But Muhammad's image is not illegal in the US, so why remove them? That has no point. Why do we have to remove content perfectly legal under US law? Please educate me why.
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Peter Coombe <[email protected]>wrote: > We already remove images of children which are considered to be > illegal under US law, and I see no one arguing that we do otherwise. > The recent kerfuffle has been over the broader category of sexual > images. But if we are take account of all religious and moral > sensitivities, where will it end? > > There are many countries in the world in which the depiction of the > prophet Muhammad is a crime, or religious systems see it as something > abominable. > > We must respect these laws and these beliefs, whether we like them or not? > > Pete / the wub > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > -- Regards, Mike http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/User:Mikemoral http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mikemoral _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
