignore speech/video you do not like (just turn off your computer or don't look at youtube if you don't like the video), it is hard to limit censorship once it is allowed.

Also, for what it's worth, the current video does not show anyone having sex, although its obviously implied, but not shown.

I hope this problem with censorship extends to other religions as well! Anyway, I think this problem arises when the government is completely neutral and fair. It is not on anyone's side so if it decided to censor for 1 group all others will demand the same. Islamic governments on the other hand have 1,2,3 censored 1,2,3 available and tells people to enjoy their life.

 

[Alaa]

You're just not listening. You only want to hear what you want to hear. If you're going to do that then why don't you just take a page out of our book and walk away from things that you don't agree with. People are entitled to their opinions - even the ones about Islam that you don't agree with.

Again, you are free to believe in what you want and say whatever you want as long as it is in the framework of politeness and respect to others.

 

[randomrogue]

Again, you are free to believe in what you want and say whatever you want as long as it is in the framework of politeness and respect to others.

That's absurd. If that was the case there would never be any free speech. I know this is hard for you to understand since I have an Egyptian friend (Coptic) and although we hang out every week all he does is talk about religion and he gets very upset when someone says something that he disagrees with. He knows "everything" about Islam and Coptic Christianity. It becomes a diatribe each time but we just sit back and let him do his thing since he's a nice guy. That and we are free to leave if we don't want to listen to him.

Free speech is free as long as it doesn't hurt someone. What's NOT ok is for someone to spew out calls for violence.

 

[Alaa]

That's absurd. If that was the case there would never be any free speech. I know this is hard for you to understand since I have an Egyptian friend (Coptic) and although we hang out every week all he does is talk about religion and he gets very upset when someone says something that he disagrees with. He knows "everything" about Islam and Coptic Christianity. It becomes a diatribe each time but we just sit back and let him do his thing since he's a nice guy. That and we are free to leave if we don't want to listen to him.

Free speech is free as long as it doesn't hurt someone. What's NOT ok is for someone to spew out calls for violence.

Politeness and respect are absurd?! Why can't you get your points straight while being polite? What's bad for free speech in doing this? If I disagree with Christians, instead of saying that Jesus is not God, I make a movie that mock Jesus and depicts him in horrible situations that I made in my mind! Is this free speech to you? If it is then we really are miles apart.

 

[Emos]

Something you must understand about our American values: free speech is the right upon which all other rights are based. Without speech, there is nothing. You have the freedom to declare Muhammad the greatest prophet of all, I have the right to declare that I see no reason to believe in a God at all.

People in this country say thing I consider incredibly, horribly wrong. There are holocaust deniers, neo-nazis, Klansmen, NAMBLA members, people who fuck goats, Todd Akin, Benedict Groeschel, the list goes on. I support letting these people speak because the things I say are considered equally horrible by other people (indeed, being an atheist still carries a death sentence in some parts of the world).

Furthermore, publicly silencing ideas does not eliminate them. By not letting those with ideas you detest speak their thoughts openly, their ideas fester unchallenged, further radicalizing their believers. The more strongly you react to these people publishing stupid Muhammad videos, the more intent they will be on producing them, and the more they will hate the Muslim world for their overreaction.

Yeah this is why I feel that having freedom of expression is so valuable, it helps to improve debate and critical thinking skills. As mentioned above there are many things that I find personally offensive (mostly "intelligent design" or other anti-science rhetoric in my case) but instead of protesting to ban it in its totality my goal is to use my freedom of expression to counter what I would find wrong or offensive and sway people over to my side.

Saw an interesting tweet the other day that mockingly sums up the thought process of many pro-censorship people: "Your Rights end where my Feelings begin"

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Politeness and respect are absurd?! Why can't you get your points straight while being polite? What's bad for free speech in doing this? If I disagree with Christians, instead of saying that Jesus is not God, I make a movie that mock Jesus and depicts him in horrible situations that I made in my mind! Is this free speech to you? If it is then we really are miles apart.

I think I understand you better and I'll address your points more completely later. We have different perspectives but some things in common. All cultures have blind spots and that includes us, but a full and proper response will take time, which I do not have right now. I must lay before you some of our history and consequent thinking for a better understanding of us as a people, things outside of brief histories that you cannot be expected to know.

 

[cybrsage]

Thanks for admitting it.

I hope this problem with censorship extends to other religions as well! Anyway, I think this problem arises when the government is completely neutral and fair. It is not on anyone's side so if it decided to censor for 1 group all others will demand the same. Islamic governments on the other hand have 1,2,3 censored 1,2,3 available and tells people to enjoy their life.

There actually is a lot more censorship wrt Islam than other religions in the US. Most TV stations will refuse to air anything that overtly insults Islam but will readily and quickly air things that overtly insult Christianity. It is not government censorship, though.

 

[Alaa]

There actually is a lot more censorship wrt Islam than other religions in the US. Most TV stations will refuse to air anything that overtly insults Islam but will readily and quickly air things that overtly insult Christianity. It is not government censorship, though.

LOL Strange. Anyway, I only proposed a law that forces mutual respect between groups so we don't end up cursing each other. Whoever breaks this law shall be taken to court. Not censored by government.

 

[crashtestdummy]

I have no problem with anything you said. I only ask for some politeness and respect for my religious figures. Both of us denies each others' beliefs but we still respect each other. You may express your views of whatever you want and probably say that our prophet did X which you see as negative or whatever you want. But there is always a limit of respect.

You're more than welcome to ask for it, but no law should require others to grant it. You're essentially asking for a law against being an asshole. Why does it matter to you if someone you've never met is being rude?

 

[bfdd]

LOL Strange. Anyway, I only proposed a law that forces mutual respect between groups so we don't end up cursing each other. Whoever breaks this law shall be taken to court. Not censored by government.

What if someone views themselves as their own religious figure? How do you deal with possibly insulting the,?

Also, it is absurd to want to base everything on politeness and respect. Respect has to be earned you aren't simply afforded it because of what you believe or who you are.

 

[cybrsage]

LOL Strange. Anyway, I only proposed a law that forces mutual respect between groups so we don't end up cursing each other. Whoever breaks this law shall be taken to court. Not censored by government.

At one time, in the US, the use of free speech was countered by the use of personal duels. You could be as idiotically insulting as you wanted, but the person you insulted could force you to duel them to recover their honor...and if you refused it was widely spread about how cowardly AND wrong you were in what you said.

Duels became illegal but no limit was placed on being insulting...making it unbalanced. Not sure if duels are a good thing to restore, though.

 

[bfdd]

At one time, in the US, the use of free speech was countered by the use of personal duels. You could be as idiotically insulting as you wanted, but the person you insulted could force you to duel them to recover their honor...and if you refused it was widely spread about how cowardly AND wrong you were in what you said.

Duels became illegal but no limit was placed on being insulting...making it unbalanced. Not sure if duels are a good thing to restore, though.

I thunk they would be. It's tradition and with twitter things could be fun/interesting.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

I had asked about the American exceptions to free speech, I used your UK as an example to you when you asked.

Which would be entirely irrelevant since the filmmakers were not British.

Are you asking me, which parts of the movie, I don't think are correct?
I haven't seen the movie, and would not be able to tell you if I had.
I'm not Muslim and have only begun to try to understand their beliefs.

I'm asking you which parts of the movie you think would be illegal speech under US law since that is what we're discussing.

I'd suggest you watch the movie, it's just a 15 minute trailer. Granted the quality makes it seem like it's five hours long but i don't really know how anyone can have an opinion of it without even watching it.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

My problem with you is that you are taking it too far. Censorship is not comparable to depicting religious figures in sexual intercourse. There is no comparison and you know it. What you are saying is correct generally but there are exceptions for every rule.

Why not? Because some dipsheit thinks his holy man is beyond critique and ridicule? Piss off with that daft sheit.

I've seen plenty of extremely disrespectful depections of Jews in Egypt and those refer to a whole people who are alive today but i haven't seen your likes calling for censorship about that.

But when it comes to some guy who's long dead AND per todays definitions IS a pedophile (having sex with a 6 year old and penetrating her when she's 9 means you are a pedo by todays definitions) you rage and scream about censorship.

Why not censor those parts of the Quaran that tells the story of Aisha? Isn't it disrespectful of the Quaran to depict Mochhhhhammat as a pedophile?

 

[ProchargeMe]

Are Christians sensitive about God?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

LOL Strange. Anyway, I only proposed a law that forces mutual respect between groups so we don't end up cursing each other. Whoever breaks this law shall be taken to court. Not censored by government.

If your belief is so pathetically weak that it's threatened by ridicule it's not much of a belief and i don't think it should be respected AT ALL.

Ever wonder what would happen if the life of brian would have depicted ol Mo's life instead of ridiculing Christianity?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Are Christians sensitive about God?

Some are, piss christ made a ruckus, no riots though.

Life of Brian made one bishop tiffed but not much else.

Last temptation of Christ did cause a couple of Christians to attack and burn people in a theater.

So yeah, some are but the demands for censorship are few and far in between, you won't see nations demanding that other nations arrest people for insulting Jesus.

 

[Screech]

Thanks for admitting it.

It is not on anyone's side so if it decided to censor for 1 group all others will demand the same.

Right, and that's why censorship is a bad idea. Take a look at scientology: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology
It is basically a cult that drains its members of their money in exchange for a bunch of bullshit. If we have to be respectful of all religions, then criticism of scientology is now against the law. Telling the truth, no matter how disrespectful, should never be against the law.

Ironically, the cult/church of scientology has basically followed your idea and tried to sue out of existence anyone who speaks ill about it. Thankfully, at last south park has managed to withstand the legal barrage.
http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s09e12-trapped-in-the-closet

Also, if the government allows people to take each other to court for feeling 'insulted' then that is using the power of government to infringe on free speech. Is it really so difficult to not watch something you do not like that you feel it necessary to be able to ban it? What if we decide that criticism of Israel must also be banned? It would certainly offend someone! (probably asshole jewish settlers that I have no respect for but the point stands, they would be quite offended!)

 

[Orignal Earl]

Which would be entirely irrelevant since the filmmakers were not British.





I'm asking you which parts of the movie you think would be illegal speech under US law since that is what we're discussing.

I'd suggest you watch the movie, it's just a 15 minute trailer. Granted the quality makes it seem like it's five hours long but i don't really know how anyone can have an opinion of it without even watching it.

I should of started my post with * If Muslims in the US started rioting..*
I guess I assumed that people would just get the drift of my post.

If I watch the trailer on YouTube will it give some asshole a nickle?
Then count me out.

I'll get my info about this from here for now

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence_of_Muslims

At one time, in the US, the use of free speech was countered by the use of personal duels. You could be as idiotically insulting as you wanted, but the person you insulted could force you to duel them to recover their honor...and if you refused it was widely spread about how cowardly AND wrong you were in what you said.

Duels became illegal but no limit was placed on being insulting...making it unbalanced. Not sure if duels are a good thing to restore, though.

lol come on...
Dueling was done by individuals everywhere, it's not like there was a US law of the land that worked around it.

The US had it's share of Blasphemy laws.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law_in_the_United_States

A lot more people went to prison for insulting a religion, rather then solving the dispute over a duel.

 

[Alaa]

I've seen plenty of extremely disrespectful depections of Jews in Egypt and those refer to a whole people who are alive today but i haven't seen your likes calling for censorship about that.

Same happens with Muslims but we are talking about religious figures still.

Why not censor those parts of the Quaran that tells the story of Aisha? Isn't it disrespectful of the Quaran to depict Mochhhhhammat as a pedophile?

Can you show me the part you are talking about?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Same happens with Muslims but we are talking about religious figures still.

And those aren't even around to be insulted so that would make it LESS insulting than to insult a whole people, don't you think?

Can you show me the part you are talking about?

I don't know the exact verses but i'm talking about Aishas story, you know.

Let me explain with an image:

 

[bfdd]

Earl blasphemy laws are always hotly debated and usually found to be infringing on freedom of speech....

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

I should of started my post with * If Muslims in the US started rioting..*
I guess I assumed that people would just get the drift of my post.

If I watch the trailer on YouTube will it give some asshole a nickle?

Well, google will probably make a nickle off of you clicking a link there but other than that... no.

You can find it on other sites too.

I'd say it's worth watching if for no other reason to understand that people getting upset about it are fucking retarded.

 

[Orignal Earl]

Well, google will probably make a nickle off of you clicking a link there but other than that... no.

You can find it on other sites too.

I'd say it's worth watching if for no other reason to understand that people getting upset about it are fucking retarded.

Like I said, I can read and gain a better understanding from here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence_of_Muslims

I would not be able to understand what Arabic dubbed version says anyways

 

[bfdd]

Like I said, I can read and gain a better understanding from here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence_of_Muslims

I would not be able to understand what Arabic dubbed version says anyways

No you really can't, you have to watch it if you want to understand it. You're basically playing telephone and trying to make a rational decision. If you haven't watched the trailer your entire opinion on the subject is null and you really should exit before you make yourself look a bigger fool. I had assumed you watched it, I had assumed everyone making an opinion on the matter has watched it, guess I made an ass out of myself by giving you to much credit.