Secularism, Muhammed Cartoons and The Sikh Temple Shooting

Brown Bomber · 14-08-2012 12:10am #1

In light of the hate crime committed against the Sikhs in the US I wanted to ask of the secularists on boards if they regret their "draw a Muhammed day campaigns"?

The SPLC's extremism expert Mark Potok is convinced the shooter mistook the Sikhs for Muslims.

Why do you think Page, who clearly was a hate-filled white supremacist, targetted Sikhs, and that too innocent worshipers in a temple?

My educated guess is that this man almost certainly mistook Sikhs for Muslims. It is the same old story that we see every time -- the same old story we saw with Balbir Singh (Sodhi) and those three murders after 9/11.

Republican presidential candidate Romney even referred to the Sikhs as "Sheiks".

I'm not saying that anyone posting here was a direct cause of the attacks or that Muslims, or people who look like Muslims to the ignorant being attacked was the goal, but overall it is an unintended consequence IMO.

Obviously it is not to hard to figure out how an ignorant "patriotic" fool can go from Muhammed with a bomb in his turban - to Muslims are terrorists - to Killing turban-wearing Sikhs.

Nodin · 14-08-2012 12:27am

Wild speculation at this point.

Galvasean · 14-08-2012 12:28am

It pains me to see that BB learned nothing in his absence...

Brown Bomber · 14-08-2012 12:39am

Nodin wrote: »

Wild speculation at this point.

But not without precedent: Sikh leaders fear Wisconsin gunman believed he was targeting Muslims

Hate crimes are common against Sikh's in the US because they resemble the Muslim stereotype -- beard & turban -- a stereotype that is perpetuated by "draw Muhammed day".

Blowfish · 14-08-2012 12:41am

Given that he was a Christian, what the hell has this actually got to do with Secularism?

Sonics2k · 14-08-2012 12:51am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

In light of the hate crime committed against the Sikhs in the US I wanted to ask of the secularists on boards if they regret their "draw a Muhammed day campaigns"?

The SPLC's extremism expert Mark Potok is convinced the shooter mistook the Sikhs for Muslims.

Republican presidential candidate Romney even referred to the Sikhs as "Sheiks".

I'm not saying that anyone posting here was a direct cause of the attacks or that Muslims, or people who look like Muslims to the ignorant being attacked was the goal, but overall it is an unintended consequence IMO.

Obviously it is not to hard to figure out how an ignorant "patriotic" fool can go from Muhammed with a bomb in his turban - to Muslims are terrorists - to Killing turban-wearing Sikhs.

So wait. Because a bunch of people (not just Atheists and Agnostics) drew Muhammed to show that they're not afraid of bunch of psychotic extremist Muslims trying to kill them, it's now their fault than an idiotic, racist, right-wing Christian killed a bunch of people thinking they were Muslim?

Seriously BB, try thinking.

p.s. Romney is a complete moron. Everyone knows this.

Brown Bomber · 14-08-2012 1:01am

Blowfish wrote: »

Given that he was a Christian, what the hell has this actually got to do with Secularism?

1. That just claims he was Christian. Nothing more.
2. His own religion is irrelevant to him being influenced by the anti-Islam agendas of some which include prominent secularists like Sam Harris and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who Breivik referenced in his manifesto.

Sonics2k · 14-08-2012 1:07am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

1. That just claims he was Christian. Nothing more.
2. His own religion is irrelevant to him being influenced by the anti-Islam agendas of some which include prominent secularists like Sam Harris and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who Breivik referenced in his manifesto.

Yeah, because atheist neo-nazi's are so freaking common. It comes down to the fact he was a psychopathic racist.

Stop stretching BB, it's sad.

Blowfish · 14-08-2012 1:14am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

1. That just claims he was Christian. Nothing more.

Perhaps you missed the rather large Christian cross tattoo on his arm? A symbol which incidentally is also fundamentally linked with White Nationalism?

Brown Bomber wrote: »

2. His own religion is irrelevant to him being influenced by the anti-Islam agendas of some which include prominent secularists like Sam Harris and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who Breivik referenced in his manifesto.

If his beliefs are irrelevant to his 'anti-Islam agenda', then why are Sam Harris and Ayaan Hirsi Ali's beliefs relevant to it?

Brown Bomber · 14-08-2012 1:22am

Sonics2k wrote: »

So wait. Because a bunch of people (not just Atheists and Agnostics) drew Muhammed to show that they're not afraid of bunch of psychotic extremist Muslims trying to kill them, it's now their fault than an idiotic, racist, right-wing Christian killed a bunch of people thinking they were Muslim?

Seriously BB, try thinking.

I have no doubt a number of "useful idiots" did it in good faith out of gullibility though surely it's time to think twice if you become idelogical bedfellows with extremists?

Such as the EDL
http://englishdefenceleague.org/forums/topic/78-of-uk-muslims-oppose-free-speech-youtube-99013-2/

White Supremacists at Stormfront
http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t709660/

Jewish Supremacists the JTF
http://jtf.org/forum/index.php?topic=45820.0

Ireland's resident atheist Islamophobe Mark Humphrys
http://markhumphrys.com/islam.annoys.html#edmd

And professional anti-Islam extremists Pam Geller and Robert Spencer
http://spencerwatch.com/2010/05/21/draw-muhammad-day-predictably-descends-into-hate-fest/

Yesterday, May 20th was the Draw Muhammed Day which is extending into today, ostensibly put together to defend freedom of expression/speech. The original creators of the day have backed out, including Molly Norris, due to the tremendous amounts of bigotry and hate that it engendered, but others continued with the campaign.

Taking a glance at the Facebook page, most of the freedumb expressions are hateful and bigoted depictions of Muhammad meant to anger Muslims. Is it a coincidence that the ones who are reveling most in this day are racists and Islamophobes?

Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller have both been utterly gleeful over the event. Unconditionally supporting it, Spencer got in the act himself drawing Prophet Muhammad with a bomb on his head, though the depiction looks a little bit like Spencer himself, and Geller added to the fray by drawing Prophet Muhammad with the face of a pig.

Galvasean · 14-08-2012 1:28am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I have no doubt a number of "useful idiots" did it in good faith out of gullibility though surely it's time to think twice if you become idelogical bedfellows with extremists?

So what you are saying is you are partially responsible for 9-11? Nice.

Brown Bomber · 14-08-2012 1:30am

Sonics2k wrote: »

Yeah, because atheist neo-nazi's are so freaking common. It comes down to the fact he was a psychopathic racist.

Stop stretching BB, it's sad.

Based on reports there is no doubting he was a racist. Non-pschyopathic people do kill people so we can't be sure as to his mental health. Unless you wan't to apply your logic to all terrorist attacks and the perpetrator is then de-facto a pschyopath by virtue of carrying out a terrorist attack then that then completely removes the religion factor e.g. all Islamic suicide bombers are pschyopaths.

You accept he was racist. Was he born racist? how does he become racist?

King Mob · 14-08-2012 1:42am

All of your claims and objections become laughable BB when it's revealed that you believe that all of this was the result of a Jewish media control conspiracy.

If you are so worried about the anti-muslim being sown by something as silly as Draw mohammad day, why are you not concerned about claims that the media is being taking over and controlled by zionist jews and their sympathisers causing the same problem?

Nodin · 14-08-2012 1:43am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

But not without precedent: Sikh leaders fear Wisconsin gunman believed he was targeting Muslims

Hate crimes are common against Sikh's in the US because they resemble the Muslim stereotype -- beard & turban -- a stereotype that is perpetuated by "draw Muhammed day".

...while thats true, it's still speculation to say that he targeted them for that reason. He was not unintelligent, despite being a racist.

dlofnep · 14-08-2012 1:47am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

In light of the hate crime committed against the Sikhs in the US I wanted to ask of the secularists on boards if they regret their "draw a Muhammed day campaigns"?

No. The two events aren't even remotely linked. I celebrate the draw Muhammad day, like everyone else who favours free speech should.

Brown Bomber · 14-08-2012 1:47am

Sonics2k wrote: »

Yeah, because atheist neo-nazi's . There are so freaking common.

Are you confusing Neo-Nazism with Christian Identity? There is no compulsion to be any specific religion to be a Neo-Nazi. Individual groups would have their individual membership requirements but I would expect their religious affiliations to be varied. Timothy McVeigh was agnostic for example.

Brown Bomber · 14-08-2012 1:51am

dlofnep wrote: »

No. The two events aren't even remotely linked. I celebrate the draw Muhammad day, like everyone else who favours free speech should.

Right, but if it became known to you that your "celebration" led to a Mosque being burned down, or a Muslim man being attacked in the street or even a young Muslim kid being bullied in school would it be worth it? To you personally I mean.

Galvasean · 14-08-2012 1:56am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Right, but if it became known to you that your "celebration" led to a Mosque being burned down, or a Muslim man being attacked in the street or even a young Muslim kid being bullied in school would it be worth it? To you personally I mean.

If it became known to you that people reading the Qur'an led to atrocities such as 9-11 would it be worth it? To you personally I mean.

We can do this all day BB. Hopefully now that the shoe is on the other foot you will see just how foolish this whole thread is.

Brown Bomber · 14-08-2012 1:57am

Nodin wrote: »

...while thats true, it's still speculation to say that he targeted them for that reason. He was not unintelligent, despite being a racist.

Agreed, it is speculation. However, a while back I interviewed a bunch of skinheads for a project I was undertaking and while they are very much driven by violence I would say that there is a zero pc chance that they would give up their lives to kill Sikhs when they could just as easily kill Muslims, Jews, blacks or mixed-race people.

dlofnep · 14-08-2012 1:58am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Right, but if it became known to you that your "celebration" led to a Mosque being burned down, or a Muslim man being attacked in the street or even a young Muslim kid being bullied in school would it be worth it? To you personally I mean.

Yes. I'm not responsible for the actions of extremists who completely misinterpret the underlying message of Draw Muhammad Day. Under no circumstances would I ever support, celebrate or link the above acts to the defense of freedom of speech and expression. In fact, the above acts would be completely counter to it.

Brown Bomber · 14-08-2012 2:03am

dlofnep wrote: »

Yes. I'm not responsible for the actions of extremists who completely misinterpret the underlying message of Draw Muhammad Day. Under no circumstances would I ever support, celebrate or link the above acts to the defense of freedom of speech and expression. In fact, the above acts would be completely counter to it.

Okay, but surely there are better ways to defend freedom of speech than fuelling the flames of religious intolerance via bigoted stereotypes?

dlofnep · 14-08-2012 2:06am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Okay, but surely there are better ways to defend freedom of speech than fuelling the flames of religious intolerance via bigoted stereotypes?

I think the whole idea of Draw Muhammad Day is completely lost on you to be fair.

Brown Bomber · 14-08-2012 2:08am

Galvasean wrote: »

If it became known to you that people reading the Qur'an led to atrocities such as 9-11 would it be worth it? To you personally I mean.

Would what be worth it? Perhaps you are not aware tha reading the Koran is not what led to 9/11? In the hypothethical scenario then if someone else reading a book led them to commit terrorism then I would say the reading is not worth it.

I'm not sure if I answered your question correctly. I apologise if so. Would reading To Kill A Mockingbird and then assasinating people have been a better example?

Brown Bomber · 14-08-2012 2:11am

dlofnep wrote: »

I think the whole idea of Draw Muhammad Day is completely lost on you to be fair.

Likewise :pac:

In fairness, thank you, you've answered the question I asked so I wont 't drag it out.

I wonder if everyone else who posted images feels the same?

Brown Bomber · 14-08-2012 2:23am

Blowfish wrote: »

Perhaps you missed the rather large Christian cross tattoo on his arm? A symbol which incidentally is also fundamentally linked with White Nationalism?

The cross is a symbol of white supremacism. So either it indicates that either a) He was Christian b) He was a white supremacist or c) He was both a Christian and white supremacist.

Based on what we know only b and c are possible. Therefore we don't know if he was Christian or not.

Blowfish wrote: »

If his beliefs are irrelevant to his 'anti-Islam agenda', then why are Sam Harris and Ayaan Hirsi Ali's beliefs relevant to it?

Because like anyone else he is influenced externally.

Canis Lupus · 14-08-2012 2:32am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Likewise :pac:

In fairness, thank you, you've answered the question I asked so I wont 't drag it out.

I wonder if everyone else who posted images feels the same?

I've drawn some awesome stick photos of Mo in my time (allah never gifted me the ability to draw anything more detailed than a house with some fluffy clouds and a big yellow sun).

Anyway, I'm not responsible for the actions of others as has been said already.

Hypothetically (lets ignore Iran), if muslims started actively killing apostates should the koran be banned?

Brown Bomber · 14-08-2012 2:59am

Canis Lupus wrote: »

I've drawn some awesome stick photos of Mo in my time (allah never gifted me the ability to draw anything more detailed than a house with some fluffy clouds and a big yellow sun).

Anyway, I'm not responsible for the actions of others as has been said already.

Hypothetically (lets ignore Iran), if muslims started actively killing apostates should the koran be banned?

Well no, as the Koran doesn't proscribe death for apostasy and even if it did and the apostate lived under Shariah Law then the crime would have to be tried in court and found guilty prior to any execution.

That's like saying if Americans (the courts) started actively killing (executing) murderers then should Atlas Shrugged be banned.

Canis Lupus · 14-08-2012 3:25am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Well no, as the Koran doesn't proscribe death for apostasy and even if it did and the apostate lived under Shariah Law then the crime would have to be tried in court and found guilty prior to any execution.

That's like saying if Americans (the courts) started actively killing (executing) murderers then should Atlas Shrugged be banned.

My understanding is that the general agreed stance is that death is the punishment for apostasy. A quick google search and looking at wiki doesn't appear to disagree with this understanding. I'd be grateful if you can provide clarification?

My hypothetical didn't (and still doesn't) include courts

14-08-2012 3:50am

Atheists! I knew it was them! Even when it was the bears, I knew it was them!

Brown Bomber · 14-08-2012 4:17am

Canis Lupus wrote: »

My understanding is that the general agreed stance is that death is the punishment for apostasy. A quick google search and looking at wiki doesn't appear to disagree with this understanding. I'd be grateful if you can provide clarification?

My hypothetical didn't (and still doesn't) include courts

The Koran doesn't proscribe death as a punishment for apostasy; in fact it's the opposite.

For example:

The truth is from your Lord, so whoever wills - let him believe; and whoever wills - let him disbelieve."
http://quran.com/18

and

There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.
http://quran.com/2/256/

And there are others in the Koran and no verses to contradict it. However, the Hadiths do proscribe death for apostasy but it get's complicated as the Koran should always have prevelance over the Haditha, and different sects recognise different haditha, Quranists recognise none and amongst these different sects the opinions and rulings of the jurists and scholars differ throughout the centruries and today also i.e. there is no "general agreed stance".

As for your hypothethical situation if there is a book that is inciting people to violent acts either intentionally or unintentionally then I would like to see it banned, unless it served a higher purpose that I can't think of right now.

MagicMarker · 14-08-2012 8:37am

BB, were you drunk when you started this thread?

Delirium · 14-08-2012 9:04am

Nowhere in the article you linked to in the OP does it suggest that the racist in the story was a supporter of Draw Muhammed Day or secularism.

The guy is an angry disturbed young man. He's a former member of a band whose artwork included pictures of white men beating black men. He is affliated with a racist group that are anti-Jew/black/homosexual/immigrant and since 9/11 now also anti-Muslim.

I don't for one second believe that if secularism or Draw Muhammed day weren't happening in America that this nutcase wouldn't have gone out to hurt people.

Penn · 14-08-2012 9:19am

I do feel guilty. I once made fun of America. The killing happened in America. Therefore, I'm partially responsible.

Do I hand myself in to the local authorities or do I have to go to America? I hate it in America, loads of people are fat.

OH NO, I DID IT AGAIN! NOW SOMEONE IN AMERICA IS GOING TO KILL FAT PEOPLE! WHAT HAVE I DONE?!

Dave! · 14-08-2012 9:29am

Christian white supremacists were hating non-whites for a long time before Draw Muhammed Day. If you want to make a point about that protest leading to deaths, then use the violent protests and riots in Arab countries as the example, because we know that many Muslims in these countries were motivated by this to cause carnage and murder. Suggesting that this guy was involved with Draw Muhammed Day, or that he read Sam Harris or Chris Hitchens, is pure speculation.

pH · 14-08-2012 9:37am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

In light of the hate crime committed against the Sikhs in the US I wanted to ask of the secularists on boards if they regret their "draw a Muhammed day campaigns"?

Artists/People in the secular west draw things - cartoons even. If Muslims feel their religion forbids them from drawing Mohammed then that's absolutely fair enough - but they've no more right to tell me what I can and cannot draw than say a Jewish person has to tell me what foods I can and cannot eat.

No one is forcing a Muslim to draw anything (and rightly so) - no one is forcing a Jewish or Muslim person to eat pork (and rightly so) - what this is about is the unthinking assumption many religious people have that their religious rules should apply to other people. We see a similar thing about gay rights at the moment - if you believe your religion proscribes homosexuality and you find yourself both gay and an adherent of that religion - then by all means live a celibate unhappy life to please the god you believe in; that's your right to practice your religion. However your religious rules do not and should not apply to other people - the very idea they do is ludicrously self centered.

Are you confusing Neo-Nazism with Christian Identity? There is no compulsion to be any specific religion to be a Neo-Nazi. Individual groups would have their individual membership requirements but I would expect their religious affiliations to be varied. Timothy McVeigh was agnostic for example.

Most of that is quite funny - although I agree with you on one thing - bloody murdering terrorist agnostics! I'm sick to death of all the evil atheist memes "Hitler .... Pol Pot ... Stalin ... Bundy" we certainly need to compile a list of sick and crazy agnostics - their hate filled agenda has been allowed fly under the radar far too long - well spotted BB!

Dades · 14-08-2012 10:24am

As someone who sees "Draw Mohammed Day" as a net loss, in terms of what it *achieves*, I don't even think there's merit in your contention, BB.

I do believe the drawings bring out the stereotypes people have, but this is far cry from having any effect on an already extremist individual. A guy like this isn't going to be set off by drawings poking fun, he's going to be set off by reading hate forums or white propaganda, getting dumped or maybe losing his job to a non-"white".

What you're effectively suggesting is that people shouldn't be openly critical of Islam in case it pushes a switch in some nutbag on the other side of the world. Its a hell of an odd situation that you shouldn't criticise something for fear of the reaction from both those who disagree with you, and those that do.

Penn · 14-08-2012 10:42am

In all seriousness, Brown Bomber, correlation does not imply causation. And in this case, there isn't even any tangible correlation.

People draw prophet Muslims worship as expression of freedom of speech and freedom from religion.

White supremacist kills Sikhs.

Now, maybe he thought they were Muslim. Okay. We don't know that, but let's accept the premise for now anyway. There is still no tangible correlation with Draw Muhammad Day, regardless of whether or not you agree with DMD.

Seriously, you're completely grasping at straws here.

Brown Bomber · 14-08-2012 11:35am

pH wrote: »

Artists/People in the secular west draw things - cartoons even. If Muslims feel their religion forbids them from drawing Mohammed then that's absolutely fair enough - but they've no more right to tell me what I can and cannot draw than say a Jewish person has to tell me what foods I can and cannot eat.

No one is forcing a Muslim to draw anything (and rightly so) - no one is forcing a Jewish or Muslim person to eat pork (and rightly so) - what this is about is the unthinking assumption many religious people have that their religious rules should apply to other people. We see a similar thing about gay rights at the moment - if you believe your religion proscribes homosexuality and you find yourself both gay and an adherent of that religion - then by all means live a celibate unhappy life to please the god you believe in; that's your right to practice your religion. However your religious rules do not and should not apply to other people - the very idea they do is ludicrously self centered.

I agree with you. However, I think you missed the point. The issue in this case is not merely drawing Muhammed it is drawing Muhammed, for example with a bomb in his turban. This expands on the stereotype of Terrorism = Muhammed = Islam = Muslims in general.

Muslims are being the victims of hate crimes in Western societies because of this stereotype.

The cartoons are just a component of this. They fan the flames of anti-Muslim hatred, intentionally or not - and some is undoubtedly intentional. And for what benefit? Freedom of speech? Freedom of speech can exist regardless if people draw Muhammed or not.

Brown Bomber · 14-08-2012 11:37am

Penn wrote: »

In all seriousness, Brown Bomber, correlation does not imply causation. And in this case, there isn't even any tangible correlation.

People draw prophet Muslims worship as expression of freedom of speech and freedom from religion.

White supremacist kills Sikhs.

Now, maybe he thought they were Muslim. Okay. We don't know that, but let's accept the premise for now anyway. There is still no tangible correlation with Draw Muhammad Day, regardless of whether or not you agree with DMD.

Seriously, you're completely grasping at straws here.

Did the white supremacists at Stormfront who are pushing this draw Muhammed "as expression of freedom of speech and freedom from religion."

robindch · 14-08-2012 11:40am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

[...] surely it's time to think twice if you become idelogical bedfellows with extremists?

Are you drunk?

Sonics2k · 14-08-2012 11:41am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I agree with you. However, I think you missed the point. The issue in this case is not merely drawing Muhammed it is drawing Muhammed, for example with a bomb in his turban. This expands on the stereotype of Terrorism = Muhammed = Islam = Muslims in general.

Absolutely no more than Terrorism = IRA = Catholic = Irish in general.
I agree the bigotry exists, but don't try blaming the DMD for it. It's just down to simple ignorance and pointless hate. It happens in Islam too.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Muslims are being the victims of hate crimes in Western societies because of this stereotype.

From a minority of people, yes.
There are still people in Britain who associate all the Irish with terrorism.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

The cartoons are just a component of this. They fan the fan flames of anti-Muslim hatred. And for what benefit? Freedom of speech? Freedom of speech can exist regardless if people draw Muhammed or not.

Your Religion states you cannot draw Muhammed. We are not Muslim. Therefore we don't need to follow your rules while we don't live in a Muslim society.

People started to do the DMD because of psychopathic, bigoted, hate filled, extremists who threatened innocent lives for simply being different and not following their rules.

If you want to try and make a connection that DMD and Secularists are responsible for the actions of a racist Christian Neo-Nazi, then I'm just going to go ahead and blame you for 9/11. You are Muslim after all.

Brown Bomber · 14-08-2012 11:41am

Dades wrote: »

As someone who sees "Draw Mohammed Day" as a net loss, in terms of what it *achieves*, I don't even think there's merit in your contention, BB.

I do believe the drawings bring out the stereotypes people have, but this is far cry from having any effect on an already extremist individual. A guy like this isn't going to be set off by drawings poking fun, he's going to be set off by reading hate forums or white propaganda, getting dumped or maybe losing his job to a non-"white".

What you're effectively suggesting is that people shouldn't be openly critical of Islam in case it pushes a switch in some nutbag on the other side of the world. Its a hell of an odd situation that you shouldn't criticise something for fear of the reaction from both those who disagree with you, and those that do.

I'm not suggesting that the cartoons are a direct cause but that they a component of something larger that does cause hatred against Muslims which leads to hate crimes and therefore their merits are questionable.

dlofnep · 14-08-2012 11:41am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Freedom of speech can exist regardless if people draw Muhammed or not.

No, it cannot.

King Mob · 14-08-2012 11:43am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Did the white supremacists at Stormfront who are pushing this draw Muhammed "as expression of freedom of speech and freedom from religion."

Brown Bomber wrote: »

... though surely it's time to think twice if you become idelogical bedfellows with extremists?

Lol, again made hilarious given your theories on who controls the media...

Penn · 14-08-2012 11:46am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Did the white supremacists at Stormfront who are pushing this draw Muhammed "as expression of freedom of speech and freedom from religion."

Did they draw Muhammad?
Only thing I could find about Draw Muhammad Day on their website

Nodin · 14-08-2012 11:54am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I'm not suggesting that the cartoons are a direct cause but that they a component of something larger that does cause hatred against Muslims which leads to hate crimes and therefore their merits are questionable.

The koran is a compononent of Jihadi ideology. Lets ban the Koran.

robindch · 14-08-2012 12:03pm

Nodin wrote: »

The koran is a compononent of Jihadi ideology. Lets ban the Koran.

Iron is used in guns. Let's ban it too, lest we be seen as "idelogical (sic) bedfellows" with the turrists.

Penn · 14-08-2012 12:07pm

Corkfeen · 14-08-2012 12:15pm

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I'm not suggesting that the cartoons are a direct cause but that they a component of something larger that does cause hatred against Muslims which leads to hate crimes and therefore their merits are questionable.

If we're really going to start blaming the cartoons which I don't think are responsible, i'd have assumed that it was the extremists of the religion who threaten people that draw Mohammed are the real issue. There'd be no big deal about it if the event wasn't surrounded by so much controversy as a result of death threats. I do not hate muslims however no religion will impeach upon my rights because of threats against the lives of people who draw him. I didn't actually draw him but i'm fascinated by blaming the event for a psychopath.

We are not guilty by association, it's like people who play Grand Theft Auto are responsible for actual car robberies. Or Catcher in The Rye being responsible for assassinations, nobody should read it!

Penn · 14-08-2012 12:27pm

Corkfeen wrote: »

If we're really going to start blaming the cartoons which I don't think are responsible, i'd have assumed that it was the extremists of the religion who threaten people that draw Mohammed are the real issue. There'd be no big deal about it if the event wasn't surrounded by so much controversy as a result of death threats. I do not hate muslims however no religion will impeach upon my rights because of threats against the lives of people who draw him. I didn't actually draw him but i'm fascinated by blaming the event for a psychopath.

We are not guilty by association, it's like people who play Grand Theft Auto are responsible for actual car robberies. Or Catcher in The Rye being responsible for assassinations, nobody should read it!

Or The Matrix, where someone watched it, thought he was being kept in the Matrix by his parents and killed them.

Again, BAN ALL THE THINGS!

robindch · 14-08-2012 12:33pm

Penn wrote: »

Again, BAN ALL THE THINGS!

It gets worse!! Since the turrists ban things and since we don't want to be seen as "idelogical (sic) bedfellows", should we... ban bans too?

Answers on a postcard please.

Secularism, Muhammed Cartoons and The Sikh Temple Shooting

Comments