I think that it is because the radicals of the Muslim religion make a
lot of noise, and that the press simply repeats this noise, that we hear
so much about it.
I don't know how moderate Muslims feel about these images.
I believe that people should not look at things they don't like.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jordan,
I don't dispute your basic premise, however I think it's unfair to label those who are offended by
the public display of these images as "extremists". Islam (to my limited understanding)
has a fundamental objection to "graven images" and depictions of the Prophet seem to be
the most egregious form of this.
I would say that the vast majority of those asking for the removal of those
pictures are devout adherents to their faith, and are overall decent people.
Some members of this list (as well as most adult citizens of the US) are also
devout adherents to their faith, however their faith may not have an issue with
graven images. But they are no less devout for all that. Would you consider
them extremists?
I also think there comes a time when exercise of one's freedom of expression
goes beyond a reasonable limit, if enough people are genuinely offended.
Imagine if Wikipedia were to display graphic images of sex acts on its home
page. This may sound ludicrous, but to some Muslims, a graphic depiction of
the Prophet is equally offensive.
*************************************************************************
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ **
*************************************************************************
