Free Speech vs an Angry Islamic World

[Foxfyre]

Okay I am agreeing with most of you. To allow others to dictate what we may say, think, express, opine about, insulting or not is to subjugate ourselves to others and give them power that it may be unhealthy to alllow them to have.

But playing devil's advocate here, do we bear no responsibility to not provoke the mentally unbalanced, the deranged, the brainwashed, or to simply look to our own interests?

You might see your boss as a total ass, but do you say so and thereby risk being demoted, not promoted, or fired? Or do you exercise prudence?

Do you obey the orders of the mad man or robber with a gun so as not to provoke him to shoot you or others he is with or the hostage he is holding? How much risk can you ethically take in a situation like that?

So how is it different to not provoke militant Muslims?

Strangely enough, experts in security advise you to actively resist and get away in the second situation.

If you are a hostage, perhaps. But I don't think many professionals would advise provoking the guy who has a gun aimed at your belly or heart or head.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I think it is a shame that you broad-brushed Muslims with your thread title.

The vast majority of Muslims didn't protest the video or the cartoons.

But your thread title does one good thing, it makes me realize that the people acting like children by disrespecting someone's belief to this extent are also broad-brushing and when protests and riots occur they can say, "see I was right, Muslims are nothing but animals."

Bullshit. Who hasn't disrespected some one else's beliefs at one time or another?

Vast majorities never participate directly in protests, but interviews with Muslims who didn't participate indicate that they were almost universally angry about the film. This raises the question: to what extent does this anger provide fertile soil from which extremists such as those who attacked our embassies can grow? The vast majority of Germans did not participate in any activities related to the Holocaust, yet without their hostile attitudes towards Jews the nazis would never have been empowered to perpetrate their horrors.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I think it is a shame that you broad-brushed Muslims with your thread title.

The vast majority of Muslims didn't protest the video or the cartoons.

But your thread title does one good thing, it makes me realize that the people acting like children by disrespecting someone's belief to this extent are also broad-brushing and when protests and riots occur they can say, "see I was right, Muslims are nothing but animals."

I think it is a shame that some people need to defend people that abuse them.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Okay I am agreeing with most of you. To allow others to dictate what we may say, think, express, opine about, insulting or not is to subjugate ourselves to others and give them power that it may be unhealthy to alllow them to have.

But playing devil's advocate here, do we bear no responsibility to not provoke the mentally unbalanced, the deranged, the brainwashed, or to simply look to our own interests?

You might see your boss as a total ass, but do you say so and thereby risk being demoted, not promoted, or fired? Or do you exercise prudence?

Do you obey the orders of the mad man or robber with a gun so as not to provoke him to shoot you or others he is with or the hostage he is holding? How much risk can you ethically take in a situation like that?

So how is it different to not provoke militant Muslims?

Strangely enough, experts in security advise you to actively resist and get away in the second situation.

If you are a hostage, perhaps. But I don't think many professionals would advise provoking the guy who has a gun aimed at your belly or heart or head.

It is actually better to provoke them than to cooperate and let them get the upper hand.

 

[Intense]

If you had the power or influence to do so, could you call for that with a clear conscience knowing the possible consequences?

Or is the price of deferring to militant Islam too high and this the best way to handle it is for condemnable behavior by militant Islam triggering universal condemnation or ridicule of them and Mohammed the way to go?

Tough call.

The consequence of giving in is the other side asking for more and more of your freedoms. At some point you would be left with the choice between fighting them or becoming one of them. Why not force the issue now and see what happens?

There is no "see what happens". Let's be honest, we all know what happens. They riot and people die. If you are going to call for people to insult Islam more, be hones to admit you are sacrificing other peoples lives when you do it.

So, by that logic, The argument translates to "If you don't do what I tell you to do, when, and how, I tell you to do it, to my satisfaction, you are sacrificing other peoples lives." You see the flaw in the argument, right? A person that subscribes to that Philosophy has no free will, no Liberty. Ii is failed reasoning.

 

[Foxfyre]

I think it is a shame that you broad-brushed Muslims with your thread title.

The vast majority of Muslims didn't protest the video or the cartoons.

But your thread title does one good thing, it makes me realize that the people acting like children by disrespecting someone's belief to this extent are also broad-brushing and when protests and riots occur they can say, "see I was right, Muslims are nothing but animals."

Bullshit. Who hasn't disrespected some one else's beliefs at one time or another?

Vast majorities never participate directly in protests, but interviews with Muslims who didn't participate indicate that they were almost universally angry about the film. This raises the question: to what extent does this anger provide fertile soil from which extremists such as those who attacked our embassies can grow? The vast majority of Germans did not participate in any activities related to the Holocaust, yet without their hostile attitudes towards Jews the nazis would never have been empowered to perpetrate their horrors.

It is important to note, however, that all Germans were not hostile toward the Jews, yet they were silent and did not resist government actions which they deplored. Many Germans, Poles, and others, yes most were Christian, risked their lives to shelter or hide the Jews or assisted them in escaping the Nazi net. Ditto Russians who helped their Jewish neighbors escape from viscious Russian pograms. There is no way to know how many were spared due to such efforts, but the estimates run into the tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands. And some, such as Corrie Ten Boom who has written of her experience, wound up in concentration camps with the Jews.

But neither did any of these resist or rise up against a government committing such atrocities. Nor again, do we see credible evidence that many peaceful Muslims are condemning the militant terrorists. If we are consistent, we have to recognize the right of people not to speak out against what offends them just as we promote the right of people to speak out against what offends them.

The paradox continues.

 

[Katzndogz]

Okay I am agreeing with most of you. To allow others to dictate what we may say, think, express, opine about, insulting or not is to subjugate ourselves to others and give them power that it may be unhealthy to alllow them to have.

But playing devil's advocate here, do we bear no responsibility to not provoke the mentally unbalanced, the deranged, the brainwashed, or to simply look to our own interests?

You might see your boss as a total ass, but do you say so and thereby risk being demoted, not promoted, or fired? Or do you exercise prudence?

Do you obey the orders of the mad man or robber with a gun so as not to provoke him to shoot you or others he is with or the hostage he is holding? How much risk can you ethically take in a situation like that?

So how is it different to not provoke militant Muslims?

If you are obeying the orders of the madman, it is because he likely has a gun to your head and the threat is immediate. In islam it is different. They aren't threatening to kill the hostage, but hundreds of others. Why do you think we have a policy (or had) not to comply with terrorist demands? Because they never end. If muslims rioted and started killing people in Philadelphia because the nation's women do not wear burkas, should all women immediately put on that burka? That's a provocation of militant muslims. We are being trained, just like dogs are trained by use of a whip. We are being trained to immediately comply with muslim demands or risk punishment. We are in the process of becoming the abused wife of islam where we understand the offense we gave by burning the morning toast.

 

[Intense]

Okay I am agreeing with most of you. To allow others to dictate what we may say, think, express, opine about, insulting or not is to subjugate ourselves to others and give them power that it may be unhealthy to alllow them to have.

But playing devil's advocate here, do we bear no responsibility to not provoke the mentally unbalanced, the deranged, the brainwashed, or to simply look to our own interests?

You might see your boss as a total ass, but do you say so and thereby risk being demoted, not promoted, or fired? Or do you exercise prudence?

Do you obey the orders of the mad man or robber with a gun so as not to provoke him to shoot you or others he is with or the hostage he is holding? How much risk can you ethically take in a situation like that?

So how is it different to not provoke militant Muslims?

Your Boss has Power and Influence over you. Random People of any Religion, generally do not. Personally, from a christian Perspective the Golden Rule should Generally apply. Forgetting it, should not be a death sentence.

 

[martybegan]

I think it is a shame that you broad-brushed Muslims with your thread title.

The vast majority of Muslims didn't protest the video or the cartoons.

But your thread title does one good thing, it makes me realize that the people acting like children by disrespecting someone's belief to this extent are also broad-brushing and when protests and riots occur they can say, "see I was right, Muslims are nothing but animals."

Bullshit. Who hasn't disrespected some one else's beliefs at one time or another?

Vast majorities never participate directly in protests, but interviews with Muslims who didn't participate indicate that they were almost universally angry about the film. This raises the question: to what extent does this anger provide fertile soil from which extremists such as those who attacked our embassies can grow? The vast majority of Germans did not participate in any activities related to the Holocaust, yet without their hostile attitudes towards Jews the nazis would never have been empowered to perpetrate their horrors.

It is important to note, however, that all Germans were not hostile toward the Jews, yet they were silent and did not resist government actions which they deplored. Many Germans, Poles, and others, yes most were Christian, risked their lives to shelter or hide the Jews or assisted them in escaping the Nazi net. Ditto Russians who helped their Jewish neighbors escape from viscious Russian pograms. There is no way to know how many were spared due to such efforts, but the estimates run into the tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands. And some, such as Corrie Ten Boom who has written of her experience, wound up in concentration camps with the Jews.

But neither did any of these resist or rise up against a government committing such atrocities. Nor again, do we see credible evidence that many peaceful Muslims are condemning the militant terrorists. If we are consistent, we have to recognize the right of people not to speak out against what offends them just as we promote the right of people to speak out against what offends them.

The paradox continues.

An excellent point. Silence may not equal support, but it sure as hell implies sympathy.

 

[Intense]

Might want to consider that Muslims that are Pro Reform, even Moderate Muslims, can be just as much a target as us. The issue isn't about most Muslims, it's about those with Concentrated Power, who direct the trends, and act with impunity. Whether it's one in a thousand, or one in a hundred thousand, it is insignificant to the victim of the effect. The Enemy is Sharia, trying to bring the World into Compliance with It's Interpretation of what is Right and Just, by Any Means. It does not Recognize anything even Parallel, It does not see Truth outside of It's own brand, only temporary competition, obstruction. In Islam, the Sword is Mightier than the Pen.

 

[AmyNation]

The consequence of giving in is the other side asking for more and more of your freedoms. At some point you would be left with the choice between fighting them or becoming one of them. Why not force the issue now and see what happens?

There is no "see what happens". Let's be honest, we all know what happens. They riot and people die. If you are going to call for people to insult Islam more, be hones to admit you are sacrificing other peoples lives when you do it.

So, by that logic, The argument translates to "If you don't do what I tell you to do, when, and how, I tell you to do it, to my satisfaction, you are sacrificing other peoples lives." You see the flaw in the argument, right? A person that subscribes to that Philosophy has no free will, no Liberty. Ii is failed reasoning.

It is your right to go to a black neighborhood, break out a loud speaker, and spew the vilest racist hate speech you can think of. No one has the right to kill you for your words. However that doesn't mean you get to bury your head in the sand and pretend your words don't have consequences.

 

[Foxfyre]

Might want to consider that Muslims that are Pro Reform, even Moderate Muslims, can be just as much a target as us. The issue isn't about most Muslims, it's about those with Concentrated Power, who direct the trends, and act with impunity. Whether it's one in a thousand, or one in a hundred thousand, it is insignificant to the victim of the effect. The Enemy is Sharia, trying to bring the World into Compliance with It's Interpretation of what is Right and Just, by Any Means. It does not Recognize anything even Parallel, It does not see Truth outside of It's own brand, only temporary competition, obstruction. In Islam, the Sword is Mightier than the Pen.

This is the other side of the coin. What would it profit those peaceful Germans, for instance,who would have suffered Corrie Ten Boom and her family's fate or worse had they protected Jews or openly spoken out or otherwise resisted the orders of the Third Reich? Was Oscar Schindler honorable or dishonorable in pretending to be a loyal Nazi even as he was sheltering Jews and sabotaging the German war machine? If you are a Muslim, are you, as a matter of honor, obligated to speak out against militant Islamic terrorists and thereby make yourself a target?

How do we view those who shield illegal immigrants so that they won't be deported? How do we view a William Ayers who commmitted domestic terrorism against his own country? How do we view those who we perceive or suspect are intentionally sabotaging Americans or American enterprise no matter how pure their motives? Do you sympathise with the OWS in their more destructive demonstrations?

As much as we would like to make this cut and dried, I can see the dichotomies that exist.

 

[Katzndogz]

Moderate muslims will slit your throat as easily as a violent extremist. They will just have different motivations for doing so. Like saving their own lives.

 

[Foxfyre]

There is no "see what happens". Let's be honest, we all know what happens. They riot and people die. If you are going to call for people to insult Islam more, be hones to admit you are sacrificing other peoples lives when you do it.

So, by that logic, The argument translates to "If you don't do what I tell you to do, when, and how, I tell you to do it, to my satisfaction, you are sacrificing other peoples lives." You see the flaw in the argument, right? A person that subscribes to that Philosophy has no free will, no Liberty. Ii is failed reasoning.

It is your right to go to a black neighborhood, break out a loud speaker, and spew the vilest racist hate speech you can think of. No one has the right to kill you for your words. However that doesn't mean you get to bury your head in the sand and pretend your words don't have consequences.

But what consequences should be tolerated?

 

[Ravi]

I think it is a shame that you broad-brushed Muslims with your thread title.

The vast majority of Muslims didn't protest the video or the cartoons.

But your thread title does one good thing, it makes me realize that the people acting like children by disrespecting someone's belief to this extent are also broad-brushing and when protests and riots occur they can say, "see I was right, Muslims are nothing but animals."

Bullshit. Who hasn't disrespected some one else's beliefs at one time or another?

Vast majorities never participate directly in protests, but interviews with Muslims who didn't participate indicate that they were almost universally angry about the film. This raises the question: to what extent does this anger provide fertile soil from which extremists such as those who attacked our embassies can grow? The vast majority of Germans did not participate in any activities related to the Holocaust, yet without their hostile attitudes towards Jews the nazis would never have been empowered to perpetrate their horrors.

Angry, sure. But the governments made arrests and protected our embassies. I heard a guy interviewed, forget from which country, but he said most didn't agree with the protests (though of course, everyone does have a right to protest without getting violent) and a real Muslim would never mistreat a guest in their country. He also said it is hard for him to understand why someone would feel the need to insult a religious icon in this manner.

I think your analogy is off.

 

[Ravi]

I think it is a shame that you broad-brushed Muslims with your thread title.

The vast majority of Muslims didn't protest the video or the cartoons.

But your thread title does one good thing, it makes me realize that the people acting like children by disrespecting someone's belief to this extent are also broad-brushing and when protests and riots occur they can say, "see I was right, Muslims are nothing but animals."

I think it is a shame that some people need to defend people that abuse them.

No one has abused me. And I haven't defended anyone abusing anyone.

 

[AmyNation]

So, by that logic, The argument translates to "If you don't do what I tell you to do, when, and how, I tell you to do it, to my satisfaction, you are sacrificing other peoples lives." You see the flaw in the argument, right? A person that subscribes to that Philosophy has no free will, no Liberty. Ii is failed reasoning.

It is your right to go to a black neighborhood, break out a loud speaker, and spew the vilest racist hate speech you can think of. No one has the right to kill you for your words. However that doesn't mean you get to bury your head in the sand and pretend your words don't have consequences.

But what consequences should be tolerated?

What kind of action to you purpose we take that we haven't already? These aren't American citizens, or even a foreign goverment.

 

[Ravi]

Might want to consider that Muslims that are Pro Reform, even Moderate Muslims, can be just as much a target as us. The issue isn't about most Muslims, it's about those with Concentrated Power, who direct the trends, and act with impunity. Whether it's one in a thousand, or one in a hundred thousand, it is insignificant to the victim of the effect. The Enemy is Sharia, trying to bring the World into Compliance with It's Interpretation of what is Right and Just, by Any Means. It does not Recognize anything even Parallel, It does not see Truth outside of It's own brand, only temporary competition, obstruction. In Islam, the Sword is Mightier than the Pen.

You realize, don't you, that not so very long ago people talked about Catholics and the Pope in much the same way as you are speaking about Islam.

 

[Foxfyre]

Might want to consider that Muslims that are Pro Reform, even Moderate Muslims, can be just as much a target as us. The issue isn't about most Muslims, it's about those with Concentrated Power, who direct the trends, and act with impunity. Whether it's one in a thousand, or one in a hundred thousand, it is insignificant to the victim of the effect. The Enemy is Sharia, trying to bring the World into Compliance with It's Interpretation of what is Right and Just, by Any Means. It does not Recognize anything even Parallel, It does not see Truth outside of It's own brand, only temporary competition, obstruction. In Islam, the Sword is Mightier than the Pen.

You realize, don't you, that not so very long ago people talked about Catholics and the Pope in much the same way as you are speaking about Islam.

Believing that 'your way' is more pure, more orthodox, or more acceptable and a HOPE that all the world will come to understand it is a much different thing than physical punishment of people for not respecting your beliefs and way of doing things.

Islam has been around for almost as long as the Roman Catholic Church has been formally recognized as a religious entity. The more militant Roman Catholic Church long ago gave up physically punishing dissidents or heretics and that was never universal throughout catholicism. The more militant Islam seems much slower to evolve to such a point of view.

 

[Katzndogz]

Except the catholics weren't beheading anyone. You have to go back a few hundred years for that one.