snowychap Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 And it's 100 people who believe in him. Now someone does a picture of him, and as a result two of his followers go into a cafe and shoot 10 people. The following week, the other 98 people take to the streets in protest about the picture. They would be destroyed for their insensitivity to people who are actually on this planet.The other 98 people weren't out on the streets in protest, were they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YLN Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 And it's 100 people who believe in him. Now someone does a picture of him, and as a result two of his followers go into a cafe and shoot 10 people. The following week, the other 98 people take to the streets in protest about the picture. They would be destroyed for their insensitivity to people who are actually on this planet. The other 98 people weren't out on the streets in protest, were they? Well in a starfish organisation there's only the 100 who are in the religion and they all live in the same commune. Am I attacking the protests, or am I attacking the righteous indignation Muslim people seem to feel in the main about anything that depicts the prophet in a negative light? Probably both, but the former because of the latter. I appreciate that those protesting are not representing every Muslim in London. I suppose I am just attacking the protests. This year Muslims have seen extreme secularism - it was a cartoon. In response there was Islamic extremism - it was murder. And yet judging by yesterday, thousands of Muslims believe their position and perspective hold the high moral ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 And it's 100 people who believe in him. Now someone does a picture of him, and as a result two of his followers go into a cafe and shoot 10 people. The following week, the other 98 people take to the streets in protest about the picture. They would be destroyed for their insensitivity to people who are actually on this planet. The other 98 people weren't out on the streets in protest, were they? Well in a starfish organisation there's only the 100 who are in the religion and they all live in the same commune. Am I attacking the protests, or am I attacking the righteous indignation Muslim people seem to feel in the main about anything that depicts the prophet in a negative light? Probably both, but the former because of the latter. I appreciate that those protesting are not representing every Muslim in London. I suppose I am just attacking the protests. This year Muslims have seen extreme secularism - it was a cartoon. In response there was Islamic extremism - it was murder. And yet judging by yesterday, thousands of Muslims believe their position and perspective hold the high moral ground. So, in the real world, what would you do about it? Is there any way forward that actually addresses the problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YLN Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 And it's 100 people who believe in him. Now someone does a picture of him, and as a result two of his followers go into a cafe and shoot 10 people. The following week, the other 98 people take to the streets in protest about the picture. They would be destroyed for their insensitivity to people who are actually on this planet. The other 98 people weren't out on the streets in protest, were they? Well in a starfish organisation there's only the 100 who are in the religion and they all live in the same commune. Am I attacking the protests, or am I attacking the righteous indignation Muslim people seem to feel in the main about anything that depicts the prophet in a negative light? Probably both, but the former because of the latter. I appreciate that those protesting are not representing every Muslim in London. I suppose I am just attacking the protests. This year Muslims have seen extreme secularism - it was a cartoon. In response there was Islamic extremism - it was murder. And yet judging by yesterday, thousands of Muslims believe their position and perspective hold the high moral ground. So, in the real world, what would you do about it? Is there any way forward that actually addresses the problem? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MC5iP2LFsM0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Well in a starfish organisation there's only the 100 who are in the religion and they all live in the same commune. Am I attacking the protests, or am I attacking the righteous indignation Muslim people seem to feel in the main about anything that depicts the prophet in a negative light? Probably both, but the former because of the latter. I appreciate that those protesting are not representing every Muslim in London.In your analogy you don't appreciate that, though.I suppose I am just attacking the protests.Attacking or criticizing? The latter's fine (as that criticism is there, in turn, to be debated and, if necessary, criticized); the former isn't (as it implies protesting shouldn't be happening). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YLN Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 (edited) Well in a starfish organisation there's only the 100 who are in the religion and they all live in the same commune. Am I attacking the protests, or am I attacking the righteous indignation Muslim people seem to feel in the main about anything that depicts the prophet in a negative light? Probably both, but the former because of the latter. I appreciate that those protesting are not representing every Muslim in London. In your analogy you don't appreciate that, though. I suppose I am just attacking the protests. Attacking or criticizing? The latter's fine (as that criticism is there, in turn, to be debated and, if necessary, criticized); the former isn't (as it implies protesting shouldn't be happening). I'm not sure I see the distinction between attacking and criticizing that you're making there, but yes I criticize them because I don't think they should be protesting. I disagree with the legitimacy of their protest despite recognising their right to do so. Edited February 9, 2015 by yillan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post chrisp65 Posted February 9, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted February 9, 2015 I was hoping that wasn't going to be the response there Yillan. I was hoping for something a little more measured and long term. For me I'd start somewhere like: Ban the teaching of religion in schools - as in teach them religions exist and here are 4 examples, but no prayers and no faith schools. Withdraw aid from countries that do not offer equal secular education to both sexes. Educate at every opportunity. Minimise business and trade with corrupt governments and tyrants to that which is utterly essential and cannot be sourced elsewhere somewhere more enlightened. Admittedly that's all a bit long term and a lot less sexy than the pyro porn of night time tracer fire and explosions. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 I'm not sure I see the distinction between attacking and criticizing that you're making there, but yes I criticize them because I don't think they should be protesting. I disagree with the legitimacy of their protest despite recognising their right to do so.Criticism addresses the subject of the protest; attacking addresses (the) protesting itself.I have a real problem with people suggesting that others should not be protesting just because they don't see validity in their argument (I'm guessing you meant that when you said 'legitimacy' rather than suggesting their protest ought to be illegal) - that seems initially absurd and, on further thought, pretty dangerous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YLN Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 I was hoping that wasn't going to be the response there Yillan. I was hoping for something a little more measured and long term. For me I'd start somewhere like: Ban the teaching of religion in schools - as in teach them religions exist and here are 4 examples, but no prayers and no faith schools. Withdraw aid from countries that do not offer equal secular education to both sexes. Educate at every opportunity. Minimise business and trade with corrupt governments and tyrants to that which is utterly essential and cannot be sourced elsewhere somewhere more enlightened. Admittedly that's all a bit long term and a lot less sexy than the pyro porn of night time tracer fire and explosions. Ah I read your post with a more aggressive, 'yeah well what are you going to do about it?' tone. And I didn't have an answer for it, so I went for that video. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YLN Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 I'm not sure I see the distinction between attacking and criticizing that you're making there, but yes I criticize them because I don't think they should be protesting. I disagree with the legitimacy of their protest despite recognising their right to do so. Criticism addresses the subject of the protest; attacking addresses (the) protesting itself. I have a real problem with people suggesting that others should not be protesting just because they don't see validity in their argument (I'm guessing you meant that when you said 'legitimacy' rather than suggesting their protest ought to be illegal) - that seems initially absurd and, on further thought, pretty dangerous. Is this a distinction you've invented between criticism and attacking or one that is generally accepted as a particular of language? Is English your first language snowy? I ask because every time there is a discussion you always seem to become stuck in the tribulations of your very rigid and unyielding singular understanding of certain words, despite the clarity of the point being made. Legitimacy has numerous meanings outside of a legal context, and legality is obviously the word I would have used had I intended to discuss whether or not their protest was illegal. And then the sentence wouldn't have made any sense. Why would you support a protest without a legitimate argument? If a man went out and began to protest against sheep being red, I would disagree with that too. I recognise that he has a right to protest, but as far as I'm concerned it's a poor use of his time. 'Mate you shouldn't really be doing that', I might say to him. 'It's a nonsense'. Now I'm not denying his right to protest, I'm just saying that not all protests are valid, and in my opinion his is not. There's a difference between disagreeing with someone's right to protest and disagreeing with the legitimacy of their protest. And both positions can be represented by saying 'I don't think they should protest'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 (edited) Is this a distinction you've invented between criticism and attacking or one that is generally accepted as a particular of language?That's an incredibly bizarre question to be put by someone who then criticizes me for a supposed 'very rigid and unyielding singular understanding of certain words'.I was attempting to outline my distinction between (my use of) those words in the context of the discussion we are having. Is English your first language snowy?If you hadn't been a poster on this site for almost eight and a half years then I may have taken that as a genuine question rather than a sly dig. Legitimacy has numerous meanings outside of a legal context...Indeed it does and, though it often also has quite a narrow one when connected with protest, it was made clear in my post that my (correct) assumption was that you were using it as a synonym for validity rather than legality.Why would you support a protest without a legitimate argument? If a man went out and began to protest against sheep being red, I would disagree with that too. I recognise that he has a right to protest, but as far as I'm concerned it's a poor use of his time. 'Mate you shouldn't really be doing that', I might say to him. 'It's a nonsense'. Now I'm not denying his right to protest, I'm just saying that not all protests are valid, and in my opinion his is not.It's not really a question of supporting someone's protest but rather not suggesting that my (or your) subjective assessment of the validity or otherwise of his argument is a good basis for deciding upon whether or not the protest ought to be happening.There's a difference between disagreeing with someone's right to protest and disagreeing with the legitimacy of their protest. And both positions can be represented by saying 'I don't think they should protest'.Indeed but you have missed out the position that has people agreeing with the right to protest (as some sort of abstract principle of a 'free and open democratic society' or whatever people might like to claim we live in) but disagreeing (for whatever reason) with the exercising of that right . Edited February 9, 2015 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugeley Villa Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 I see that thousands of british muslims are protesting in london against the charlie hedbo magazine, wouldn't it be better if they protested against isis for doing such horrible things in the name of their religion ? unnreal but im not a little bit surprised. i know there are two sides to the coin but yeah lets all protest over a stupid cartoon drawing that took the piss out of our so so special prophet. makes me sick and they wonder why muslims are getting a bad name. Did the jewish population of Britain march to condemn Israels mass murder of 2200 people? No, because they live here and not Israel. Same rule for Muslims here surely? dude they were marching against some stupid magazine that apparantly insulted islam, why? why dont they march against isis? probably because they support what they did. excuses,excuses,excuses all the pissing time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 dude they were marching against some stupid magazine that apparantly insulted islam, why? why dont they march against isis? probably because they support what they did. excuses,excuses,excuses all the pissing time. Woah there.....there's a huge difference between not marching against something and actively supporting it. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugeley Villa Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 why are they marching against this stupid magazine? please tell me. after everything that has just happend why are they doing a public protest, why not march against those evil cowards that are killing their own people for not being in their words proper muslims. the whole thing stinks and id put money on the majority of those protesters supporting isis and what they are doing. for crying out loud they are upset because some magazine has insulted their prophet but what about those horrible animals called isis? aint they insulting the prophet by doing all these evil things in his name? nah we will just kick up a fuss about the magazine because they aint muslim. unreal! i dont view all muslims the same so for those that are muslim on here im not digging at you but its the same old bullshit. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted February 9, 2015 Moderator Share Posted February 9, 2015 The people marching against the stupid magazine are a bit missing the point - it's a french magazine, not British for a start. But in a way it's like the EDL who march against whatever it is they march against - they don't represent normal people's thinking. Normal people don't agree with the EDL, and normal muslims don't agree with the ISIS - they're appalled by ISIS - for a start ISIS gives them a bad name by associating their religion with horrific acts and they end up getting grief from idiots because of it. Back to the marchers against the magazine - from our perspective they've picked a dumb act and a dumb time to do it, but clearly they're miffed enough by some french cartoonists (many of whom were murdered) drawing pictures of their idol. Free world and all that. Not a sharp move, but hey ho. In the world we live in, it's the case that taking the mickey out of, or insulting people's invisible sky fairies annoys them (as does calling the various idols invisible sky fairies, I confess) - but anyway perhaps we shouldn't do it if we don't want to upset people unnecessarily. Equally, in the UK, a secular country, it's necessary to accept that it is permitted and held firmly that free speech and comment about religions is a right. In other words you're entitled to declare how great your sky fairy is, and I'm entitled to say "what a load of bollocks" 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugeley Villa Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 the way i see it is that they are saying what happend in paris is justification for apparantly insulting their prophet. they have disguised it well but i clearly see it as support for what happend. they had over 100.000 signatures to represent their feelings and yes its perfectly legal what they are doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted February 9, 2015 Moderator Share Posted February 9, 2015 the way i see it is that they are saying what happend in paris is justification for apparantly insulting their prophet. they have disguised it well but i clearly see it as support for what happend. they had over 100.000 signatures to represent their feelings and yes its perfectly legal what they are doing. They expressed “deep regret” about the Cartoon killings in Paris and called them a violation of Islamic law, which they absolutely were, so I doubt they were "disguising" anything Ruge. Like I said dumb timing etc. but there's absolutely nothing to give any gist they were actually marching about or supporting or excusing anything else, let alone gruesome murders. Why think the worst of people? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugeley Villa Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 did the same people express regret? i know some of the muslim world did but im just on about the ones that done the protest today. lets not march against isis, we will march against some magazine who put a few cartoons of the prophet up. i just dont get it blandy and i think a lot of those there today support what happend otherwise why protest. what gets me is that when some of these protests happen and they start preaching all their bullshit which did not happen today i might add but when other protests happen they shout murder etc etc and use freedom of speech. but they dont like it the other way, if i went on national tv or radio and said something they did not like id be a marked man. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Not sure where this notion of marching against everything and anything comes from. The march is poor timing and not needed in the UK. Many have marched against ISIS fyi, don't assume otherwise just because you have not read about it. ISIS is killing plenty of Muslims. I can do a straw poll of about 1000 Muslims in a few days and I am betting that not 1 would offer even a hint of support. I would say 50% of Khutbahs (sermons) I have been to over the last year and a bit has been about the wrongs ISIS are doing. It's very easy to pain the majority with a view when they don't do something to appease your pre-existing views. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Also have you seen the backlash Muslims have been getting in the name of freedom of speech since the Charlie Hebdo attacks? It's increased tenfold. Things have only got worse for your normal Muslim here in the UK. They will get worse with the counter terrorism reforms being proposed by May. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts