Evil Religion.

trobinett

Senior Member
Oct 25, 2004
1,832
162
48
Arkansas, The Ozarks
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,186451,00.html


Calif. Campus in Uproar Over Muslim Cartoons
Wednesday, March 01, 2006

aos, with one speaker calling Islam an "evil religion" and audience members nearly coming to blows.

Organizers of Tuesday night's forum at the University of California, Irvine, said they showed the cartoons as part of a larger debate on Islamic extremism.

But several hundred protesters, including members of the Muslim Student Union, argued the event was the equivalent of hate speech disguised as freedom of expression.

Although there were numerous heated exchanges, no violence was reported.

The panel, which included one Muslim speaker, was sponsored by the College Republicans and the United American Committee, a group that says it promotes awareness of internal threats facing America.

During the discussion in a nearly packed 424-seat campus auditorium, six cartoons were displayed: three depicting Muhammad and three anti-Semitic cartoons.

The discussion got off to a contentious start with the Council on American-Islamic Relations — an invited guest — boycotting the event and calling the United American Committee a "fringe group."


Tensions quickly escalated when the Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, founder of the conservative Brotherhood Organization of a New Destiny, said that Islam was an "evil religion" and that all Muslims hate America.

People repeatedly interrupted the talk and, at one point, campus police removed two men, one of them a Muslim, after they nearly came to blows.

Later, panelists were cheered when they referred to Muslims as fascists and accused mainstream Muslim-American civil rights groups of being "cheerleaders for terror."

"I put out a call to Muslims in America: Put out a fatwa on [Usama] bin Laden, put out a fatwa on [Abu Musab] al-Zarqawi," said panelist Lee Kaplan, a UAC spokesman. "Support America in the war on terror."

Thousands of Muslims worldwide have protested, sometimes violently, after the cartoons were published in a Danish newspaper and in other European newspapers. Islam widely holds that representations of Muhammad are banned for fear they could lead to idolatry.

Osman Umarji, former president of the Muslim Student Union, equated the decision by the student panel to display the prophet drawings to the debasement of Jews in Germany before the Holocaust.

"The agenda is to spread Islamophobia and create hysteria against Muslims similar to what happened to the Jews in Nazi Germany," said Umarji, an electrical engineer who graduated from Irvine last spring. "Freedom of speech has its limits."

Brock Hill, vice president of the College Republicans, said his group had a First Amendment right to display the cartoons.

"We're not going against Islam whatsoever," he said. "This is about free speech and the free marketplace of ideas."

Mohamed Eldessouky, 20, a criminology student who attended the discussion, said he was disappointed because he felt the panel and the audience were biased against Islam.

"I entered it with an open mind, but I thought it was totally biased. I thought the panelists would be more balanced. I think it did more harm than good," he said.

Lauren Chramosta, 18, a freshman, said she didn't know much about Islam and attended hoping to learn more.

"It was helpful to listen to different views," she said. "But I think [the Muslim panelist] was shut down so many times that he didn't get a fair shake."

**********************************************************

Seems it`s "free speech" only if the left says` it is.

When the tables are turned, the radical Muslim`s don`t much care for the "smell"!

Too damn bad.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: dmp
Someone should just go up to these lobby groups and say something like "If you're a Muslim and you want to live under Muslim rules and obligations, fine. Good for you. But I'm not a Muslim, and I refuse to have those rules apply to me." Just lay it out simple as that.
 
Did you not read the quote from the student who attended??? The person who didn't get any chance to speak was the only Muslim panelist. The right wing student group brought in a virulently anti-Muslim crusader in and allowed him to speak, but in the words of the student who attended "shut down" the Muslim speaker.

Whose free speech was violated here? The left organizations chose to boycott and protest, they didn't get, or, from what I read, even ask, the administration to shut down this event.

acludem
 
But several hundred protesters, including members of the Muslim Student Union, argued the event was the equivalent of hate speech disguised as freedom of expression.

First, I find it hard to see how talking about Islam is "hate speech."

Second, hate speech is still protected by the First Amendment, even on California college campuses.
 
The reason they considered it hate speech is because the two sponsoring groups brought in some very anti-muslim speakers. This would be like bringing the KKK into a multicultural discussion under the banner of freedom of expression. You can do it, but some people would consider it hate speech.

I wasn't there, I was going by the quote from the woman who was there and said it was biased.

Lauren Chramosta, 18, a freshman, said she didn't know much about Islam and attended hoping to learn more.

"It was helpful to listen to different views," she said. "But I think [the Muslim panelist] was shut down so many times that he didn't get a fair shake."


Also, I find it ironic that conservatives will work hard against first amendment freedom of speech (i.e. art, etc) until someone tells them to shut up. As an ACLU member I will fight for anyone's right to speak freely so long as they do not threaten to harm or incite others to harm or kill people. Example: I think Islam is an evil religion vs. I think Muslims should be exterminated.

acludem
 
acludem said:
The reason they considered it hate speech is because the two sponsoring groups brought in some very anti-muslim speakers. This would be like bringing the KKK into a multicultural discussion under the banner of freedom of expression. You can do it, but some people would consider it hate speech.

I wasn't there, I was going by the quote from the woman who was there and said it was biased.

Lauren Chramosta, 18, a freshman, said she didn't know much about Islam and attended hoping to learn more.

"It was helpful to listen to different views," she said. "But I think [the Muslim panelist] was shut down so many times that he didn't get a fair shake."


Also, I find it ironic that conservatives will work hard against first amendment freedom of speech (i.e. art, etc) until someone tells them to shut up. As an ACLU member I will fight for anyone's right to speak freely so long as they do not threaten to harm or incite others to harm or kill people. Example: I think Islam is an evil religion vs. I think Muslims should be exterminated.

acludem


Perhaps Lauren, however sweet, is an idiot?
 
acludem said:
The reason they considered it hate speech is because the two sponsoring groups brought in some very anti-muslim speakers. This would be like bringing the KKK into a multicultural discussion under the banner of freedom of expression. You can do it, but some people would consider it hate speech.

I wasn't there, I was going by the quote from the woman who was there and said it was biased.

Lauren Chramosta, 18, a freshman, said she didn't know much about Islam and attended hoping to learn more.

"It was helpful to listen to different views," she said. "But I think [the Muslim panelist] was shut down so many times that he didn't get a fair shake."


Also, I find it ironic that conservatives will work hard against first amendment freedom of speech (i.e. art, etc) until someone tells them to shut up. As an ACLU member I will fight for anyone's right to speak freely so long as they do not threaten to harm or incite others to harm or kill people. Example: I think Islam is an evil religion vs. I think Muslims should be exterminated.

acludem

You're assuming that the anti-muslims speakers were inciting anyone to do and harm. If libs say it--it's free speech---if cons say it--it's incitement. Still trying to have you cake and eat it too I see.
 
Aclu do you think being anti muslim is a completely irrational and hateful thing to be? Is being anti christian the same?
 
I can't help but notice the irony here. All the muslim reaction did was end up supporting the group by proving them correct.

While I don't agree that Islam is an evil religion, they lost a major opportunity to show by example they aren't. If I were the leadership of the Muslim Student Union, I would use this as an opportunity to set up my own event to educate others in what I believed.

Also, I find it difficult to justify complaining that the forum was one sided when the MSU boycotted the event. Of course it was going to be one sided. The other side refused to show up. So I don't see how they can complain about being shafted by it. They did it to themselves.
 
acludem said:
The reason they considered it hate speech is because the two sponsoring groups brought in some very anti-muslim speakers. This would be like bringing the KKK into a multicultural discussion under the banner of freedom of expression. You can do it, but some people would consider it hate speech.

And again, as vile as the Klan is, their speech is protected. But when the Left throws around the term "hate speech," censorship is always right around the corner - especially on college campuses, which already restrict free speech on draconian levels.

Also, I find it ironic that conservatives will work hard against first amendment freedom of speech (i.e. art, etc) until someone tells them to shut up. As an ACLU member I will fight for anyone's right to speak freely so long as they do not threaten to harm or incite others to harm or kill people. Example: I think Islam is an evil religion vs. I think Muslims should be exterminated.

acludem

Conservatives try to shut down free speech?!? Why - because we don't like the NEA? Getting rid of subsidies to artists is not working against free speech. And, may I remind you, conservatives aren't the ones holding two months worth of violent protests over political cartoons. Even when "Piss Christ" and the Virgin Mary with cow dung came out, conservative reaction was 100% non-violent. So it's not the American Right who is actively working against free speech, it's Islam.
 
gop_jeff said:
Conservatives try to shut down free speech?!? Why - because we don't like the NEA? Getting rid of subsidies to artists is not working against free speech. And, may I remind you, conservatives aren't the ones holding two months worth of violent protests over political cartoons. Even when "Piss Christ" and the Virgin Mary with cow dung came out, conservative reaction was 100% non-violent. So it's not the American Right who is actively working against free speech, it's Islam.

I agree. I think Art would be much better if it wasn't subsidized. We would see talent rather than crap being passed off as art. I mean think of all the masterpieces of the world? They were all funded by private sponsors.
 
I think being blindly anti-any religion is completely irrational and hateful. You can disagree with someone's religion, but the speaker they had said, according to the article - the Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, founder of the conservative Brotherhood Organization of a New Destiny, said that Islam was an "evil religion" and that all Muslims hate America.

How is saying that not hateful and irrational? All Muslims hate America? What about the Muslims who are fighting for HIS freedom in Iraq and Afghanistan? He can say these things, I will defend his right to do so, but I will also call him an irrational, hate-monger.

acludem
 
acludem said:
I think being blindly anti-any religion is completely irrational and hateful. You can disagree with someone's religion, but the speaker they had said, according to the article - the Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, founder of the conservative Brotherhood Organization of a New Destiny, said that Islam was an "evil religion" and that all Muslims hate America.

How is saying that not hateful and irrational? All Muslims hate America? What about the Muslims who are fighting for HIS freedom in Iraq and Afghanistan? He can say these things, I will defend his right to do so, but I will also call him an irrational, hate-monger.

acludem

Does it ever seem wierd to you to be protecting irrational, hate mongering people?
 
No, because if we don't protect the irrational hate-mongers, we don't protect our own freedom to express our own, more rational and less hateful (in most cases on this board) views.

Either we all have free speech or none of us do.

acludem
 
acludem said:
I think being blindly anti-any religion is completely irrational and hateful. You can disagree with someone's religion, but the speaker they had said, according to the article - the Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, founder of the conservative Brotherhood Organization of a New Destiny, said that Islam was an "evil religion" and that all Muslims hate America.

How is saying that not hateful and irrational? All Muslims hate America? What about the Muslims who are fighting for HIS freedom in Iraq and Afghanistan? He can say these things, I will defend his right to do so, but I will also call him an irrational, hate-monger.

acludem

Somehow I doubt a Reverend is blindly "anti-any religion". You're saying someone cannot look at the Qur'an/Islam, study it, and come to the conclusions that it is indeed evil in its roots? Tell me how that is "irrational", because I have come to the same conclusion after learning what I know about Islam.
 
It is irrational for him to call a religion that has the same basis as his own "evil" yes. It is highly irrational to say that "all Muslims hate America", especially when there are many Muslim soldiers in the U.S. military fighting for HIS freedom right now in Iraq and other parts of the world. Yes it is irrational. Islam is not an evil religion, certain practitioners of it may be evil. I believe Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and Fred Phelps are evil people, but I do not condemn all Christians for the actions of these zealots.

acludem
 
I have one opinion of Islam... here it is...

toilet_koran_buzzaro.jpg
 
Pale Rider said:
I have one opinion of Islam... here it is...

toilet_koran_buzzaro.jpg


I am an atheist and I insist on my right to flush down bibles or Korans.

That being said, I respect peoples religious believes and refrain from it.

So this picture is not helpful for dialogue since you rightfully would
be upset if I d flush a bible or whatever you believe in to make my
point of free speech.

But I count on that you wont storm German embassies or threaten to kill me.

I aprreciate that.
 
acludem said:
The reason they considered it hate speech is because the two sponsoring groups brought in some very anti-muslim speakers. This would be like bringing the KKK into a multicultural discussion under the banner of freedom of expression. You can do it, but some people would consider it hate speech.

I wasn't there, I was going by the quote from the woman who was there and said it was biased.

Lauren Chramosta, 18, a freshman, said she didn't know much about Islam and attended hoping to learn more.

"It was helpful to listen to different views," she said. "But I think [the Muslim panelist] was shut down so many times that he didn't get a fair shake."


Also, I find it ironic that conservatives will work hard against first amendment freedom of speech (i.e. art, etc) until someone tells them to shut up. As an ACLU member I will fight for anyone's right to speak freely so long as they do not threaten to harm or incite others to harm or kill people. Example: I think Islam is an evil religion vs. I think Muslims should be exterminated.

acludem

i think he was shut down.....so she wasn't sure and if he was shut down doesn't that mean he was speaking?.....you know what tough shit....speak up....or shut up but don't bitch
 

Forum List

Back
Top