Clash of civs, Pt.1: Denmark vs Islam

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Fvck Islam! Fvck Christianity! Fvck Judaism! Fvck Hinduism!

Atheism!

Under Islamic law , your statement "Fvck Islam!" is punishable by death . Muslims will want to kill you . Christians , Jews , and Hindus can and will take the joke .


Agnosticism

[Winston]

Originally posted by Az
f*cking pussies.

Come on, at least award a

You will notice they didn't apologize for having printed the cartoons in the paper, but rather for how they had turned out to indisputably cause offense to a number of Muslims. Which was wholly unintentional on their part.

They have not and will not apologize for exercising their free speech. But don't expect this point to be over-emphasised too much in the days ahead..

Another thing worth noticing is the wording of the last paragraph,

Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten takes exception to symbolic acts suited to demonise specific nationalities, religions and ethnic groups.

I perceive this to be a clear (though not too straight-forward) condemnation of yesterday's burnings of the Danish flag by Palestinians - and the developing boycott of Danish products by Muslim consumers.

Incidentally, Danish Bishops have pointed out that the burnings of the national flag also constitutes a desecration of the Christian faith, since the flag features a cross so prominently.

However, I don't suppose appealing to any sort of deeper thought activity will make much difference to the minds of the Martyr Brigades currently parading themselves around.

[Az]

You will notice they didn't apologize for printing the cartoons in the paper, but rather for how they had turned out to indisputably cause offense to a number of Muslims. Which was wholly unintentional on their part. But don't expect this point to be over-emphasised too much in the days ahead..

Well, you have to know, if you're printing something like this, you're bound to piss off people - if they're fanatical bastards. I fully support your paper's right to piss them off, however saying that they didn't know what a ****storm it will cause is dishonest.

[Winston]

They were printed as an exercise to test the extent of self-censorship among cartoonists and illustrators with regard to Islam. As I pointed out earlier, 45 cartoonists were invited, of which 12 accepted the bid. The rest were intimidated into not wanting to touch this subject with a ten foot pole.

It all comes down to, should we in the West tailor our exercising of free speech to suit the sensitivities of fanatical Muslims?

Jyllands-Posten did not think so, and I don't believe they've changed their minds, but they have stretched themselves to the threshold of pain to accomodate the criticism they have been receiving. They've done so because this is no longer about the newspaper itself, it's about Danish citizens here and abroad, our troops in Iraq and elsewhere, $1.2 billion in exports and thousands of jobs. If it were just about the paper (as it should be, everyone seems to overlook this) they'd have taken it in stride, like any proper newspaper would.

[germanos]

Originally posted by Winston

Incidentally, Danish Bishops have pointed out that the burnings of the national flag also constitutes a desecration of the Christian faith, since the flag features a cross so prominently.

Does this make the Bishops as dense as the islamists? Or am I missing something.

[Az]

Does this make the Bishops as dense as the islamists? Or am I missing something.

"pointing out" != going ape**** insane.

[Winston]

Originally posted by germanos
Does this make the Bishops as dense as the islamists? Or am I missing something.

Yes, you're missing that the Bishops didn't throw a fit over it, or toured the OECD countries with false claims of 10 times the flag burnings, calling for condemnation and boycott of Arab products. Those were the Danish Imams who took such comparable action..

The Bishops pointed it out and then went about their business.

[germanos]

I agree that pointing out is a different matter then calling for a boycott or worse.

However, it seems dense to me that an action against a national symbol is seen as an action against faith.
In other words: while the muslims are pissed because they are insulted by the cartoons mocking Mohammed (as they were intended), the christians are pissed because a secular symbol is mocked.
(Denmark IS still a secular state, isn't it?)

[Saras]

Originally posted by Winston
Or why not get a nice Vestas windmill for the back yard?

Vestas
Enercon

[Winston]

Originally posted by germanos
I agree that pointing out is a different matter then calling for a boycott or worse.

However, it seems dense to me that an action against a national symbol is seen as an action against faith.
In other words: while the muslims are pissed because they are insulted by the cartoons mocking Mohammed (as they were intended), the christians are pissed because a secular symbol is mocked.
(Denmark IS still a secular state, isn't it?)

It is a minor point, suited to point out the double standards under which the flag burners are operating.

But you seem terribly keen on discussing the minor points of this, while being seemingly content to avoid the larger issue of Muslims behaving like the world is going to end.

And again you fabricate things to support your case; the cartoons were not intended to mock Muhammed, as has been explained numerous times.

You're a Muslim apologist aren't you?

[germanos]

Originally posted by Winston


It is a minor point, suited to point out the double standards under which the flag burners are operating.

But you seem terribly keen on discussing the minor points of this, while being seemingly content to avoid the larger issue of Muslims behaving like the world is going to end.

And again you fabricate things to support your case; the cartoons were not intended to mock Muhammed, as has been explained numerous times.

You're a Muslim apologist aren't you?

A cartoon is by definition intended to mock somebody or something IMO. In any case, from what I understand of the situation, the cartoons in question were meant to explore the limits of mocking (depicting if you wish) Mohammed. As the intention was to search for the limits of doing so, I think it's hard to argue that the cartoons were meant to be totally harmless for muslims.


With regard to the small/big issues:
To me the muslims are not behaving like the world is going to end. (BTW, does the capitalation of Muslims mean the whole community? or do you mean some muslims?)
Therefore I do not think it is such a big issue.

I'm not terribly conceirned about the Bishops either.
It did however raise the question I asked.
It's easy to discard questions by saying they are small issues and do not need to be adressed.

I fully agree with you that the Bishops statements show the double standards involved, AND it shows that the double standards are not solely to be found in the muslim world.
I will even say that the Bishops show the same hypersensitivity you accused the muslims off.


And if trying to point out that muslims have more in common with the rest of the world-population then they are different, then yes, you may call me a muslim apologist.
And yes, if not getting worked up if muslims burn a Danish flag and refuse to eat Lurpak for whatever silly reason, then you may call me a muslim apologist.
Throw me in a box that's most convenient to you.

But I AM not a muslim apologist, nor an apologist of any other kind.

[VetLegion]

Originally posted by Winston
They were printed as an exercise to test the extent of self-censorship among cartoonists and illustrators with regard to Islam. As I pointed out earlier, 45 cartoonists were invited, of which 12 accepted the bid. The rest were intimidated into not wanting to touch this subject with a ten foot pole.

Too many accepted. I can't fathom over a third of people in a normal population volunteering to mock a religion (any religion) and having it published.

[BeBMan]

Why not mock a religion? There are other things mocked every day in the media, why should religions be treated differently?

And cartoons and satire are usually expected to be "overdone" and most people know it, and take that into account.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Winston

You're a Muslim apologist aren't you?

Wait, do people generally have to apologize for being muslim?

[VetLegion]

Originally posted by BeBro
Why not mock a religion? There are other things mocked every day in the media, why should religions be treated differently?

You don't piss off a majority of people if you can help it. OK, so religions aren't really all that important in the west, you can mock them now and then. One of the last things that is almost universally accepted in the west is the notion that paedophilia is bad, very bad. Yet, I've never seen society's stance on that mocked. Not just cartooned, but mocked so that the sting is against the commonly held belief.

Imagine a cartoon with a guy saying "Paedophiliacs are evil" and the guy being depicted as a crazy fascist or something. Imagine a magazine running a series ridiculing the hatred of paedophilia.

It would be in bad taste. It wouldn't be funny. You wouldn't laugh, at best you'd be "WTF?". And how many cartoonists would respond to the call to submit such work, I wonder. 12 of 45? Fewer, I think