Forums → WEPR → Issues with Islam
| 99 | 32561 |
I'm sure most people have heard of the ever infamous video, whose pilot was put onto Youtube, disgracing Islam.
Personally, I have not watched this video, and am not sure if there is another thread on this topic.
So, what is your opinion?
How should the U.S. react to having one of it's ambassoders and several others murdered?
Should the people who posted the video have it removed, fined, or given other punishments?
Where do we draw the line between freedom of speech, and hating against one's beliefs.
(I am personally not one for religion, but if a person has devoted their life to it, it must mean quite a large deal to them)
- 99 Replies
There is a difference between criticizing/ debating with an evidence and outright insults.
and no I am not sitting that murderer's chair.
My god has been done saying 1400 years ago.
Someone insulting you or someone you love doesn't give you the right to censor them or to murder. You can demand that these people be censored (freedom of speech), but for such a law to exist would be wrong.
You want to make sure nobody insults your god, but you have to understand that you and everyone who worships your god are the only ones who see him as someone who should be respected. Why should others be forced to follow your religion's rules? Why shouldn't we be allowed to insult your religion? Insult other religions, insult atheism, whatever, freedom of speech.
As an atheist, it's offensive when people say I'm going to burn in hell or that I'm a bad person for not believing in their god. Should everyone who says such things be censored? No.
You need to learn that the importance of you god, to nonbelievers, is that of a pebble sitting in one's driveway. You CAN'T force these people to respect something they don't believe in. If you're insulted, then express you anger through speech or non-coercive actions (refusing to make deals with such people).
---
France banned the burka. People in France are genuinely offended when they see another person wearing a burka, but that doesn't justify the ban. If I want to wear a shirt saying "**** God", I should be allowed to. God is not important to me, because he does not exist. I should not follow laws in which I have to respect a non-existent being.
Someone insulting you or someone you love doesn't give you the right to censor them or to murder. You can demand that these people be censored (freedom of speech), but for such a law to exist would be wrong.
You want to make sure nobody insults your god, but you have to understand that you and everyone who worships your god are the only ones who see him as someone who should be respected. Why should others be forced to follow your religion's rules? Why shouldn't we be allowed to insult your religion? Insult other religions, insult atheism, whatever, freedom of speech.
As an atheist, it's offensive when people say I'm going to burn in hell or that I'm a bad person for not believing in their god. Should everyone who says such things be censored? No.
You need to learn that the importance of you god, to nonbelievers, is that of a pebble sitting in one's driveway. You CAN'T force these people to respect something they don't believe in. If you're insulted, then express you anger through speech or non-coercive actions (refusing to make deals with such people).
---
France banned the burka. People in France are genuinely offended when they see another person wearing a burka, but that doesn't justify the ban. If I want to wear a shirt saying "**** God", I should be allowed to. God is not important to me, because he does not exist. I should not follow laws in which I have to respect a non-existent being.
Freedom speech can go to hell
such attacks on prophet willbe met with protests and violence the day no one proresrs over this will be the day islam ceased to exist
Freedom speech can go to hell
such attacks on prophet willbe met with protests and violence the day no one proresrs over this will be the day islam ceased to exist
Hey now. Play nice.
NoName is a random person on the internet, filled with billions of people, expressing his opinion.
It was insulting to have put up the video, it was "insulting" to have killed 3 people.
Fil betor?
Freedom speech can go to hell such attacks on prophet willbe met with protests and violence the day no one proresrs over this will be the day islam ceased to exist
And Muhammad can suck my willy. Hopefully, the Muslims who aren't extremists will someday amass in such numbers that they become the number 1 wall standing in the way of extremists and freedom of speech. Muslims who understand that you can't expect people who don't believe to live as if they do believe.
(It would be horrible to tell the great prophet Muhammad to suck my willy, luckily, he doesn't exist.)
Now, we're talking about hate speech. Apparently hate speech should be banned because it's insulting and drives criminally insane people too kill. NEWSFLASH - THESE EXTREMISTS THREATEN TO KILL EVERYONE WHO QUESTIONS THEIR GOD. It has NOTHING to do with hate speech AT ALL, it has to do with elitist extremists who would gladly kill people for being Christian.
And you're telling me hate speech has nothing to do with this inflammation process? Hatred for the West was already there. Hate speech was yet another spark that blew this keg up at this time.
And you're telling me hate speech has nothing to do with this inflammation process? Hatred for the West was already there. Hate speech was yet another spark that blew this keg up at this time.
That's their problem. If they want to force America to ban skirts and they'll kill until such ban is made, we'll have to stand just as firm. We shouldn't sacrifice our rights because another foreign group is unhappy and willing to commit acts of violence.
Protecting people is very important, but there's a certain point in which we must protect the people from terrorists rather than protecting them by giving into terrorist demands.
That's their problem. If they want to force America to ban skirts and they'll kill until such ban is made, we'll have to stand just as firm. We shouldn't sacrifice our rights because another foreign group is unhappy and willing to commit acts of violence.
Protecting people is very important, but there's a certain point in which we must protect the people from terrorists rather than protecting them by giving into terrorist demands.
Why do you insist on bad analogies? Skirts and hate speech are two very different issues.
Well, then get used to this scenario of violence. If one side refuses to budge and one side doesn't have the apparatus to rein their people in, cobflagarationsn are going to start. Shooting your mouth off without regard is partially to blame.
Does hate speech directly cause violence? Yes. It incites high emotion, provides more ammo in this hatred and continues the cycle. Hate speech has no valid purpose in society but to stoke disorder and unhappiness.
For every example of Islam being linked to that, we can find one linked to any major religion.
Why do you insist on bad analogies? Skirts and hate speech are two very different issues.
Not really. You're saying we should ban hate speech because it sparks violence. Should we ban something merely because it sparks violence?
Does hate speech directly cause violence? Yes. It incites high emotion, provides more ammo in this hatred and continues the cycle. Hate speech has no valid purpose in society but to stoke disorder and unhappiness.
Often people use hate speech against Islam because they're challenging the extremists. They're making the statement that "you're violence will not keep me from talking." Who's to really say there is no purpose behind hate speech? Sometimes, I might want to go outside with a sign that hates on politicians, or religion in general, just to let people know that there are others out there who don't look kindly to such.
If I want to spread hate, I have every right to let people know how I feel and what I think.
If I think Jews are a bunch of greedy ****s, I have every right to let people know that I think such (I don't).
Speech refers to a device in which you let people know what you think. I believe you should always be allowed to let people know what you think, even if it's offensive.
Not really. You're saying we should ban hate speech because it sparks violence. Should we ban something merely because it sparks violence?
Do skirts perpetuate violence directly and normally?
Often people use hate speech against Islam because they're challenging the extremists. They're making the statement that "you're violence will not keep me from talking." Who's to really say there is no purpose behind hate speech? Sometimes, I might want to go outside with a sign that hates on politicians, or religion in general, just to let people know that there are others out there who don't look kindly to such.
The film didn't mark out extremists but was a blanket generalization on Islam. Muslim hate crime isn't against extemists but Islam as a whole. evangelical television pundits and mass organizations like the EDL aren't against extremists but all Muslims.
Speech refers to a device in which you let people know what you think. I believe you should always be allowed to let people know what you think, even if it's offensive.
A balance has to be struck. People are naturally angry when you insult then to the face. You can't blame them for not feeling so if it's something deep ad personal to them, just so you can get an opinion out in the most rabid fashion.
Do skirts perpetuate violence directly and normally?
His point isn't that skirts cause Violence, it's that skirts are a solid example of something that we believe is perfect normal, while another culture finds barbaric and evil. Should we change our beliefs that offend others, even if they are find by our standards?
Now, I have two bits I want to throw in about free speech. A lot of people in this thread are saying that free speech should only be allowed when it doesn't offend others. But this is the essence of free speech! What was so important about free speech when it first started? You were allowed to voice your concerns about your government without fear. You were allowed to hate your government. You could scream hate speech all you wanted! And this is what made it great. The moment we decide to start crushing others beliefs, even if they impede on others beliefs, is when we forget what free speech is.
Free speech is the act of pointing out flaws- even if those flaws are fictional, you have the right to point them out.
His point isn't that skirts cause Violence, it's that skirts are a solid example of something that we believe is perfect normal, while another culture finds barbaric and evil. Should we change our beliefs that offend others, even if they are find by our standards?
If you read his response, it is about violence.
Now, I have two bits I want to throw in about free speech. A lot of people in this thread are saying that free speech should only be allowed when it doesn't offend others. But this is the essence of free speech! What was so important about free speech when it first started? You were allowed to voice your concerns about your government without fear. You were allowed to hate your government. You could scream hate speech all you wanted! And this is what made it great. The moment we decide to start crushing others beliefs, even if they impede on others beliefs, is when we forget what free speech is.
No one said you shouldn't be able to do those things. What we are arguing about is when free speech crosses into merely hate speech that inflames and endangers society. We should be able to criticize and debate. We shouldn't be allowed to publicly besmirch, smear and incite hatred towards certain groups, turn opinion against them based on lies and mere hate.
The debate isn't about whether free speech should be allowed, but the extent that it should. Freedom is not an absolute concept where everyone can have maximum freedom. An action will always compromise the freedom of another person. Therein is the question.
I have something to say about the video, I think it is insulting and that the producer should apologize.
These muslims going bonkers over a anti muslim video really show that they aren't exactly peacefull... well the extremists anyway.People shouldn't call out for someones death just because their prophet was insulted.
I mean Jesus Christ has been called many things in the past and insulted, but we don't do any violence... actually sometimes we do nothing about it. (No seriously for some odd reason when some people insulted our Christ some christians do nothing about it. I find that wrong that other christians will not defend Christ.)
Anyway, just to make something clear in case people think this way, the place where 4 americans were killed was a pre-planned terrorist attack by muslim extremists. That one had nothing to do with the video, the rest of the known protests though do have to do with the video.
I mean Jesus Christ has been called many things in the past and insulted, but we don't do any violence...
Oh? Christians may not go beserk as often when JC gets badmouthed, but they are far from 'eaceful' if you're comparing extremists with extremists.
Christian Terrorism
People shouldn't call out for someones death just because their prophet was insulted.
People shouldn't call out for someone's death just because of an insult. Whether they are believed to be a prophet or not is irrelevant.
You must be logged in to post a reply!