Canadian Philosophy Professor Raises Tensions

[BlackCat]

@Elok : those three addons are old news - I think that bbc even displayed the piggiepic as one of the original 12 which they later apologized for. Unfortunatedly, it's very difficult to undo such a mistake.

While those three for certain is insulting - the doggy one even to the single muslim - I don't think they make much difference. Much of the rioting is government controlled and can't happen spontaneous.

[Elok]

You don't think they make much difference, huh?

Lessee:

Muhammad connected with a pig (considered an unclean animal by Islam).
Muhammad associated with demons and sexual perversion.
Muslim methods of prayer explained as a form of bestiality.

You don't think that perhaps those irritate them far more than the other, real ones?

EDIT: Sorry, but just to make this absolutely clear, are you telling me all of you knew they were seeing those three fakes, all this time, and you still thought it was about the lame twelve that really were published? WTF?

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Elok
You don't think they make much difference, huh?

Lessee:

Muhammad connected with a pig (considered an unclean animal by Islam).
Muhammad associated with demons and sexual perversion.
Muslim methods of prayer explained as a form of bestiality.

You don't think that perhaps those irritate them far more than the other, real ones?

EDIT: Sorry, but just to make this absolutely clear, are you telling me all of you knew they were seeing those three fakes, all this time, and you still thought it was about the lame twelve that really were published? WTF?

You are quite rigth that they certainly would offend common people a lot more than the original 12 (noone cared when they were published in an egyptian paper back in october), but I'm not sure that they actually are that known outside the group the danish imams visited - if that was the case, they for certain would have been on display instead of those that actually has been amongst the protesters.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
C0ckney

I agree. As someone from a Jewish background, I don't go burning flags in the street about the decades of crap the Arabs have published about my people. The cartoons were not, imho, published with malicious intent; and like I've said in another thread, analysing religion is what we do in the West with our free intellects. Muslims should be grateful that they're being treated as we treat all religions.

Brits will note the new Kleenex adverts, with the Buddhist sneezing into a tissue that "kills 99% of bacteria".

I don't agree. I think they were designed to be provocative, and that it was a mistake to publish them. There are better and more mature ways of making the point than putting a bomb on Muhammad's head.

But this doesn't change the fact that a college is probably the best place to talk about them now that they are out there.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Agathon


I don't agree. I think they were designed to be provocative, and that it was a mistake to publish them. There are better and more mature ways of making the point than putting a bomb on Muhammad's head.

Isn't that the nature of caricatures ? that they are provocative and might stir up emotions ? Another thing - it seems that people only see the 'bomb in turban' pic, and ignores the rest. A couple of them actually says that JP are making a PR stunt; other are making jokes; some even adress the original problem.

None of them actually goes beyond any limits of what is common in danish satirical drawing tradition - to be true they are a little mellow

But this doesn't change the fact that a college is probably the best place to talk about them now that they are out there.

It for certain shouldn't be disallowed to discuss them there , but I can't see how you could restrain the discussion to such - they are after all publicly known.

[Asher]

Agathon, et. al., you've avoided one of my questions:

If he was doing his job here, would it also be doing his job if he was pro-Life and posted pictures of aborted fetuses around campus?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Agathon
But this doesn't change the fact that a college is probably the best place to talk about them now that they are out there.

You keep coming back to this by ignoring the process by which he presented the cartoons.

The way he presented them was offensive, not asking for disussion. I am not really surprised some people here are acting surprised people acted the way they did in response -- it seems like something obvious to me, but then again I'm not detached from the real world in my Philosophy bubble.

[Az]

If he was doing his job here, would it also be doing his job if he was pro-Life and posted pictures of aborted fetuses around campus?

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Asher
Agathon, et. al., you've avoided one of my questions:

If he was doing his job here, would it also be doing his job if he was pro-Life and posted pictures of aborted fetuses around campus?

Of course it would, though, I don't know why he should do it across the campus - why not on his office door ?

[Asher]

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Asher

You keep coming back to this by ignoring the process by which he presented the cartoons.

The way he presented them was offensive, not asking for disussion. I am not really surprised some people here are acting surprised people acted the way they did in response -- it seems like something obvious to me, but then again I'm not detached from the real world in my Philosophy bubble.

I don't know what kind of bubble that you are in, but it certainly is detached from the real world.

There isn't anything offensive in him presenting them on his office door. It was a question for debate. If he wanted to offend people, then he would have publiciced them in front of the local mosque.

[Whaleboy]

I don't agree. I think they were designed to be provocative, and that it was a mistake to publish them. There are better and more mature ways of making the point than putting a bomb on Muhammad's head.

Perhaps, but then caricatures are meant to be provocative as someone said, so accepting that they are caricatures, your argument begs the question of whether it is appropriate to caricature Muhammed? I liked the image of Jesus on a surfboard, and I approve of these images!

If he was doing his job here, would it also be doing his job if he was pro-Life and posted pictures of aborted fetuses around campus?

If I may answer his question too, then yes he would. The response of the institution would be a measure of its health, so to speak. If it allows a free discussion as to the nature of the images, why they are posted, and how appropriate it is, then all is well. If there is some hysterial reaction, then there is something wrong on the high levels of that university. Same goes for these cartoons.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Asher

You have totally pwned me with this awesome argument



Please don't elaborate - that will just hurt too much.

[C0ckney]

whaleboy

[StarLightDeath]

If you see a hornet's nest and decide not to stir it up, it's still a hornet's nest and at some point it's going to have to be destroyed. This is the best thing that could ever happen to unite the west against Islam and an all out war is the only way we will ever stop the Islamic threat. This has proven that "moderate" muslims are fewer than many would like us to believe. Their beliefs run contrary to what the West is about. Why is it that it's ok to make art work defiling Christian symbols, but it's not ok to do it with Islam? Why does the liberal media call it art on the one hand, and bigotry on the other? The west needs to unite and soon because eventually it will be too late.