Shootings in Paris

[M18CTID]

I'm not sure why people are arguing about this. PB and Metal Biker are both posters that I have a huge amount of time for on here but I think there's been a misunderstanding somewhere. From what I can see, every poster on this thread has condemned the attacks in Paris last week. Every poster also believes in the right to free speech as well.

The problem that PB and others have highlighted is that this is a powder keg of a subject and it might have been more sensible for the cartoonists to steer away from it. Granted that goes against the idea of free speech but we saw the furore in 2005 when the Danish cartoons were published and it doesn't take a genius to work out from the reaction back then that there are some utter lunatics out there that would be prepared to carry out those threats to kill if another publication ever decided to go down that route. It's beyond belief of the vast majority of right thinking people, me included, that someone would even contemplate doing such a thing over what in our eyes is merely a cartoon poking fun at a religious figure but you only have to look at the behaviour of some of these nutters towards others of the same religion to realise that there is just no reasoning with them.

None of the above is excusing what happened and as for understanding why they did it, personally I'll never be able to comprehend why someone would go to those lengths.

Couldn't disagree more buddy. The very fact that you're suggest we steer away from it, is the very reason we shouldn't.

Islam should be no more protected than Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity or any one of a thousand other belief systems. Let them alter their view as opposed to western society bowing down to terror.

I'm not fundamentally disagreeing with your view Sam. But as I said above, the law is just part of the whole picture. I wouldn't go into some pub in a dodgy part of Salford and mock the local hard-man, even though there's nothing illegal about it. If said hard-man beat me to a pulp, then the law is very much on my side but you would certainly question the wisdom of my action.

Precisely. I'm struggling to see how some of the more intelligent posters on here are missing the point you're making.

 

[M18CTID]

I understand where you guys are coming from, totally, and I'm not sure what I'd do if I were a cartoonist to be honest.

The sad thing is, if they stop drawing, then the lunatics win.

I couldn't agree more. Being a cartoonist shouldn't ever be a life-threatening profession and they should be free to draw what they want in accordance with the laws of the country they're in.

 

[SWP's back]

To many it's not so much what Mohammed is portrayed as that is the problem, it is that Mohammed is being portrayed at all.

You can't really compare Mohammed to Christ because they are different figures. In Christianity, Jesus was literally God. In Islam, Mohammed is NOT God but is a prophet from God.

Pictures and idols and the like of Mohammed were considered blasphemous at the time as they were concentrating on deifying the messenger rather than the message. Sort of stealing the credit from God and giving it to some bloke. It is this that the orthodox Muslims have a problem with - the idea of Mohammed as a symbol for their religion instead of Allah

Not sure all Muslims would agree with that:

Omer El-Hamdoon, from the Muslim Association of Britain, said the actual depiction of Mohammed and the satire element will offend Muslims.

"Because he is held in high esteem, we find that any sort of publishing of cartoons would not really be suffice to present the person he is," he said.

"And this becomes more problematic when the actual cartoon is actually out there to offend people, to actually make a satire out of this image."

Also, depicting Mohammed wasn't always Haram.

 

[Balti]

Couldn't disagree more buddy. The very fact that you're suggest we steer away from it, is the very reason we shouldn't.

Islam should be no more protected than Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity or any one of a thousand other belief systems. Let them alter their view as opposed to western society bowing down to terror.

I'm not fundamentally disagreeing with your view Sam. But as I said above, the law is just part of the whole picture. I wouldn't go into some pub in a dodgy part of Salford and mock the local hard-man, even though there's nothing illegal about it. If said hard-man beat me to a pulp, then the law is very much on my side but you would certainly question the wisdom of my action.

Talking shite imo. Mocking an individual to their face is not the same as drawing a cartoon.

Maybe despite being dead for a couple of thousand years he would use his famous super powers to rise from the dead and not just beat you to a pulp but riddle you with bullets for good measure. After all if you take the piss out of someone face to face in a pub it's only right and proper that they murder you as any sane and intelligent person would shirley agree........and if you did it by cartoon well by god that's even worse ffs....

 

[aguero93:20]

Couldn't disagree more buddy. The very fact that you're suggest we steer away from it, is the very reason we shouldn't.

Islam should be no more protected than Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity or any one of a thousand other belief systems. Let them alter their view as opposed to western society bowing down to terror.

I'm not fundamentally disagreeing with your view Sam. But as I said above, the law is just part of the whole picture. I wouldn't go into some pub in a dodgy part of Salford and mock the local hard-man, even though there's nothing illegal about it. If said hard-man beat me to a pulp, then the law is very much on my side but you would certainly question the wisdom of my action.

Talking shite imo. Mocking an individual to their face is not the same as drawing a cartoon.

[bigimg]https://brunswick.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/yac1.jpg[/bigimg]

 

[SWP's back]

Couldn't disagree more buddy. The very fact that you're suggest we steer away from it, is the very reason we shouldn't.

Islam should be no more protected than Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity or any one of a thousand other belief systems. Let them alter their view as opposed to western society bowing down to terror.

I'm not fundamentally disagreeing with your view Sam. But as I said above, the law is just part of the whole picture. I wouldn't go into some pub in a dodgy part of Salford and mock the local hard-man, even though there's nothing illegal about it. If said hard-man beat me to a pulp, then the law is very much on my side but you would certainly question the wisdom of my action.

Precisely. I'm struggling to see how some of the more intelligent posters on here are missing the point you're making.

Because it's not an accurate analogy. Drawing a picture and mocking a hard **** are not the same thing.

And these twats are not hard cunts.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Couldn't disagree more buddy. The very fact that you're suggest we steer away from it, is the very reason we shouldn't.

Islam should be no more protected than Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity or any one of a thousand other belief systems. Let them alter their view as opposed to western society bowing down to terror.

I'm not fundamentally disagreeing with your view Sam. But as I said above, the law is just part of the whole picture. I wouldn't go into some pub in a dodgy part of Salford and mock the local hard-man, even though there's nothing illegal about it. If said hard-man beat me to a pulp, then the law is very much on my side but you would certainly question the wisdom of my action.

Talking shite imo. Mocking an individual to their face is not the same as drawing a cartoon.

I can hardly mock Mohammed to his face now can I? And the point is that Muslims do take it personally if Mohammed is seen to be mocked and a number of posters have pointed this out.

 

[foxy]

I'm not fundamentally disagreeing with your view Sam. But as I said above, the law is just part of the whole picture. I wouldn't go into some pub in a dodgy part of Salford and mock the local hard-man, even though there's nothing illegal about it. If said hard-man beat me to a pulp, then the law is very much on my side but you would certainly question the wisdom of my action.

Talking shite imo. Mocking an individual to their face is not the same as drawing a cartoon.

I can hardly mock Mohammed to his face now can I? And the point is that Muslims do take it personally if Mohammed is seen to be mocked and a number of posters have pointed this out.

Surely that's their problem which is what the issue is. Other religions are mocked endlessly in Western Society because freedom of Speech allows it and followers of different beliefs are open to criticism because that's how we function in the west, we try and change for the better. It seems a negative movement making exceptions to a group which refuses to adapt to western and current ways.

 

[M18CTID]

I'm not fundamentally disagreeing with your view Sam. But as I said above, the law is just part of the whole picture. I wouldn't go into some pub in a dodgy part of Salford and mock the local hard-man, even though there's nothing illegal about it. If said hard-man beat me to a pulp, then the law is very much on my side but you would certainly question the wisdom of my action.

Precisely. I'm struggling to see how some of the more intelligent posters on here are missing the point you're making.

Because it's not an accurate analogy. Drawing a picture and mocking a hard c**t are not the same thing.

And these twats are not hard c**ts.

True, but the analogy is accurate in the sense that both acts could result in violent repercussions.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Interesting discussion.

I think you are confusing what is legal/illegal in the UK and what a person's own "code of conduct" is. Mocking a religion or a religious icon isn't illegal in the UK, but I personally wouldn't mock a person's beliefs because I respect that person's right to his own beliefs. I will defend another person's right to mock a religion though, up to the point that it becomes illegal. And there are ways to have specific actions made illegal, provided there is enough support for it.

I also wouldn't mock the local hard man, but I would defend anyone's right to do that if they so wished.

I'm not fundamentally disagreeing with your view Sam. But as I said above, the law is just part of the whole picture. I wouldn't go into some pub in a dodgy part of Salford and mock the local hard-man, even though there's nothing illegal about it. If said hard-man beat me to a pulp, then the law is very much on my side but you would certainly question the wisdom of my action.

Talking shite imo. Mocking an individual to their face is not the same as drawing a cartoon.

I can hardly mock Mohammed to his face now can I? And the point is that Muslims do take it personally if Mohammed is seen to be mocked and a number of posters have pointed this out.