EU to ban Islamic terrorism

[germanos]

Originally posted by Pekka
Furthermore if you think rules and restrcitions help in this matter, you are so wrong it makes my eyes bleed.

Bans never work. The problem is not the usage of this term.

I guess we can't talk about Christian Crusades either, as a historical fact?

Listen, if we can't ban idiotic things from the world. I know you have a hard on for bureocracy and banning things, like socialists do, but please, let's leave it up to the people waht they want to do. Education is the key, transparency and better, more comprehensive policies, NOT bans and rules.

Also part of maturity is thinking about the implications of acts. THere's just nothing good coming out of this ban. This will restrict freedom of press, self censorship and furthermore, you will see about billion law suits about 'european racism'. You sir are just not being on the ball today.

from the OP:

EU officials drafting the guidelines hope that the European Commission and the European Parliament will also endorse the linguistic code of conduct, which will be non-binding.

Deaf, dumb and blind.

Sure, let everybody speak as they wish. Let them use 'ban' when it's not at all the issue at hand and subsequently on...

[Velociryx]

I'd be all for that. And any other image that's associated specifically with any religion, holiday, or organized event.

I mean, if the goal is protecting the gentle sensibilities of those around us, why go halfway?

Banning a specific word will only protect those poor (insert group here) in very specific settings.

Let's ban everything hurtful.

All communication.

All symbols.

Anything not made of Nerf Material (learn to eat with your fingers and get over it).

That'd be a decent start.

-=Vel=-

[Pekka]

" European countries have laws against racial hatred/discrimination or whatever. The phrase "Islamic terrorism" is a phrase that can't exactly be attacked by the courts (especially since most journalists don't even have an anti-islamic intent when saying it), but which has been a matter of concern for integrated Muslims for some time."

YEAH because IT ISN'T HATE SPEECH! I guess we should make it one eh??

You know what's your problem? Your problem is that you think you have the authority to tell the rest of us how we should think, live and act. You think that you should be the author of thinkign what's goof for EVERYONE. You know what I think? I think you should leave peopel alone from your ultiamtely freedom limiting and therefore oppressive views.

You want to ban stupid people. Why don't we just ban them so the rest of us wo n't have to suffer from their idiocy?

Don't think what's good for me or the rest of us. Have the decency and respect to let everyone of us decide what's good for us. OK? I don't claim to know what's good for you, because I'm just not that arrogant. YOu don't think it's a matter of arrogancy, because you are blind to it and don't like freedom.

I freedom so stay out of my freedom.

Listen if I want to post a pic of mohammad with a 'islamic terror' shirt on, laugh at it being naked and have bbq sauce all over me and you think I'm being offensive, you know, IT'S just not YOUR problem OK? Mind your OWN business.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Pyrodrew
As is the image of Mohammed, the EU should ban any image of Mohammed.

Among the images of Mohammed, not all were criticized by associations of integrated Muslims. The bomb-turban one got most flak, and the oppressed-women one did as well (and the bomb-turban indeed implies that Islam is inherently terroristic, just like the phrase "Islamic terrorism").

[Pekka]

germanos, who the **** ever claimed it would be binding and implemented law?

Why don't you just stick to the issues.

[Velociryx]

Germanos: That's a good point, but Pekka's fear is well founded.

In the USA, income tax was designed to be a "temporary wartime measure." It has never been repealed.

Book Bannings have led to book burnings.

Historically, we have a rather large body of evidence that would suggest that if you allow the government to take an inch, they'll take more.

If you start with a voluntary restriction, it'll become a fining offence (gotta raise money to support (fill in the blank) social program. Or pay for the new weapons program. Or something.

This has never happened in history? There is no expectation that it could?

Random thoughts....

-=Vel=-

[Pyrodrew]

a terminology that induces Islamophobi.

Like "Irish terrorism" has done against the Irish?
And "eco-terrorism" has done against environmentalists?

[germanos]

Originally posted by Pekka
germanos, who the **** ever claimed it would be binding and implemented law?

Why don't you just stick to the issues.

Look up the definition of a 'ban' in an english dictionary will you?

[Pekka]

It's all the attitude I see around this article that bothers me the most. Fairly smart people are actualyl for this, blind to the implications and inherently not understanding the basic concept of freedom.

That's worrying.

Stay out of my way, dogs, or you will be slaughtered.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Historically, we have a rather large body of evidence that would suggest that if you allow the government to take an inch, they'll take more.

Funny thing. We have had tons of laws restricting our freedoms (our freedom of murdering, raping, stealing etc.) for centuries, and yet we manage to live in free countries now. How come the Leviathan didn't naturally become toalitarianism everywhere?

[Pekka]

germanos, Look at the topic. THis seems to be a suggestion, not something that is implented in the EU, yes?

I'm talk ing about why we shoujld never take any steps towrads this kind of action, never ever, not even an inch.

But all you can say is 'what about the crying baby jebus'.

[Pekka]

"
Funny thing. We have had tons of laws restricting our freedoms (our freedom of murdering, raping, stealing etc.) for centuries, and yet we manage to live in free countries now."

You just proved my point. You have no idea of the freedom concept AT ALL. Then again you are self proclaimed communist.

But let me help you. If you murder someone, you kind of limit THEIR freedom, YES?? SO it's not a freedom issue in that sense. I know you have difficulties understanding this.

[Pyrodrew]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Among the images of Mohammed, not all were criticized by associations of integrated Muslims.

And not all Islamic associations have criticized the term "Islamic terrorism".

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Pyrodrew
Like "Irish terrorism" has done against the Irish?

I don't know about the stigma (or lack thereof) toward the Irish in Britain during the peak of IRA terrorism, so I can't say.

And "eco-terrorism" has done against environmentalists?

Eco-terrorism has rarely been on the frontpage. OTOH, you have prominent news of Islamic terrorism everyday.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Pekka
germanos, Look at the topic. THis seems to be a suggestion, not something that is implented in the EU, yes?

The suggestion, even when it'll be adopted by the EU (which might probably be the case) will be non-binding. The EU official Termbank didn't suggest to make it binding.

The word "ban" was introduced by Gangerolf, who wanted to make a catchy title