I figures since it is a comminity discusion it would only make scence. Its like talking about a Picaso painint and not looking at it.
You have a rather twisted view nexxo, as if you look at it, religon has been used as an excuse for wars by sick people in but a few circumstances. Religon has given a great deal to the world, Mother Theresa, Ghandi, hundreds of christian, hindu, muslim and other religous charities. People have a way of seeing what they only want to see, and although atrocities have bee comitted in the name of religon, atrocities have been comitted in the name of the queen, country and peace to. Do not get it twisted, religon is not the reason for war, it is mans nature, religon has been used in a few circumstances to cloak some peoples evil nature, but a great deal of good has been done through religon, and although a select few religous people may be evil, the majority are far from it. As far as the bible goes, all violence is sondemed, and although some "religous" people do not follow this, the majority try to adhere to this principal. If we want to have a multi cultural society, we have to start respecting the beliefs and views of others. Its not hard to hold yourself back from telling a joke about what someone holds dear to them. What real benefit do you gain, a minute or two of laughter whilst causing someone real upset.
there is freedom of speech and there is also tasteful disgresion, putting a picture of a religious prophet with a bomb for a hat or what ever it was is very bad taste. Now i'm not religious and i do think burning places and rioting is unaceptable, protest peacefully in numbers! i think more of a point should also be made to seperate extremists from their claimed religions as well, the media cause a lot of the trouble by bad reporting. i mean bin laden may think he is a good muslim but thats only because he has adapted a peaceful religion into his own, it's like saying hitler was a good christian! come on, why are people so ignorant to the media! treat everyone with repect and expect it in return, if they don't show you any then ignore them, if they persist, deal with it peacefully. (sorry for mistakes, rushed this b4 a lecture)
You have called this forum "hostile to religion" but so far have always been the first to directly insult people and their views in your posts (I refer you to your post (#22) in this thread, and your posts #26 and #28 in the current one). Meanwhile although disagreeing with your views, we have nonetheless addressed you with common politeness and respect and without making personal insults. Before you advocate respect for other people's beliefs, you might want to actively demonstrate some yourself. If that is not too twisted a view to take. Incorrect. Religion has been used as an excuse numerous times, by numerous authorities. Crusades. Jihads. Inquisitions. Persecutions. Genocides. Moreover, religious texts are full of wars in the name of God too --and endorse them wholeheartedly. Religion is a very effective way of getting a large group of people to work together towards a common goal. It is an effective psychological mechanism for organising your followers and de-humanising the enemy. Other frameworks work as well --Nationalist pride, ethnocentrism, racism-- but religion has had its share of abuse. In my previous post I have pointed out the importance and usefulness of religion in human functioning, and I never said religions were the cause of wars (that would be a massive oversimplification). However many people do charitable works, are kind to their neighbours and small animals and even sacrifice themselves for the greater good on no more than humanist or personal principles. You do not have to be religious to be magnanimous or good. Just like there are, as you point out, sick and evil religious people, there are good and kind atheists. The Bible may condemn all violence, but the Old Testament in particular is an ongoing list of wars, killing infidel tribes and taking their land in the name of God (and feeling good about it). Which brings me to my next point. Religions put themselves in a special position. You cannot claim the moral high ground and that somehow you are special, and have a unique relationship with God that the non-believers don't, and judge other people's behaviour and lifestyles on that basis, and then behave in exactly the same humanly fallible, evil or selfish ways as the rest of humanity. If you claim to be enlightened, people are going to expect some enlightened behaviour of you. And if you fail to do so, people will feel that you're a fraud. And that is the big PR problem that religions are suffering. Neither is it that hard to refrain from personal insults or offensive remarks in your posts just because someone disagrees with your views. Think about it.
Apologies if i caused offence to you in my previosu post, because it wasnt meant, all i am saying is that you have twisted view on religon, meaning that you only see the negative things it has done. My comment #22 was justified, as these people are passing judgement on something which has nothing to do with them, and if you look at the context of #26, I was infact not being treated with politeness. Furthermore although I am christian by background, I am hardly an advocate for the religon, and thus do not take my actions to represent the faith as a whole, as I am far from it. My last point and post on this matter is this, on these boards althogh one is open to free speech, certain things have been censored for the better of the community, such as swearing, as this may cause offence to a select few. This is totally justified, and although it partially removes the right to free speech it is for the better of the community. In the same way, if one was to censor out these needless images, although it would put a slight limit on free speech, it would be for the better of the community. You cannot have double standards, just as swearing offends people on here, the mocking of someone's faith offends others.
The whole thing is hypocrisy extremus... For a religion that professes peace and forgiveness and tolerance it is probably the least in all of the above categories. Someone needs to get a grip, Its a freaking cartoon... People who live in a free and democratic society should back wholeheartedly the right of someone to do this, otherwise you are opening up a whole can of worms where freedom of speech and expression are involved. Take for example things like political cartoons. Politics can be just as polarized as religions, yet I dont see democrats and republicans (Im American) out in the streets threatening to kill each other over a cartoon. I dont see President Putin threatening nuclear war over a derogatory cartoon in some paper or another. etc etc and so on. But back down on this, and someday you might find it is against the law... I find a lot of things offensive, does it give me the right to threaten someone, or destroy property or cause bodily harm? Not anywhere I have ever lived. When in Rome..... If people that live in Denmark, Norway etc have a problem with the cartoons, it is their right to peacefully protest. Dont buy the freaking paper anymore. If they live in a democratic country, then they should realize that. This is not Afghanistan, nor Iran, nor Syria or any of the other multitude of countries where religious zealots control the goverment and make the laws. Problems with that? Then they should move back where they feel more secure and have everything filtered for consumption. As far as Im concerned I think about 100 million T-shirts/Baseball Caps/Coffee Mugs should be made up with the cartoons in question, (Though I only found a couple that were pretty funny).
In my opinion (and anything that starts with those words is bound to offend) it would seem to boil down to two problems. Interpretation of the western world's right to freedom of speech and complaints that Islamic Laws (and to be fare all religious Laws) are not always legally enforceable in western counties. In view of point one, the freedom of speech does include the right to offend, it's integral to the right as pretty much any statement will offend at least one person in the world. However the freedom of speech does not include the right to intimidate and threaten. The right is there to enable people to have reasoned and unreasoned discussions with out threat of prosecution, it is not there to allow those that shout loudest or forcibly coerce others to "win". On the second point western laws have been developed and mutated throughout the years to follow alongside current morality, hence why it is still illegal to kill but no longer illegal to not be a Catholic (few hundred years), slavery now being illegal and even down to homosexuality in the last few years. Religious laws however do not evolve (or evolve at a much slower rate) hence the American Bible belt’s interpretation that same sex sex is wrong, and the Islamic (extremist?) view that anyone who insults the profit should be killed. To my mind Religious laws are not above the actual law of the land, and if you view is against this move to a country where the laws are same, this is to all religions, all peoples all creeds past present and probably future. Otherwise use your religious laws as your own moral compass and not other peoples.
The offensive way in which you put your opinion was absolutely not justified. Nobody had made any offensive, derisive or insulting remark about you or anything you had said. In fact, your first insult was at allforcarry who hadn't even replied to anything you had posted at all. Your second insult was at specofdust, who did not say anything to personally insult you. So sorry, but I do not consider that a valid excuse. You advocate respect, you demonstrate some respect. Otherwise you have no credibility. Which is, incidentally, exactly the PR problem that religion is suffering from as I outlined in my previous post. However if your belief system inherently and openly judges and criticises others, you can expect to get some in return. If you make statements that others could reasonably consider offensive, you can expect some offensive remarks in return. Isn't that how you justify your offending posts above?
Actually both posts were offensive tome, as my mum comes from a middle eastern background, and allforcarrie called them "f***ers" thus insulting much of my family, and my father is a vicar, thus insulting my father by calling him petty.
Sorry, but I think that you are wildly grasping for excuses now. If allforcarrie's post was that dumb or offensive, you could have pointed that out in a more eloquent way (I mean, it wouldn't be hard) or reported it. Just because your father is a religious person, and specofdust states that religious people can be stupid and petty, does not automatically imply him stating that your father is. Unless you think that all religious people should be above and beyond criticism based purely on the fact that they are religious. Which is exactly the point I am making about putting yourself above the rest and then wondering why people resent you. In short, they did not insult you personally, directly, knowingly, or intentionally. You however, did. You've had warnings in two threads now. At the third, suspension will follow. You are intelligent and eloquent enough to make your points without resorting to personal insults.
As mentioned earlier for a religion thats founded on peace and forgiveness it has turned out to be the most fanatical and extreme from others. The cartoons printed were wrong i agree and common sense should have been used but they excercised their freedom in their own country which they were well within their rights to do. Also i should point out that the Islam religion wasnt the only one offended in the drawings, others were also but you dont see them going ape **** which basically justifys the drawings when they showed Islamist fanatics being terrorists as the protestors went on to show - Ironic isnt it? What i find incensing is the fact that these protestors are trying to impose their beliefs on everyone - Fine the eastern societys are much less freedom orientated and tolerate far less from the individual with religion being much stronger but by all means dont impose it on everyone, others value their own beliefs and liberty and if a people like the protestors can justify their actions using their Religion as an excuse i think they need to seriously reconsider which faith they follow because i highly doubt ANY religion condones such actions - Far from it actually.
So one can get banned for describing someones views, that middle easterners are f***ers and would tear each other apart, as "idiocy", and calling a person "pathetic" because they can not make their own mind up without the help of childish cartoons, yet when one labels middle easterners as "f***ers" and religous people as "petty" there is no repremand. I personally would call that "idiocy" and quite "pathetic". You yourself said "religon is an opiate for the masses", saying that we are deluding ourself with false realities, which i find extremely hurtful and derogatory. I find that offensie, however you will not be suspended for it. Members have said "ban religon", offensive and rude yet you overlook that matter for some inexplicable reason. If I was to say "ban homosexuals" I'm sure everyone would be outraged. Ban me if you will, but if you do, you will just be exposing the double standards you impose as a moderator.
It is interesting to consider that the same Danish paper has, in fact, published cartoons on Christian or Jewish subjects before. Also, many Arab papers in the Middle East frequently publish cartoons making fun of Christian or Jewish subjects. Gotta love those double standards... One protester here in the UK, who deemed it appropriate to dress up as a suicide bomber to protest against this heinous insult to his religious principles, turns out to have an outstanding conviction for crack-cocaine and heroine dealing. Obviously not as bad a sin in the eyes of his Lord as printing a few cartoons of poor taste. Danish troops also came under fire in southern Iraq. Shots were fired at a patrol as it helped children who had been hit by a car near Qurnah (none of the soldiers or children was injured, luckily). Obviously it is much more acceptable to shoot at people who are helping children after a car accident (and the children themselves, indirectly), than it is to print a defamatory cartoon. I'm sorry, but regardless of whether those cartoons were in poor taste or not, or disrespectful or not, or unwise or not, someone should be able to knock out a few bad cartoon without a fifth of the world population mentally coming apart at the hinges and behaving in the most despicable ways. If people demand respect, they should demonstrate behaviour that earns it.
I think it is kind of funny that a small Danish newspaper could cause such a stir. I didn't think there would be so many subscribers to a Danish paper in Syria or Iran. Basically, I think this is being blown way out of proportion. I mean the origin seems to be a Danish childrens book author with what seems like good intent towards the Muslim community trying to hire an artist. I've seen the cartoons and the english translation, a few are funny. Most are making light of how blown out of proportion the origional depictions were. Sure, ban idology. Worship of idols is banned in Christianity too ya know. But, do it in your own country. just my 2p
I'll say this, and I don't mean it as offensive against Bit-tech, but maybe rather against the militaristic and violent muslims, but its a sad day when your average joe has to go to the BNP website to actually see what the news is on about.
No, calling someone on the forum an "idiot" (as in: "your idiocy", not "the idiocy of your view"), or "feeble" and "pathetic" does. Again, it is personal insults that are banned. And again, specofdust merely said that religious people can be petty. Like you conceded they can be evil. Because it is not a PERSONAL INSULT! Who is this "we" I supposedly talked about? Are you getting the concept of PERSONAL INSULT yet?!? Actually, people frequently make derogative remarks about homosexuals and we generally let it pass (and nobody gets outraged and starts name calling --not even the gay forum members) --because it is not meant seriously, like "ban religion" in this instance is not meant to seriously advocate torching churches and mosques. It is not a PERSONAL INSULT. You are just choosing to make it a personal insult. As thousands of protestors are currently doing, over a few sodding cartoons. Well, I'm sorry, but that's your choice and not down to anyone else. I've been here many times before, with many people, listening to increasingly ludicrous arguments about why their behaviour is acceptable and others' isn't, and why they are right and we are wrong. Frankly, I don't care. You're not some whining child, you're an intelligent adult. Behave accordingly. Shape up, or ship out. Other mods would have banned you by now.
