Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

Issues with Islam

Posted Sep 21, '12 at 4:43am

partydevil

partydevil

5,109 posts

Not when it is meant only to harass and condemn other people.

the truth can harass someone. should we therefor not speak about the truth?

There's next to nothing that the US government or judicial system will do when people yell out "It's my freedom of speech!" so they were protected from any legal action.

well thats a flaw in yout laws then.
we had the same kinda thing happening at our WW2 remembrance Day. during a 2 min silence.
he got arrested for disturbances of public order. and got 2 year jail for it.

The military only changes you if you want it to change you

what? hahahaha no, it changes you by the events that happen to you while in the military. you can't choose for it.
you should go to war and see yourself ;)

People should have the right to remain uninsulted

that is dangerous. what someone sees as a insult can be mend as not a insult.
when i say. "your mom is so fat... etc." it can be seen as a joke (or fact) but it can also insult the person.
if we have to keep in account that what we say can't insult someone. then we can better put a ban on communication at all.

 

Posted Sep 21, '12 at 6:12am

nichodemus

nichodemus

12,164 posts

Knight

that is dangerous. what someone sees as a insult can be mend as not a insult.
when i say. "your mom is so fat... etc." it can be seen as a joke (or fact) but it can also insult the person.
if we have to keep in account that what we say can't insult someone. then we can better put a ban on communication at all.

It's pretty obvious calling the Prophet a homosexual who indulges in gross sexual fantasies whilst depicting Islam as a religion purely of hate and violence isn't criticizing to help, but hate speech. As the White House said it, you CAN have freedom of speech. But when that become hate speech and desecrates another person's beliefs, you are abusing your freedom and infringing on the freedoms of others. People are won't to shout when their countries flags are burnt, yet turn a blind eye to Koran burning that occurs Ren within their own countries. If you are willing to subvert everything to freedom of speech and expression, don't condemn people when they burn your flag. Don't condemn them Wen they protest worldwide. Freedom of speech.

 

Posted Sep 21, '12 at 6:30am

thewolf52

thewolf52

28 posts

It's pretty obvious calling the Prophet a homosexual who indulges in gross sexual fantasies whilst depicting Islam as a religion purely of hate and violence isn't criticizing to help, but hate speech. As the White House said it, you CAN have freedom of speech. But when that become hate speech and desecrates another person's beliefs, you are abusing your freedom and infringing on the freedoms of others. People are won't to shout when their countries flags are burnt, yet turn a blind eye to Koran burning that occurs Ren within their own countries. If you are willing to subvert everything to freedom of speech and expression, don't condemn people when they burn your flag. Don't condemn them Wen they protest worldwide. Freedom of speech.

Nichodamus you said what I wanted to in a far better way.
You should become a writer.

 

Posted Sep 21, '12 at 6:49am

partydevil

partydevil

5,109 posts

you CAN have freedom of speech. But when that become hate speech and desecrates another person's beliefs, you are abusing your freedom and infringing on the freedoms of others.

i agree on the hate speech part.
the beliefs part is only politically correct to say.

 

Posted Sep 21, '12 at 7:18am

thewolf52

thewolf52

28 posts

Situation of violence up till now
Egypt:- 3000 protesters besieged US embassy and tore down its flag.
Libya:- 125 armed men attacked US embassy and killed the ambassador.
Yemen:- Protesters entered US embassy, burned vehicles and buildings, 4 protesters died 11 wounded with 25 security personnel wounded.
Lebanon:- 500000 Lebanese   protested and set fire to many American businesses on fire.
Sudan:- Protesters set fire to German embassy.
Tunisia:- Protesters set American embassy and a school on fire.
Afghanistan:- Taliban attacked camp Bastion killing 2 marines and destroying six jets in retaliation. A suicide  attack killed 14.
India:- Protesters threw stones and shoes in embassy.
Indonesia:- 500 protesters attack US embassy but failed to enter.
Pakistan:- In Islamabad, 100000 protesters tried to reach US Embassy but were stopped by police.
They burnt many Police check points and cointainers.
As a preventive measure Gov. is shutting the mobile service and sale of Petrol and CNG is banned in whole country.
40 Police men and 20 protesters wounded. Army has been called.
In Karachi:-
The Australian

        News
        Opinion
        National Affairs
        Business
        Aus IT
        Higher Ed
        Media
        Sport
        Arts
        Life
        Magazines
        Careers
        Video
        News
        Breaking News
        The Nation
        The World
        Features
        In-Depth
        Galleries
        Investigations
        FOI
        Health & Science
        Weather
        Events

    Login
    Sign Up

Search for:
The World
Pakistanis storm Karachi US Consulate in anti-Islam film protest

    From: AP
    September 17, 2012 8:29AM

    Increase Text Size
    Decrease Text Size
    Print

Karachi protest

Pakistani Muslims burn an American flag during an anti-US protest rally against an American produced film mocking Islam in Multan as at least eight people were injured after clashes with police outside the US consulate in Karachi. Source: AFP

HUNDREDS of Pakistanis protesting an anti-Islam film have broken through a barricade near the US Consulate in the southern city of Karachi, sparking clashes with police in which one demonstrator was killed and more than a dozen injured.

 

Posted Sep 21, '12 at 1:21pm

Alpha791

Alpha791

651 posts

the truth can harass someone. should we therefor not speak about the truth?

Did you not read it at all? I said when it is meant ONLY to harass and condemn them. The truth is an attempt to inform them.

well thats a flaw in yout laws then.
we had the same kinda thing happening at our WW2 remembrance Day. during a 2 min silence.
he got arrested for disturbances of public order. and got 2 year jail for it.

In America, if that happened, people would just stare and that guy COULD possibly be arrested for disturbing the peace, but it wouldn't be any substantial jail time.

what? hahahaha no, it changes you by the events that happen to you while in the military. you can't choose for it.
you should go to war and see yourself ;)

You don't just go to war and then come back changed. If you kill someone or see someone killed, that event has happened. It's the person's own mind that destroys itself by obsessing over it.

that is dangerous. what someone sees as a insult can be mend as not a insult.
when i say. "your mom is so fat... etc." it can be seen as a joke (or fact) but it can also insult the person.
if we have to keep in account that what we say can't insult someone. then we can better put a ban on communication at all.

Whenever I post something, you take it to the utmost extreme and make it seem irrational. If you say something meant only to harass someone then, that is wrong and NOT free speech, you're just making an *** of yourself. What about that do you not see?

 

Posted Sep 21, '12 at 6:55pm

Enti

Enti

9 posts

Does it not? Criticizing religion is one thing, putting it across offensively is another.

May I ask what the difference is? If we are continuing with Islam as an example, they not only don't want Mohammad shown badly (At all), they don't want him portrayed at all. How can you be critical of something, when you can not mention any of the negative points?

You insult someone, you prepare for the consequences. Thinking that insulting someone without getting a reaction is naive. A **** victim doesn't go out and flash herself. A man doesn't go out with a wallet begging to be robbed. But if you know you're going to instigate and inflame feelings violently when you provoke people by smearing dirt on what they believe, you deal with the consequences, because you're actively provoking them. Muslim protesters are reacting, a robber and rapist already has the intention to commit their crime.

So you are saying that these poor, innocent Muslims where just forced into murdering those big, evil diplomats who where in no way connected to the insults, besides their country of origin? I cannot comprehend the logic behind that. Lets just say that you are correct, and that they are provoked to a level that murder would somehow be a reasonable response, then why would they attack someone unrelated to the attack at all? It would be like finding out your wife slept with a Canadian, and then killing a random Canadian in anger.

I didn't say it was a plague. A rise is a rise, and it is a bad thing. Nor is it offensive. It's a fact that even the FBI acknowledges. Anti-Muslim hate crimes soared by an astounding 50% in 2010, skyrocketing over 2009 levels in a year marked by the vicious rhetoric of Islam-bashing politicians and activists, especially over the so-called 'Ground Zero Mosque' in New York City.

Fine, lets just say there was a raise and leave it at that. Back to the topic at hand:

Lets say you are in a court, as a judge, looking at a case like this. Then lets say there where two men, and one had assaulted the other near fatally, after he heard the man insult Jesus in a private conversation with a friend. What would you judge in that situation?

It's pretty obvious calling the Prophet a homosexual who indulges in gross sexual fantasies whilst depicting Islam as a religion purely of hate and violence isn't criticizing to help, but hate speech.

So the logical reaction to having your prophet a depraved sex freak who leads a violent religion is to....kill people? Even assuming that is hate speech, how is it fault of the producers that murder happened?

As the White House said it, you CAN have freedom of speech. But when that become hate speech and desecrates another person's beliefs, you are abusing your freedom and infringing on the freedoms of others

What is so wrong with "hate speech"? You are not infringing on anyone's rights by making a cheap b movie showing a religious figure in a bad light. You are not infringing on the rights of anyone if you downright hate homosexuals, Muslims, Jews, or anything else, and you are not infringing on your rights to say so loudly. You are not infringing on anyone's rights to yell at soldier's funerals, you are not infringing on anyone's rights to accuse the president of being a Kenyan born Muslim. What right could thoughts and words damage?

You are, however, infringing upon the basic rights of men if you either act on any of those words and thoughts in a negative way or react to this thoughts in negative ways. A man stabbing someone for reading the Torah in public is just as bad as a man stabbing someone for insulting the Torah in public, while insulting the Torah and reading the Torah are both just harmless uses of freedom of speech.

 

Posted Sep 21, '12 at 7:59pm

thewolf52

thewolf52

28 posts

May I ask what the difference is? If we are continuing with Islam as an example, they not only don't want Mohammad shown badly (At all), they don't want him portrayed at all. How can you be critical of something, when you can not mention any of the negative points?

An example
" Why George did this? I think what he did was wrong"
"George did this so he is **** **** and ****"

So you are saying that these poor, innocent Muslims where just forced into murdering those big, evil diplomats who where in no way connected to the insults, besides their country of origin? I cannot comprehend the logic behind that. Lets just say that you are correct, and that they are provoked to a level that murder would somehow be a reasonable response, then why would they attack someone unrelated to the attack at all? It would be like finding out your wife slept with a Canadian, and then killing a random Canadian in anger.

In there defense, it can be said the film was MADE IN USA.
US govrn. DID NOT stop or punish the culprits, it rather protects them citing US constitution does not allow it.
Hence US govrn. is an accomplice to it and every govr. employ is a legitimate target.

Fine, lets just say there was a raise and leave it at that. Back to the topic at hand:

Lets say you are in a court, as a judge, looking at a case like this. Then lets say there where two men, and one had assaulted the other near fatally, after he heard the man insult Jesus in a private conversation with a friend. What would you judge in that situation?

I don't know about this but in case of film its called provocation.

What is so wrong with "hate speech"? You are not infringing on anyone's rights by making a cheap b movie showing a religious figure in a bad light. You are not infringing on the rights of anyone if you downright hate homosexuals, Muslims, Jews, or anything else, and you are not infringing on your rights to say so loudly. You are not infringing on anyone's rights to yell at soldier's funerals, you are not infringing on anyone's rights to accuse the president of being a Kenyan born Muslim. What right could thoughts and words damage?

You are, however, infringing upon the basic rights of men if you either act on any of those words and thoughts in a negative way or react to this thoughts in negative ways. A man stabbing someone for reading the Torah in public is just as bad as a man stabbing someone for insulting the Torah in public, while insulting the Torah and reading the Torah are both just harmless uses of freedom of speech.

Tell this to the ambassador, those 2 marines and those 14 people who died.

So the logical reaction to having your prophet a depraved sex freak who leads a violent religion is to....kill people? Even assuming that is hate speech, how is it fault of the producers that murder happened?

Now you are trolling

 

Posted Sep 21, '12 at 8:16pm

Enti

Enti

9 posts

An example
" Why George did this? I think what he did was wrong"
"George did this so he is **** **** and ****"

The only difference is the words used, then?

In there defense, it can be said the film was MADE IN USA.

So logically, slaughter random US citizens? Who had nothing to do with it?

US govrn. DID NOT stop or punish the culprits, it rather protects them citing US constitution does not allow it.

Nor should it had. What doesn't the US constitution allow? It allows freedom of speech, religion, and the press, which DOES allow you to say whatever the hell you want.

In that scenario again, it would be like killing a random Canadian because a Canadian slept with your wife, because the Canadian government does not consider adultery illegal.

Hence US govrn. is an accomplice to it and every govr. employ is a legitimate target.

Huh?

I don't know about this but in case of film its called provocation.

In England, Australia, and other nations that hate our freedom. We don't have that law in America, last I checked.

Tell this to the ambassador, those 2 marines and those 14 people who died.

Alright, I will right now. How should I start? I am sorry that insane Islamic extremists have murdered you, infringing on your basic rights of humans. Thank you for serving your country, and defending people who where not infringing on the rights of others, like myself and the people who made the innocent video. Rest in Piece.

What would you say to the dead people?

Now you are trolling

I fail to see how I am "trolling", who I am "trolling", or any argument here.

 

Posted Sep 21, '12 at 9:20pm

thewolf52

thewolf52

28 posts

Nor should it had. What doesn't the US constitution allow? It allows freedom of speech, religion, and the press, which DOES allow you to say whatever the hell you want.

If you refuse to take muslims feelings seriously
don't complaint when more americans die over this matter.
What will you prefer, lives saved or constitution kept unamended over this.

 
Reply to Issues with Islam

You must be logged in to post a reply!