Comments on The Evil Atheist: Folks, Something strikes me as rather strange in ...

personally, i think they're just finding an excuse...

2006-02-14T03:19:00.000+08:00

personally, i think they're just finding an excuse to create problems.

maybe we should just lock them in a capsule and send them to mars.

hmmm...

you know what is odd. in these countries that have...

2006-02-13T03:24:00.000+08:00

you know what is odd. in these countries that have moslems. its almost always them moslems making trouble ... in france, and now in denmark too.

i do not wish to be prejudiced. but moslems are making it difficult for me to think otherwise. the images on tv. the articles in the newspapers. its not like its all fabricated.

its not a question of which is more important. bot...

2006-02-13T03:20:00.000+08:00

its not a question of which is more important. both are important. freedom of expression IS important. peace IS also important. we do not want to give in into the demands of moslem terrorists. these moslem terrorists should be deported.

moderate moslems should speak up.

many people do not understand freedom. many people think making a decision under the barrel of a gun is freedom.

i hope this does not escalate into a war. if moslems seek understanding and sympathy from the rest of the world, i do no think that burning buildings, killing people, is the way to go about it.

i support denmark! vive le danmark!

Hades:I posted my views with regards to this fraca...

2006-02-11T21:41:00.000+08:00

Hades:

I posted my views with regards to this fracas.

Personally, I feel these fundies have over-reacted, although one must also acknowledge that given the tensions involved (Thanks to the war of terror crap), it was perhaps not the best of time to re-ignite this old world vs new world debate.

Still, I agree with the Danish govt, that freedom of the press is guaranteed by the Constitution.

Sheesh, I wish our constitution was that open.

Sincerely
The Beast

To nomluk:You say free expression doesn't mean you...

2006-02-11T20:06:00.000+08:00

To nomluk:

You say free expression doesn't mean you can abuse and demean others irresponsibly'. I say being a muslim doesn't mean you can incite huge riots and destroy buildings and cause death, injury and damage. Much has been made about Islam being a tolerant faith. The 'live' pictures we see on BBC and CNN everyday do not support that view. Based on the evidence at hand, if I say Islamists are violent and bloodthirsty, I am right. First they attacked the Danish embassy, burned Danish flags, now they 'graduate' to attacking the French and Americans. What are these people trying to do? I'm sure they will declare war against the 'infidels' soon. Maybe they will declare all non-Islamic countries god-forsaken and we'll have a fucking world war again.

Hades has said that Muslims should condemn Islamic terrorism with the same fervor as they conduct protests against the caricatures depicting the prophet in an 'unseemly' light. I agree with him totally. But when some 'holy jihadist' blows himself up along with innocents, many of whom are children, do we see Muslims marching and condemning the terrorist attack and lambasting the terrorists as 'un-Islamic'?

NO!

I ask you this question. Which is more important - a cartoon, or good sense and peace? Answer me this.

Hades's support of the freedom of the press should be lauded as the thinking of a civilised and intelligent man. There is NOTHING wrong morally, nor is this a criminal offence. He has every right to his opinion.

Pervert.

You seem to value 'right to freedom of expression'...

2006-02-10T15:40:00.000+08:00

You seem to value 'right to freedom of expression' above all else.

I feel this is only secondary compare to more important things like harmony, safety and good living environment.

No need to repeat all your argument about muslims ...

2006-02-10T14:53:00.000+08:00

No need to repeat all your argument about muslims should protests against the terrorist acts or the consequences caused by the publication of the cartoons.

The thing is you said they have a right to publish all in the name of freedom of speech but they should not.

I said the tone of your posting is that they have not done wrong and that muslims should be open-minded enough to tolerate that.

Actually, right from the start you already appear to be on the publishers' side. This is supported by your repeated citing of the universal freedom of free expression.

And to add, the right to freedom of expression is ...

2006-02-10T12:47:00.000+08:00

And to add, the right to freedom of expression is universal. Read the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19.

Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Shall we say "Checkmate"?

I didn't say that. I said that muslims should prot...

2006-02-10T12:41:00.000+08:00

I didn't say that. I said that muslims should protest the bombing of buildings with equal fervour as protesting the desecaration of their prophet in a nondescript newspaper in Denmark or else run the risk of appearing hypocritical.

RE: The right to expression.
The Danish paper had the right, under Danish laws of freedom of expression (read the relevant statute if you will, I am not in the habit of pulling statements out of my ass), to publish those papers. The law specifically states: (Constitution Act Cap 77)
"Any person shall be at liberty to publish his ideas in print, in writing, and in speech, subject to being held responsible in a court of law. Censorship and other preventive measures shall never again be introduced." He did have the right, so you're proven wrong. He shouldn't have done it but he had the right to.

There is no ground for slander and/or libel because the cartoons refer to someone (P. Muhammad) who cannot even be considered real, much alone alive. Nor can there be any specific person or group that can with any degree of seriousness, attempt to call the paper to court for libel (Of course with this hysteria they might want to do something just to shut the zealots up but that's a different issue).

You choose to read individual statements without understanding contexts and them lump them willy nilly. The first statement was said in this context: So what if some Danish paper published a cartoon on Muhammad? In what way has the life of an individual muslim been affected? In what way has his "service to the Lord" been affected? Why give a shit?"

The question is a perfectly valid one. Why should muslims worry more about some ragtag paper in Denmark so much more than the supposed threat to their religion posed by religious zealots out to bomb buildings filled with women and kids? Isn't their half hearted attempts at denouncing terrorism while getting up in arms about a cartoon saying something? Where were these protests against those who kill when Sep 11 happened? Where were these protests when JI set off bombs in Djakarta and Bali? Where were these protests when Lashkar e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad attacked the Indian parliament?

The second statement, re: the refusal was said in this context:
"If most muslims think that acts of violence against the innocent are far greater crimes than some non-muslim saying something against islam , then they should say so in no uncertain terms. This refusal to be open minded and living in a 3rd Century mindset has no place in today's world."

Have you seen some of these protests? They want to kill the idiot who came up with the cartoon. Isn't that a tad too harsh a punishment for a cartoon? Is this being open minded?
Again you have shown yourself to be someone lacking in the ability to read things in context. You seemed to have taken a stand right at the start of reading the rant, and then pried sentences out that seemed to support your stand (That I don't know what I am talking about) with no regard to their contexts and then trying to hit me over the head with it. A tactic, I might add, that fundies often use (with lesser name-calling of course)

"So what if some Danish paper published a cartoon ...

2006-02-09T22:22:00.000+08:00

"So what if some Danish paper published a cartoon on Muhammad? "

"This refusal to be open minded.."

Blockhead, your tone implies that there is nothing wrong only that the muslims are not open-minded

nomluk, read what I wrote before running your mout...

2006-02-09T20:34:00.000+08:00

nomluk, read what I wrote before running your mouth off. I said yes. the cartoonist has a RIGHT to publish those cartoons, but just because one has the right to, doesn't mean one should.

'right of free expression' - you sounded like a sc...

2006-02-09T13:28:00.000+08:00

'right of free expression' - you sounded like a schoolboy who just learnt this and was so excited

blockhead, free expression doesn't mean you can abuse and demean others irresponsibly

Your last sentence does a disservice to people liv...

2006-02-09T12:16:00.000+08:00

Your last sentence does a disservice to people living in the 3rd century.

You wrote as if religion is a rational thing, so e...

2006-02-09T09:58:00.000+08:00

You wrote as if religion is a rational thing, so easy to judge right or wrong. Religion is not rational and not all religions are the same. You insult one religion and you might just get a scolding; but with another religion it might be vastly different.

Of course if everyone thinks like you there will be peace. But if some others who think like you go and say or do some insensitive thing, there will be trouble.