Admin sides with fanatics

[Democrat4Bush]

Sighing in disgust.

The United States blasted the publication by European newspapers of cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed as unacceptable incitement to religious or ethnic hatred.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/02/03/060203161134.7zd6bpnp.html

 

[dmp]

lame.

 

[Democrat4Bush]

So, what's lame? The State Dept. or my opinion of the State Dept.

We brag about bringing democracy to the world and the middle east, yet when given a chance to defend the right of free speech and public opinion we waffle and bend over.

Islamic fanactics have won, we're just waiting for the fat lady to sing.

on Islam

 

[Avatar4321]

Nothing says they don't have a right to show the pictures. I happen to agree with the administration it is inappropriate. But even more inappropriate is the fact that fanatics want to kill the guys who wrote it.

Calling something inappropriate doesnt mean there is an attempt to censor.

 

[Annie]

If the White House does not rescind this statement of the State Department, I'm going to have to do some real thinking. Damn.

 

[Abbey Normal]

If we were dealing with reasonable, rational people, calling it inappropriate might be okay and I'd be right there with you. But with radical Islamists, it's just adding fuel to the fire. . The world may be coming to a crossroads here, whether to either agree to stifle anything angry Islamists find offensive. People everywhere may have to decide if they will allow people with extremely thin skins who see pillaging and killing as a solution to offense, to call the shots

The biggest problem, though, IMO, is that while the current issue is the just the publishing of offensive religious-oriented comics, the list of what is offensive will grow much larger, to include offensive dress, beliefs, etc. The article on the Indonesian storming of the Danish embassy, showed that the attackers were a group that regularly patrols the streets looking for violations of Islamic law. Not to mention the persecution of Christians in some Islamic countries, which I know has been posted in this board in the past. It seems that the very existence of other religions is on the list of things too offensive to tolerate.

While I do not like the idea of offending someone's sacred religious beliefs, I think there is danger in appeasing people who think and act violently whenever they are offended, even if they are right in this instance.

 

[Abbey Normal]

If the White House does not rescind this statement of the State Department, I'm going to have to do some real thinking. Damn.

What are we to do? IMO, a Dem White house would be even less likely to rescind this.

 

[Annie]

What are we to do? IMO, a Dem White house would be even less likely to rescind this.

Then we need another choice.