To those who support Danmark...

[Futuwwa]

And you seriously thought it would make them think? Putting swastikas on unrelated things is probably the most overused rhetorical trick there is. It hardly ever accomplishes anything else than convinces people about your bad taste and lack of creativity.

 

[ChildishFears]

I have not been here since long time. I am just come now to pose few lines about the issue of the abusing Karecators about our Noble Prophet Mohamed, peace be upon him.

I know that alot of people have discussed this issue, from Muslims side and non Muslims side. I know that almost everything is said in this case.

I am just here to put one thing only, and it is directed to those who support this nasty action under the title of "freedom of expression".

I would like to ask, if it is ok to anyone to express his opinion about any issue. would it be ok if anyone chose to deny the Holocoast??

If they did decide to deny it, that's their personal decision, I'm not going to threaten violence or death. I would however believe they are utterly ignorant of history and foolish.

we all know what heppebed, and what will happen, to those who just tried to dout in the existing of the Holocoast!!

so why it is ok to anyone to abuse Muslims, and it is not allowed to anyone to utter a word against the Jews?

Who said that? What do the Jews have to do with this anyways? Like Secundulus said, why is there no outrage when people mock/insult Jesus [your beloved Prophet]? That's the reality of freedom of speech, you're not going to like everything a person saids and vice versa. If you believe a person to be wrong about your religion, culture, ethnicity, etc...then [like Heart of Darkness said] you correct them and show how they wrong not use/threaten acts of aggression.

I am talking about those who live in Europe and USA, which are supposed to be the lands of freedom.

if the answer of my above question is "No", and I am sure that this will be the only answer, I would like then to say one sentence to all of you:

Please, stop this HYPOCRICY!! Because it is so disgusting!!

....I don't see any hypocricy. People are going to say nasty things about most if not ALL religions, that's life. No one said you couldn't be offended.

 

[anatolian]

I didn't. I am very much anti-censorship.

Thanks but I said it to Heart of Darkness.

 

[Vene]

And you seriously thought it would make them think? Putting swastikas on unrelated things is probably the most overused rhetorical trick there is. It hardly ever accomplishes anything else than convinces people about your bad taste and lack of creativity.

It's especially stupid since Jewish Nazi is about as close to an oxymoron as you can get.

 

[elijah115]

Why exactly is your avatar supposed to be abusive?

 

[Vene]

Thanks but I said it to Heart of Darkness.

Then why did you quote me? And look at her response. It was censored because of forum rules, not her personal beliefs. We're friends and she has had to edit and delete some of the posts I've made because that is what moderators do.

 

[Futuwwa]

@Vene: Unless you (as is the lame trend today) use "Nazi" as an umbrella term for all kinds of fascistoid ideologies.

 

[Ramona]

So you are saying you did stand against my avatar because the forum rules are against it but it was ok according to your life view? Ok.

No. I still think it is morally wrong to do that, but I could not and would not try to make you remove it from your backyard in real life.

 

[Vene]

@Vene: Unless you (as is the lame trend today) use "Nazi" as an umbrella term for all kinds of fascistoid ideologies.

True, but I don't use that. I would much rather use the term "fascist."

And I find it annoying that the swastika has been turned into a symbol of hate.

 

[Ramona]

Then why did you quote me? And look at her response. It was censored because of forum rules, not her personal beliefs. We're friends and she has had to edit and delete some of the posts I've made because that is what moderators do.

*MASSIVE snuggles*

Thank you so much!

 

[anatolian]

And you seriously thought it would make them think? Putting swastikas on unrelated things is probably the most overused rhetorical trick there is. It hardly ever accomplishes anything else than convinces people about your bad taste and lack of creativity.

Yes I seariously thought that because I think most of the visitors of this forum are western christians who think that the reaon of the violence between Palestine and Isreal is the palestinian terrorism and Israel is just an innocent country who defends itself.Then maybe people would question themselves why does this man associate Israel with Nazis.Is this inference of mine wrong?

 

[anatolian]

Then why did you quote me?

Because her post was an answer to your post and yours was to mine.

And look at her response.

. It was censored because of forum rules, not her personal beliefs. We're friends and she has had to edit and delete some of the posts I've made because that is what moderators do.[/quote]yes.look at my answer.

 

[anatolian]

No. I still think it is morally wrong to do that, but I could not and would not try to make you remove it from your backyard in real life.

This post produces new questions,

1.Do you say that those Danish newpaper Muhammed aleyhissalam cartoons are morally wrong but Denmark is their backyard so they can print them?

2.Do you say that I have right to use that kind of abusive protest according to your life view but you think it is immoral and here is a zone which you can remove it and therefor you used your power?

 

[ArcticKnight]

This post produces new questions,

1.Do you say that those Danish newpaper Muhammed aleyhissalam cartoons are morally wrong but Denmark is their backyard so they can print them?

2.Do you say that I have right to use that kind of abusive protest according to your life view but you think it is immoral and here is a zone which you can remove it and therefor you used your power?

1- It may be morally wrong for them to post the cartoons, but freedom of speech extends to allowing people to express things that are morally wrong.

Freedom of expression, however, never extends to the point where the expression involves harming other people and/or property, or impeding people (holding them against their will).

2- There is a difference between freedom of expression in a public venue or in your own backyard and freedom of expression on a privately owned, operated, and funded message board.

If I were to go into your house and insult you, it is within your right to forceably remove me from your house. If, on the other hand, I insult you in a public park, it is not your right to silence me. When you signed up to post on this board, you agreed to conduct yourself within the rules of the board. If you violate those rules, it is the right of the owners of the board (or their agents) to censor you, but their censorship rights only extend as far as this board, and no farther. They can not (and should not) censor you in a public place.

 

[Raja]

Yes, this would be okay with me. I would speak out against such a false view, but I would not use the force of law or mob violence to try to prevent such speech. Bad ideas are best countered by good ideas, not guns or death threats.



eudaimonia,

Mark

who talks about violence ??

my point is so clear and I wish to receive a brave answer!

Thanks

 

[Raja]

Firstly the holocaust is an historical fact and not a religion. Secondly Denmark is a sovereign state and has its own laws which are not sharia laws. If you want to stone to death a woman for looking at a man then do it in your own country. In Europe we practice freedom of speech because we support democracy. Anyone who purports to support the idea that the holocaust never happened will be proved wrong by the overwhelming evidence against him. He will not be put to death.

It is ideas such as yours that give Islam a bad name. Just as I will have to respect the laws in your country when I am there; so will you respect the laws of other countries when you are there. You may voice your opinion against our laws but you may not threaten with bodily harm those that you disagree with because it is against the law in Europe to do so.

If you do not like how we live in Europe then don't come here. Of course if you are willing to respect our laws then you are welcome.

you went far from the main topic my friend.

My question is clear and direct, if it is ok to "speak" about any issue, why Eurpoean countries arrest anyone refuse to accept HOLOCOAST? why dont you consider that refusion as a kind of "freedom of speech" ??

Regards

 

[Eudaimonist]

who talks about violence ??

my point is so clear and I wish to receive a brave answer!

You have gotten one from me. I wrote: "Yes, this would be okay with me." Perhaps you missed that sentence.

There is your brave answer.

Yes, I would allow speech such as someone denying the Holocaust, as wrong as it is. I object to the use of government power in punishing people who express such views. I regard them as turning their backs on free speech. I do not vote for politicians who support this hypocracy. I oppose them politically.

This may not be the answer you were expecting or hoping for, but it is an answer nonetheless!


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Raja]

If someone is spreading violent ideas and lies, you combat them through intelligent solutions and truth...not violence, and not oppression.

You will encounter people with different views from your own. Some of these views will be misguided, offensive, or just plain mean. You want to show them why they are wrong using intellect and reason if you are to convey your points. By silencing them you're just adding fuel to the fire.

Welcome back to NCR, Raja.

Thanks alot for your comment. I do agree that wise reaction is required all the time. however, there are some exceptions. we can not keep silencince when someone abuses our noble prophet.

Peace

 

[ArcticKnight]

My question is clear and direct, if it is ok to "speak" about any issue, why Eurpoean countries arrest anyone refuse to accept HOLOCOAST? why dont you consider that refusion as a kind of "freedom of speech" ??

Each country is free to make their own laws, it should also be the people's right to either leave that country, or work to change laws that they feel are not right. I, personally, do see arresting people for denying the Holocaust as an infringement on freedom of speech. However, since I am not a citizen of any such country, it is not within my right to force that country to change it's laws. I can, though, voice my opinion about such laws.

 

[quatona]

I am just here to put one thing only, and it is directed to those who support this nasty action under the title of "freedom of expression".

I don´t think I support it - I´m just not opposed to it.

I would like to ask, if it is ok to anyone to express his opinion about any issue. would it be ok if anyone chose to deny the Holocoast??

What do you mean - "is it ok"?
What do you mean "opinion"?
I fail to see the parallel between denying the Holocaust and being negatively opinionated about a certain religion.
As far as I know denying the Holocaust is covered by the freedom of speech in most every country - so where´s the "hypocrisy" you are trying to establish?

we all know what heppebed, and what will happen, to those who just tried to dout in the existing of the Holocoast!!

Apparently I don´t know what happened or will happen to them. Can you fill me in, please?

so why it is ok to anyone to abuse Muslims,

It´s not ok to abuse Muslims - it´s not illegal to criticize them.

and it is not allowed to anyone to utter a word against the Jews?

Where is it not allowed? What does "denying the Holocaust" have to do with saying a word against the Jews? Two completely different things, as far as I can see.

As for your thread title: These caricatures weren´t produced or published by Denmark. A caricaturist painted them, a newspaper published them, many other newspapers followed.