Re: Everybody Draw Mohammed Day!

[Tanker]

Ok logikos what if I said displaying a cross is offensive to my beliefs remove all crosses or Ill release the dogs...with bees in thier mouths? Would you start removing all crosses, or would you realise I don't have that right? If I were Christian I'd probably put more up. Or how about you can no longer ever say a negative word about Darwin or Evolution because "it's offensive"? Or you can't say in any form written, spoken, political cartoons, ect that you don't like the president. Would you bow down to my rediculous demands or would you let me know I don't have the right to infringe on your freedoms?

This is just an act of peaceful disobediance. It literlaly hurts no one. Letting those who would use fear and terror to force others to do things there way know that we won't be cowed and we will fight (not literally necissarily) for our freedoms.

The only time our freedoms are and should be reined in is when they impinge on the freedoms of others. A picture of Mohamed does NOT fall in this catagory.

Here's a couple pictures that wouldn't exist if publishing "offensive" material wasn't allowed.

[theTwiz]

[Dretlin]

No one has the right to not be offended.

I think the lesson is more along the lines of right to criticize and freedom FROM religion.

I agree.

[Logikos]

I have no problem with freedom of speech or offending people per se - I've certainly offended enough Muslims in my time.  What I have a problem with is doing something only because it is offensive.  There are other ways to campaign for freedom of speech that will not have the negative consequences this one will (namely inciting extremist further and turning moderates against freedom).  Add to that the fact that it will do absolutely nothing for freedom of speech, and you have a simply bad idea.

[Logikos]

Ok logikos what if I said displaying a cross is offensive to my beliefs remove all crosses or Ill release the dogs...with bees in thier mouths? Would you start removing all crosses, or would you realise I don't have that right? If I were Christian I'd probably put more up.

How about "OK, well we're going to continue on as usual."

[Dretlin]

I have no problem with freedom of speech or offending people per se - I've certainly offended enough Muslims in my time.  What I have a problem with is doing something only because it is offensive.

I find your total devaluing of freedom of speech baffling. I suspect you see sympathy with offence because your own beliefs come under scrutiny, and you would rather your beliefs were somehow, untouchable to criticism.

[Logikos]

I have no problem with freedom of speech or offending people per se - I've certainly offended enough Muslims in my time.  What I have a problem with is doing something only because it is offensive.

I find your total devaluing of freedom of speech baffling. I suspect you see sympathy with offence because your own beliefs come under scrutiny, and you would rather your beliefs were somehow, untouchable to criticism.

How exactly do I devalue freedom of speech in what I have written on this thread?  I am not saying people do not have the right to draw Muhammad or to take part in EDMD - I am saying that EDMD will be unproductive (in fact, counter-productive) and thus offend people unnecessarily (so I do not support it).  

As for wanting my beliefs to be untouchable to criticism nothing could be further from the truth.  I actively look for good arguments against my beliefs because it is my moral responsibility to do so - in fact that is partly why I'm here on this board.

[philosoraptor]

I have no problem with freedom of speech or offending people per se - I've certainly offended enough Muslims in my time.  What I have a problem with is doing something only because it is offensive.  There are other ways to campaign for freedom of speech that will not have the negative consequences this one will (namely inciting extremist further and turning moderates against freedom).  Add to that the fact that it will do absolutely nothing for freedom of speech, and you have a simply bad idea.

So how is it you know what the moderate Muslim's response to this will be?  Are you a mind reader?  I'd like to think that the greater majority of Muslims, unlike the extremists, are rational enough that they'd just chuckle at this and go on with their days, because in the grand scheme of things it's not going to hurt them, nor do they have to look at it unless they want to.  You can't be offended by something if you never look at it.  It's not like people are planing on taking out billboards to post these drawings on.

[Logikos]

So how is it you know what the moderate Muslim's response to this will be?  Are you a mind reader?  I'd like to think that the greater majority of Muslims, unlike the extremists, are rational enough that they'd just chuckle at this and go on with their days, because in the grand scheme of things it's not going to hurt them, nor do they have to look at it unless they want to.  You can't be offended by something if you never look at it.  It's not like people are planing on taking out billboards to post these drawings on.

I have already seen the shit hitting the fan on the couple of Islamic forums that I go on.  I'd love it if they were able to see past their indoctrination and laugh the whole thing off too, but that is not something people raised in Islamic culture are readily able to do.  Even the most secular Muslims are feeling the need to react to EDMD even though it has been made quite clear that the campaign is not directed at moderates, and that says a lot about the Muslim mind-set.

[philosoraptor]

Regardless, there is a right to freedom of speech.  There is not a right to not have your religious sensibilities offended.  Perhaps you view EDMD as unnecessarily offensive, but I don't think the people who've had their freedom of speech infringed upon would agree.

[Logikos]

Regardless, there is a right to freedom of speech.  There is not a right to not have your religious sensibilities offended.  Perhaps you view EDMD as unnecessarily offensive, but I don't think the people who've had their freedom of speech infringed upon would agree.

They have yet to show what EDMD will actually achieve, do not seem to have considered the consequences or have got on the side of moderate Muslims - it appears to me to be little more than a visceral reaction.

[philosoraptor]

Regardless, there is a right to freedom of speech.  There is not a right to not have your religious sensibilities offended.  Perhaps you view EDMD as unnecessarily offensive, but I don't think the people who've had their freedom of speech infringed upon would agree.

They have yet to show what EDMD will actually achieve, do not seem to have considered the consequences or have got on the side of moderate Muslims - it appears to me to be little more than a visceral reaction.

Yeah and?  The best way to see what it will achieve is to do it.  I don't get why you're defending those who *might* be offended so hard here.  Is the reaction of offended Muslims any less visceral than those offended by having their free speech infringed upon?  And if so, why are they entitled to react this way while others are not?

[Logikos]

Regardless, there is a right to freedom of speech.  There is not a right to not have your religious sensibilities offended.  Perhaps you view EDMD as unnecessarily offensive, but I don't think the people who've had their freedom of speech infringed upon would agree.

They have yet to show what EDMD will actually achieve, do not seem to have considered the consequences or have got on the side of moderate Muslims - it appears to me to be little more than a visceral reaction.

Yeah and?  The best way to see what it will achieve is to do it.  I don't get why you're defending those who *might* be offended so hard here.  Is the reaction of offended Muslims any less visceral than those offended by having their free speech infringed upon?  And if so, why are they entitled to react this way while others are not?

Most rational people tend to think before acting.  I'm not a fan of any visceral reaction on either side, and all such should be minimized.

[philosoraptor]

Okay, but why is it you're arguing so hard for those who might be offended if you claim you're opposed to visceral reactions on ALL sides?  Your bias very obviously seems to be leaning on the side of protecting the sensibilities of the religious from being offended.  Perhaps that's not how you intended it, but it definitely reads that way.

[Dretlin]

How exactly do I devalue freedom of speech in what I have written on this thread?  I am not saying people do not have the right to draw Muhammad or to take part in EDMD - I am saying that EDMD will be unproductive (in fact, counter-productive) and thus offend people unnecessarily (so I do not support it).  

As for wanting my beliefs to be untouchable to criticism nothing could be further from the truth.  I actively look for good arguments against my beliefs because it is my moral responsibility to do so - in fact that is partly why I'm here on this board.

As I have said before, no one has the right to not be offended and you are making a clear concession for that. Religion does not have right to be free of criticism, out of naive respect.

Drawing Muhammad makes the distinction clear - other laws, based on irrational belief, will not be imposed upon you. Make the distinction now, or a greater challenge may be next.