FYI you are no good with debates. So many straw men and putting so many words in my mouth with so many assumptions, why would I possibly bother talking to you? You must hates Jews, be a vegan, love jar jar binks, enjoy killing frogs, and live in a red house, right? What a bunch of random unrelated nonsense you attributed to me.Cognitive dissonance and bigotry are powerful drugs it appears.
You forgot the Christian abortion doctor killers.
But hey, keep on believing that killing thousands of people is perfectly OK, you know, all those innocent women and kids that he have killed with drone strikes. That must A-OK in your book.
And don't forget all the people the US tortured, and continues to hold without charges in Gitmo. No problem with that either I bet.
Like others have said, there are over 1.5 BILLION Muslims. If even 1% were terrorists, that would mean that there would be 15 million terrorists, and there is no evidence to support that. And it they were all terrorists, we would all be dead already. Bigotry is a bad, OK?
The two perps had a choice. They didn't have to respond in any manner at all. They could have picketed outside the event in a totally non-violent form of protest. They chose a path of violence and they paid a price for that. It was their choice.
How was this event insulting to Muslims?
We're not in the Middle East. We don't have a theocracy for a government. We have no laws against drawing anything. We are not beholden to whatever fucked up rules and regulations they place on their people. What we do is no business of theirs. If they're offended by something we do, they have the right not to look.
You know...kind of how Catholics don't care that other people make fun of the fact that some of their practices could be seen as idolatry by ignorant people. Or how the Mormons actually supported the musical The Book of Morman despite it being a parody.
Or maybe you prefer to allow religious groups to dictate how we think about them...kind of like how Scientology sues anyone who says anything remotely negative about them. Or how Islamists just kill people they don't like.
Yeah, the latter sounds like a totally better way to live.
Fucking apologists. You're almost as bad as the terrorists themselves. Because of you, they've won. We have to tiptoe around them for fear of our lives. All because of you.
"The biggest problem with people's understanding of Islam and Muslim is when they see things that a group like ISIS does overseas and think that it represents the religion of Islam and what Muslims do," Nasrullah said. "There are a lot of people who haven't even met a Muslim and yet have very strong opinions."
Throughout ALL of American history, people have been killed because they exercised their free speech rights. Free speech only guarantees that the government won't attack you for exercising the privilege. It absolutely does not confer protection from others attacking you. There is a river of black and gay blood shed due to American Christian intolerance of their free speech.
I suppose if Islam is insulted and lampooned enough, eventually it will reach a saturation point and violent reactions will not be so predictable. Currently though, the insulting Islam craze is in it's infancy so there has been ton of blowback. The people doing the insulting are playing with dynamite....
Do you really mean that? It is illegal to kill someone for their speech. You can say things back, but you cannot attack someone. The law absolutely protects people insofar that it is illegal to attack someone for speech through any means other than speech.
I think what you mean to say is that the government cannot do anything to you based on your speech, but the public can do some things. If you say fuck you to the government, they still have to provide all services to you. If you say fuck you to a shop owner, the owner can refuse service to you. The shop owner cannot shoot you for your speech though.
Pretty much this.
As I skim through this thread I keep thinking, where are the true liberals? The right to offend is sanctioned by free speech. Do I even need to delve in to this again? I don't feel like giving a refresher course to liberals on their own ideology. Fake ass liberals. :'(
All the so called "peaceful" Muslims in the US should still be standing up to support Geller's art project, even if they disagree with her, but yet they aren't, even if they agree with her. That is because they are still just as fearful the barbaric Islamic countries they came from will retaliate against them somehow for speaking out, like imprisoning and killing their other family members who are still there. Which is why no matter what evil horrors a Muslim might commit in the name of Islam, the "peaceful" Muslims mostly remain deathly silent when it comes to condemning Muslim violence and murders for Islam.
I would tend to disagree with your observation. Worldwide, the vast majority of Muslims are not peaceful. Because they willingly follow and fully support their countries leaders. Nearly every Islamic dominated country is governed by brutal, barbaric and blood thirsty religious leaders and their political puppets who punish even minor crimes like adultery with death.
Throughout ALL of American history, people have been killed because they exercised their free speech rights. Free speech only guarantees that the government won't attack you for exercising the privilege. It absolutely does not confer protection from others attacking you. There is a river of black and gay blood shed due to American Christian intolerance of their free speech.
I suppose if Islam is insulted and lampooned enough, eventually it will reach a saturation point and violent reactions will not be so predictable. Currently though, the insulting Islam craze is in it's infancy so there has been ton of blowback. The people doing the insulting are playing with dynamite....
And Christianity is different because...?
No, they don't have the right.My point is that there is nothing in any US law or agreement that guarantees anyone a freedom from being offended.
The onus is on the person who was offended to deal with it on their own. They do not get the right to murder the person who is offending them.
Reading through the thread it seems like everyone is on board with what the gunman did was wrong. What's up for debate is whether baiting someone to attack you is okay or not.
Pretty much this.
As I skim through this thread I keep thinking, where are the true liberals? The right to offend is sanctioned by free speech. Do I even need to delve in to this again? I don't feel like giving a refresher course to liberals on their own ideology. Fake ass liberals. :'(
The provocatively dressed woman used by an assailant as an excuse for him raping her doesn't go over very well. Maybe that's one way to look at it.Reading through the thread it seems like everyone is on board with what the gunman did was wrong. What's up for debate is whether baiting someone to attack you is okay or not.
Not to mention the scariest part about it is over once they finally chop off your unbelieving heathen head with a dull scimitar and feed it to their dogs.
I agree.The two perps had a choice. They didn't have to respond in any manner at all. They could have picketed outside the event in a totally non-violent form of protest. They chose a path of violence and they paid a price for that. It was their choice.
I don't think freedom of speech should include direct and blatant denigration of other people including their religion/culture. How would a Christian feel if someone is to denigrate Jesus or burn bibles etc. This types of behavior is almost hate speech. Though indirectly, you are still degrading and putting down an entire class of people. What exactly is the purpose of this type of activity other than to express hatred to an entire class of people? This also goes to all the Christian bashing that's going on in the middle eastern countries. This is unhealthy for a society as a whole.
Reading through the thread it seems like everyone is on board with what the gunman did was wrong. What's up for debate is whether baiting someone to attack you is okay or not. I think it is kind of an ass hole thing to do and I do not support Geller in smearing a religion with the intent to elicit a response, but clearly the gunmen need to organize their people in a more productive way. They could easily turn the Gellers of the world into bigoted dunces in the eyes of the people by a peaceful protest. Its too bad they would rather use blood and play right into her hand.
I don't think freedom of speech should include direct and blatant denigration of other people including their religion/culture. How would a Christian feel if someone is to denigrate Jesus or burn bibles etc. This types of behavior is almost hate speech. Though indirectly, you are still degrading and putting down an entire class of people. What exactly is the purpose of this type of activity other than to express hatred to an entire class of people? This also goes to all the Christian bashing that's going on in the middle eastern countries. This is unhealthy for a society as a whole.
I think is a fairly accurate assessment. The event was deliberately designed to provoke a reaction. This event was basically equivalent to the KKK holding a contest for who could do the best menstrual show in black face. A violent reaction though is completely unacceptable.
.