It is easy to talk grandly on a Yahoo group about the “responsibilities of 
thinking people,” but I stick to my original point: deliberate provocation of 
Muslims by means of grotesque cartoons serves the interests of no one. They 
drive the Muslims crazy and for what purpose? 
  
 I used to be an editor of a newsmagazine, and we published cartoons, which I 
was responsible for selecting. This was in the days before radical Islam was 
perceived as a threat, so I don’t recall seeing any that mocked Islam, but we 
wouldn’t have printed them. Such cartoons are in bad taste.
 

---In [email protected], <turquoiseb@...> wrote :

 From: feste37 <[email protected]>
 
 If you deliberately go around provoking people, you shouldn’t be surprised if 
eventually they lash out at you. 

 

 Yes, you actually should. Especially when what you so euphemistically call 
"lashing out" involves Kalashnikovs and killing 12 people *for making fun of 
someone who died 1383 years ago*. You're describing insanity and trying to make 
it sound as if the insane are somehow justified in being this insane because 
someone drew a cartoon they didn't like. I hate to be the one to tell you this, 
but taking this stance is making YOU sound as insane as the people who 
perpetrated this massacre. 

 

 If I am a rich man and I decide to walk in a low-income, high-crime area with 
hundred-dollar bills attached to my clothing, I will likely get robbed. The 
thieves are wrong to commit robbery, but I must also bear some responsibility 
for acting stupidly, since I know how much money means to people and what they 
may do to get it. This is not blaming the victim but applying common sense and 
acting accordingly. Otherwise I put myself at risk as well as innocent others. 

 

 So you think that what 3/4 of the world's population should do is just keep 
quiet and never say *anything* that challenges what the insane lunatic fringe 
of the other 1/4 holds sacred. You feel that people should submit to threats of 
violence and do whatever those who are threatening them tell them to do, eh? 

 

 Well, if you want to live your life as a frightened little rabbit, fine. But 
don't suggest that those who don't want to live that way should. And don't 
suggest that when the insane people finally go over the top and carry through 
on their threats that it's somehow the fault of those who -- unlike you -- 
refused to be bullied. 

 

 It is the *responsibility* of thinking people on this planet to point out how 
insane and out of touch with reality this lunatic fringe of Islam is. To do so 
is not without risk, given HOW insane these people are, but the alternative is 
to live like frightened sheep, something you seem to be advising. 

 


 

---In [email protected], <turquoiseb@...> wrote :

 From: feste37 <[email protected]>
 

 I see no reason to alter what I wrote. Insults from you are to be expected. 
After all, that’s what you do, isn’t it? Two years ago, the French government 
condemned the cartoons as needlessly provocative. See French magazine sparks 
another controversy over Mohammed cartoons 
http://rt.com/news/france-mohammed-muslim-cartoon-224/. I am not saying the 
magazine should be prevented from publishing them; only that to do so was 
ill-advised. 

 

 

 No problemo, feste. Thanks for clarifying your position. 

 

 I assume you also feel that women who are raped were ill-advised to wear 
clothes that make them look like women, and that black people shot by the 
police while just walking down the street were ill-advised to not bleach their 
skins to look white. You're riding the "Blame the victim" bus. Now it all makes 
sense.  

 

 

 
 
 http://rt.com/news/france-mohammed-muslim-cartoon-224/
 
 French magazine sparks another controversy over ... 
http://rt.com/news/france-mohammed-muslim-cartoon-224/ A French satire magazine 
has published a special issue containing cartoons on the life of Islam’s 
Prophet Mohammed. Similar images, which are deemed blasphemo...


 
 View on rt.com http://rt.com/news/france-mohammed-muslim-cartoon-224/
 Preview by Yahoo 
 

  
 


 

---In [email protected], <turquoiseb@...> wrote :

 From: feste37 <[email protected]>
 To: [email protected] 
 Sent: Thursday, January 8, 2015 12:37 AM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Religious Mind
 
 
   
 Lampooning others' beliefs may be a tradition in the West but the Muslims 
don't like it so I see no purpose in doing it in cartoons that insult the 
prophet. It only brings negative results, as we have seen. 

 

 I simply cannot believe that someone on this forum is dumb enough to believe 
this, feste. You are in effect saying, "Lampooning the beliefs of people who 
have threatened to kill us if we lampoon their ideas is a bad idea, because 
they might kill us." An attitude like yours essentially ALLOWS these people 
stuck in the Middle Ages to dictate to the world how they should act. The 
people making these threats are terrorists. The people submitting to them are 
perpetuating terrorism. 

 

 "The prophet" was just a man, as was almost every other spiritual figure in 
history (unless they were women). People should just get over their fantasies 
about these men and women.
 

 These are the cartoons this magazine published:
 The Controversial Cartoons That Are Said To Have Inspired The Terrorist Attack 
Against Charlie Hebdo 
http://thinkprogress.org/culture/2015/01/07/3608780/charlie-hebdo/.  “In 2012, 
the magazine included multiple caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad in which he 
appeared naked; one was called “Mohammad: a star is born,” and showed a man 
bent over so his beard was the only thing covering the lower half of his body. 
The cover depicted Mohammad in a wheelchair being pushed by an Orthodox Jew.” 

 

 I wouldn’t have advised this magazine to publish any of these, and indeed the 
French government advised the same. You have to remember that in Islam the 
prophet is not depicted. It is considered sacrilegious to do so (see the 
article). No good will come from it. It is just being offensive for the sake of 
it. 

 

 
 
 http://thinkprogress.org/culture/2015/01/07/3608780/charlie-hebdo/
 
 The Controversial Cartoons That Are Said To Have Inspi... 
http://thinkprogress.org/culture/2015/01/07/3608780/charlie-hebdo/ At least 12 
were killed in a terrorist attack on the magazine's offices today.


 
 View on thinkprogress.org 
http://thinkprogress.org/culture/2015/01/07/3608780/charlie-hebdo/
 Preview by Yahoo 
 

  
 


 

---In [email protected], <s3raphita@...> wrote :

 
 

---In [email protected], <[email protected]> wrote :

 Ah, the bravery of the liberals who think they have a perfect right to insult 
anyone's cherished beliefs just because they want to. 
 

 Brave for sure. They just paid with their lives.
 

 Generally speaking, it's not a good idea to insult other people's religion. 
They don't like it and it is not helpful to the situation. You should have 
learned that in grade school. 
 

 Lampooning others' beliefs is a time-honoured tradition in the West.
 

 
 

---In [email protected], <turquoiseb@...> wrote :

 From: "s3raphita@... [FairfieldLife]" <[email protected]>
 
   It's an odd kind of duty to publish cartoons that mock the founder of one of 
the world's largest religions in the way that is plainly meant to be deeply 
offensive to adherents of that faith. You say things cut both ways, and the 
matter of respecting the faith of others does also. 
 

 Why should anyone *respect* a faith they regard as intolerant of
 gays or women or free speech? Respect has to be earned. I support anyone's 
right to criticize Islam as robustly and satirically as they wish; just as I 
support someone's right to argue that liberal attitudes to sexuality are 
repugnant. Let everyone say what they wish; we can listen to their claims and 
come to our own conclusions. What are you afraid of?

 

 


 


 Thank you for saying this. 
 

 There is this terrible meme we have inherited for centuries -- both in the 
East and in the West -- that says, "If we call it 'religious', it's 
*protected*. You can't say bad stuff about it or criticize it."
 

 During many of these centuries, the people saying this were IN CHARGE. Their 
religion *ran* things. So if anyone *did* say anything critical of their 
"religious" beliefs, they just killed their asses. Simple as that. 

 

 What we're seeing today in radical Islam and in the fundamentalist extremes of 
religion such as Hindu Supremacy is a bunch of religious people wishing that 
the world still worked that way. They'd really *like* to KILL anyone who 
doesn't believe the way they think they should. 

 

 Currently on planet Earth, only one major religion is actually consistently 
claiming to be PROUD of doing that -- killing anyone who doesn't believe the 
way they think they should. 

 

---In [email protected], <[email protected]> wrote :

 It's an odd kind of duty to publish cartoons that mock the founder of one of 
the world's largest religions in the way that is plainly meant to be deeply 
offensive to adherents of that faith. You say things cut both ways, and the 
matter of respecting the faith of others does also. 
 

---In [email protected], <s3raphita@...> wrote :

 Re "That other people don't see the world the same way you do should be the 
first thing they have to teach at these "faith" schools.":
 

 Well, yes. But can you imagine a state, secular school teaching kids that some 
people regard homosexuality as an abomination, or that women's place is in the 
home, etc, etc? It cuts both ways.
 

 John Stuart Mill in On Liberty argued that we should always have some private 
(non-state) schools otherwise the state would simply use its monopoly to push 
the ideology of the ruling Establishment. He was right then; he's right now.
 

 The problem is we have two opposing fundamentalisms: religious versus new 
atheist/PC thinking. I don't subscribe to either as I want people to question 
all authority. But you don't learn to question authority in school! I suspect 
you don't *learn* it at all - you either have an enquiring mind or you don't.
 

 Anyway, salutations to those killed at Charlie Hebdo. They died in the line of 
duty.
 

 








 


 

















 


 













 


 













 


 











Reply via email to