Papers across Europe reprinting those carricatures of Mohammed

[Braznor]

:thumbsup:Go Europe GO :thumbsup:

You sure too a longtime to wake up, but you did :thumbsup:

And Sultan, Cool down mate.

I know Islam prohibits pictures and especially those of the Prophet, but you must realise that Arabia and Europe are lightyears apart culturally. They would not honor these restrictions. The best thing for you to do is to accept it and live with it, instead of damaging your position even further by blaming people who have no control over these factors i.e the Jews

 

[piasabird]

This is what happens with open borders.

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: jrenz
Tomorrow: "Islamic leaders declare that the world must be punished for these crimes"

Tomorrow?

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: maddogchen
I see no good that can come out of this.

Hopefully it will prompt more attacks so that the world will reach it's breaking point with these sons-o-bitches and we can all get together and collectively hand their asses to them finally and once and for all. I'm sick of this ******.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: maddogchen
I see no good that can come out of this.

Hopefully it will prompt more attacks so that the world will reach it's breaking point with these sons-o-bitches and we can all get together and collectively hand their asses to them finally and once and for all. I'm sick of this ******.

Because war and death is God's will, right? :roll:

 

[Bumrush99]

About damn time people stopped being politically correct and called out the hypocrisy in the Muslim world.

They have no problem burning American flags, burning effigies of Americans, chanting and ranting about how evil the infedils are. Europeans are starting to see the light, unfortunantly for them they are already doomed by their overagressive strategies to open their borders to immigration by being foolish enough to think that these groups would actually integrate in to their societies.

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: maddogchen
I see no good that can come out of this.

Hopefully it will prompt more attacks so that the world will reach it's breaking point with these sons-o-bitches and we can all get together and collectively hand their asses to them finally and once and for all. I'm sick of this ******.

Because war and death is God's will, right? :roll:

No, because it's what it's coming to inevitably more and more every day. Every day a little closer. Just freakin get it over with already. None of us are going to live forever anyway. This is getting rediculous. God has nothing to do with it. Where in my post did it even mention God? You brought up God, not me.

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: piasabird
This is what happens with open borders.

Yep. Open borders require open minds. Leave that old baggage behind. If a host country is open minded enough to open its borders then be open minded enough to accept their culture if you decide to take advantage of that open border. Don't accept an invitation to somebody's home and then crap all over their floor. That will get you unwelcome status real fast.

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: maddogchen
I see no good that can come out of this.

I already see good, I see the end of papers finally bowing down to political threats. I see people standing up for there right to critisize after decades of PC growing larger and larger. I see freedom of the press being upheld again, after years of it slowly degrading. I see the power of the press being re-established. I see Europe finally starting to come to terms she doesn't need to bend over and take it up the a$$ from the imigrants she welcomes into her lands. If you want to come to a country, you come because that country has something to offer you, you do not come because you want to change the policies of that country. I see alot of good comming out of this, too bad if some people's toes were stepped on.

:thumbsup: Right on.
Coming to another country with the intent of changing its policies is usually seen as an invasion. When people come in this capacity, they usually bring guns with them. If you are coming to take advantage of what is offered, then assimilate or go home. Those are your options. Home is a terrible place and you don't want to go back? Then that leaves you one other set of options. . .change your mind and go along with the culture you seek to live in or go through life having left one struggle behind only to have created a new struggle FOR YOURSELF.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: Bumrush99
About damn time people stopped being politically correct and called out the hypocrisy in the Muslim world.

They have no problem burning American flags, burning effigies of Americans, chanting and ranting about how evil the infedils are. Europeans are starting to see the light, unfortunantly for them they are already doomed by their overagressive strategies to open their borders to immigration by being foolish enough to think that these groups would actually integrate in to their societies.

They're not opening their borders to immigration, they're the complete opposite. They mainly let in poor refugees. That is one of the problems.

 

[ArneBjarne]

Originally posted by: Vic
While I fully support the freedom of the press, I see no reason for that freedom to be abused as an excuse to be disrespectful, hateful, or bigoted, or to incite tensions among a religious minority. In other words, just because you are free to do something does not mean that you should.

Nor should Denmark pretend that it is somehow enlightened or secular when it truly is not. It is one of the last surviving Christian monarchies in Europe, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Denmark is the state church, which is supported by public taxation even on atheists and Muslims.

That is 100% incorrect. Only members of the church pay.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: ArneBjarne

Originally posted by: Vic
While I fully support the freedom of the press, I see no reason for that freedom to be abused as an excuse to be disrespectful, hateful, or bigoted, or to incite tensions among a religious minority. In other words, just because you are free to do something does not mean that you should.

Nor should Denmark pretend that it is somehow enlightened or secular when it truly is not. It is one of the last surviving Christian monarchies in Europe, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Denmark is the state church, which is supported by public taxation even on atheists and Muslims.

That is 100% incorrect. Only members of the church pay.

Wikipedia link

The Evangelical Lutheran Church of Denmark is a state church. The Danish parliament, Folketinget, is the legislative authority for the church. The Minister for Ecclesiastical Affairs is the highest administrative authority.

The members of the church pay 0.42 to 1.51 per cent, depending on their commune, of their total income to the church, the so called church tax. Even though Denmark is a secular democracy, atheists, Muslims, and other religious movements still pay to the church because it is a part of the government's budget. That has lead to a great deal of debate in Denmark.

 

[ArneBjarne]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: ArneBjarne

Originally posted by: Vic
While I fully support the freedom of the press, I see no reason for that freedom to be abused as an excuse to be disrespectful, hateful, or bigoted, or to incite tensions among a religious minority. In other words, just because you are free to do something does not mean that you should.

Nor should Denmark pretend that it is somehow enlightened or secular when it truly is not. It is one of the last surviving Christian monarchies in Europe, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Denmark is the state church, which is supported by public taxation even on atheists and Muslims.

That is 100% incorrect. Only members of the church pay.

Wikipedia link

The Evangelical Lutheran Church of Denmark is a state church. The Danish parliament, Folketinget, is the legislative authority for the church. The Minister for Ecclesiastical Affairs is the highest administrative authority.

The members of the church pay 0.42 to 1.51 per cent, depending on their commune, of their total income to the church, the so called church tax. Even though Denmark is a secular democracy, atheists, Muslims, and other religious movements still pay to the church because it is a part of the government's budget. That has lead to a great deal of debate in Denmark.

My point exactly. The first part stating members pay is correct, the second part of the wiki entrance, which contradicts the first part is not. If you are not a member you do not pay, that is how it is.

 

[azazyel]

Originally posted by: Vic
While I fully support the freedom of the press, I see no reason for that freedom to be abused as an excuse to be disrespectful, hateful, or bigoted, or to incite tensions among a religious minority. In other words, just because you are free to do something does not mean that you should.

Nor should Denmark pretend that it is somehow enlightened or secular when it truly is not. It is one of the last surviving Christian monarchies in Europe, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Denmark is the state church, which is supported by public taxation even on atheists and Muslims.

Actually they are trying to pass a law making it illegal to wear a burka. Pretty sick IMO.

There are only about 50 women in all of the Netherlands who do cover up entirely - but soon they could be breaking the law.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4616664.stm

 

[Satchel]

Originally posted by: ArneBjarne

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: ArneBjarne

Originally posted by: Vic
While I fully support the freedom of the press, I see no reason for that freedom to be abused as an excuse to be disrespectful, hateful, or bigoted, or to incite tensions among a religious minority. In other words, just because you are free to do something does not mean that you should.

Nor should Denmark pretend that it is somehow enlightened or secular when it truly is not. It is one of the last surviving Christian monarchies in Europe, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Denmark is the state church, which is supported by public taxation even on atheists and Muslims.

That is 100% incorrect. Only members of the church pay.

Wikipedia link

The Evangelical Lutheran Church of Denmark is a state church. The Danish parliament, Folketinget, is the legislative authority for the church. The Minister for Ecclesiastical Affairs is the highest administrative authority.

The members of the church pay 0.42 to 1.51 per cent, depending on their commune, of their total income to the church, the so called church tax. Even though Denmark is a secular democracy, atheists, Muslims, and other religious movements still pay to the church because it is a part of the government's budget. That has lead to a great deal of debate in Denmark.

My point exactly. The first part stating members pay is correct, the second part of the wiki entrance, which contradicts the first part is not. If you are not a member you do not pay, that is how it is.

There is no contradiction. Read it a few more times and maybe you'll understand.

 

[irwincur]

Great, and WWIII begins. As Europe loses its identity it will undoubtedly lash out against those that it blames. On the other hand, the radical Muslims (more of them than you think - about 75% of European Muslims) will lash out against European culture.

This will simmer for a while - perhaps a deacde. At some point, Islamists will strike Europe and the world will be unable to prevent the massive uprisings and multiple civil wars. Bring in the old enemies of Europe that now have some power (the Middle East and Russia) and you have a classic World War. Once again, America will sit it out for a bit until China decides that the time is right and attacks America and the Western nations of Asia. I see this next major war as playing out almost the same as WWII with slightly different players.

 

[spunkz]

Originally posted by: Frackal
Glad to see the Danish and other newspapers/people supporting this

On a side note, that Arabic woman in the fourth or fifth BBC pic is hawt!

this?

 

[1prophet]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: ArneBjarne

Originally posted by: Vic
While I fully support the freedom of the press, I see no reason for that freedom to be abused as an excuse to be disrespectful, hateful, or bigoted, or to incite tensions among a religious minority. In other words, just because you are free to do something does not mean that you should.

Nor should Denmark pretend that it is somehow enlightened or secular when it truly is not. It is one of the last surviving Christian monarchies in Europe, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Denmark is the state church, which is supported by public taxation even on atheists and Muslims.

That is 100% incorrect. Only members of the church pay.

Wikipedia link

The Evangelical Lutheran Church of Denmark is a state church. The Danish parliament, Folketinget, is the legislative authority for the church. The Minister for Ecclesiastical Affairs is the highest administrative authority.

The members of the church pay 0.42 to 1.51 per cent, depending on their commune, of their total income to the church, the so called church tax. Even though Denmark is a secular democracy, atheists, Muslims, and other religious movements still pay to the church because it is a part of the government's budget. That has lead to a great deal of debate in Denmark.

Actually it is an indirect tax.



Section II. Status of Religious Freedom

The Constitution stipulates that the Evangelical Lutheran Church is the national church, the reigning monarch shall be a member the church, and the state shall support it. The Evangelical Lutheran Church is the only religious organization that can receive state subsidies or funds directly through the tax system. Approximately 12 percent of the Church's revenue comes from state subsidies; most of the rest comes from the church tax that is paid only by members. No individual may be compelled to pay church tax or provide direct financial support to the national church or any other religious organization. Members of other faiths, notably Catholics, have argued that the system is unfair, and that the Government does not provide religious equality, despite providing religious freedom. Allowing other religious organizations to be given the same status and privileges as the Evangelical Lutheran Church would require changes to the Constitution.




Their is a similar indirect tax in the United States, not so much on the national level but on the local and state levels. Religious groups are exempt from property taxes forcing those who do pay to make up the difference. In some cases it is significant.

To pay for the schools as well as services offered by the city and county, property taxes are high. Yet, property amounting to 47 percent of the value of all the buildings and land within the city limits is not taxed at all.

Tax exemption of churches raises two conflicting concerns. One is that the exemption might be considered a subsidy and therefore might establish the exempted religion as an arm or endorsed faith of the state. The second is that if tax exemptions were not granted, the expense of paying taxes might inhibit the free exercise of religion by making that exercise unaffordable


The town of Fallsburg in New York State has 40 percent nontaxable property, much of it from religious organizations.

I wonder when an atheist is going to successfully take this all the way to the Supreme Court and win?

 

[zugzoog]

I find it interesting that those Muslims that are protesting against the pictures of Muhammad, forget that there is a tradition of depicting Muhammad in artworks.

Muhammad artwork.

My suspicion is that it is the Muslim Partisans that are fermenting discontent for thier own ends and that most moderate Muslims would look at their heritage and not be throwing stones so quickly.

 

[biostud]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
I read that the far-right may be organizing counter anti-Muslim protests in Denmark and organize boycotts against Muslim-owned shops.

They're trying to get some sms going around but nothing major.

 

[biostud]

Originally posted by: Vic
While I fully support the freedom of the press, I see no reason for that freedom to be abused as an excuse to be disrespectful, hateful, or bigoted, or to incite tensions among a religious minority. In other words, just because you are free to do something does not mean that you should.

Nor should Denmark pretend that it is somehow enlightened or secular when it truly is not. It is one of the last surviving Christian monarchies in Europe, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Denmark is the state church, which is supported by public taxation even on atheists and Muslims.

If they actually wanted to discuss freedom of speech they could have done it without drawing the cartoons. They should be allowed to do it but they could make their point with angering most of the muslim world.

While we might not be totally secular on paper, in real world politics neither the Queen or Church have any power whatsoever.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: irwincur
Great, and WWIII begins. As Europe loses its identity it will undoubtedly lash out against those that it blames. On the other hand, the radical Muslims (more of them than you think - about 75% of European Muslims) will lash out against European culture.

This will simmer for a while - perhaps a deacde. At some point, Islamists will strike Europe and the world will be unable to prevent the massive uprisings and multiple civil wars. Bring in the old enemies of Europe that now have some power (the Middle East and Russia) and you have a classic World War. Once again, America will sit it out for a bit until China decides that the time is right and attacks America and the Western nations of Asia. I see this next major war as playing out almost the same as WWII with slightly different players.

Where did you get that 75% figure from? Because it sounds like something you pulled out of your ass, but hey, if I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: maddogchen
I see no good that can come out of this.

Agreed.

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: irwincur
Great, and WWIII begins. As Europe loses its identity it will undoubtedly lash out against those that it blames. On the other hand, the radical Muslims (more of them than you think - about 75% of European Muslims) will lash out against European culture.

This will simmer for a while - perhaps a deacde. At some point, Islamists will strike Europe and the world will be unable to prevent the massive uprisings and multiple civil wars. Bring in the old enemies of Europe that now have some power (the Middle East and Russia) and you have a classic World War. Once again, America will sit it out for a bit until China decides that the time is right and attacks America and the Western nations of Asia. I see this next major war as playing out almost the same as WWII with slightly different players.

Where did you get that 75% figure from? Because it sounds like something you pulled out of your ass, but hey, if I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

Coming from the person who claims the post war occupations in Germany and Japan claimed 10000 lives, you can pretty much bet on it not only being made up, but completely wrong.

I don't have a figure, but when the french were banning burqas, muslims there were pretty evenly split between supporting and opposing the government.

 

[Rainsford]

I tend to agree that sometimes PC behavior goes too far. While going out of your way to piss people off for no reason, I also don't think the right approach is to walk on eggshells for fear of offending someone.

That being said, I'm not sure I'd be too hard on the Muslims who were offended by this. After all, political cartoons in the US regularly draw angry protests. Maybe not to the same extent, but sometimes it's pretty close. The latest example would be a political cartoon in the Washington Post making fun of the Pentagon's dismissal of reports that the army is stretched too thin. The cartoon drew (no pun intended) the anger of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who responded to the Post with a letter signed by all of them, denouncing the cartoon with some pretty strong language. The Post's crime? The cartoon depicted a soldier missing limbs, sitting in a hospital bed being told by the Secretary of Defense, dressed as a doctor, that he was "battle ready". Perhaps using a limbless soldier to make a point was bad taste, but I think we need to realize that we aren't above getting our panties in a bunch over cartoons.