- Joined
- Sep 9, 2005
- Messages
- 34,967
- Reaction score
- 12,363
- Location
- Pennsylvania
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Well Mark, who has suggested that they didn't have a first amendment right to be childish??
The two aren't even remotely analogous... Why did you even bother?
No one deserves to be attacked like that.I'm sure the liberal response after those attacks will be that we deserve it
He's saying that the argument about criticizing the cartoon festival being off base because 1st A is an unrelated argument to the shooting.
Just because they got shot at doesn't mean they were right to do what they did.
Basically.
No.They were right to do what they did because of the Constitution. We have to keep drilling that concept into liberals over and over since they side with the two dead shooters
He's a hero and his family should be proud
Liberals across America are claiming exactly that, they're blaming the victimsNo one deserves to be attacked like that.
No reasonable person would suggest such a thing.
Where were liberals when Christians tried to get government funding cut for alleged art that defamed Christianity?That said, being attacked does not validate stupidity, which I think drawing mocking pictures of the leading figure from a major religion which has violent radical followers...qualifies as.
At the least it qualifies as a somewhat asshole move.
Edit: tl;dr: Being stupid doesn't deserve violence, but violence doesn't make stupid...smart.
No.
The 1st A protects their right to speak, but it doesn't make their speech right.
Both blame the victim even though the victim was well within their rights. You have to own your argument. I merely clarified it for you
I haven't heard of this happening at all.Liberals across America are claiming exactly that, they're blaming the victims
who cares? When someone tries to restrain speech just because it offends them, they are wrong to do so.Where were liberals when Christians tried to get government funding cut for alleged art that defamed Christianity?
Wow, I guess we know how you feel about women in short skirts nowOne is doing something to deliberately incite anger and hatred and the other isn't. Like I said, not even close.
No one reasonable. That was my point.
Just read this threadI haven't heard of this happening at all.
Granted I don't watch the news...but you'd think it would leak into other media.
Good job. You somehow find moral equivalence between Christians and the ISIS attackers. You gotta love liberal thought processeswho cares? When someone tries to restrain speech just because it offends them, they are wrong to do so.
The Christians in that case, and the attackers in this case.
Wow, I guess we know how you feel about women in short skirts now
So do you walk up to little adults and call them ****ing midgets on a regular basis or is the whole, expressing free speech for anything, just a bunch of bull****?
I didn't say that she is guilty of a crime. I said that she holds some blame. Learn to read.
I don't recall seeing any post in this thread blaming the people drawing cartoons for being attacked.Just read this thread
Good job. You somehow find moral equivalence between Christians and the ISIS attackers. You gotta love liberal thought processes
You think that women wearing short skirts is anlogous to those inciting anger from radical Muslims and you think that this somehow reflects poorly on how I view women in short skirts? You analogy and your thought process is ridiculous sophomoric.
Yes, it's a given that when anyone is critical of Islam violence may occur. If that wasn't the case Muslims would be the butt of jokes everywhere.:roll: No, it is simply stupid that they felt they needed to exercise "free speech" like they did. Do you purposely say offensive things to people just because you want to? No, because common decency acts as a barrier to being a rude asshole. Does this stupid lady or her group deserve blame for the violence? No... are they stupid ****ing morons that should have not been intentionally disrespectful assholes that knew that many Muslims would be very offended and that violence might occur? Hell ****ing yes. Only a complete dip**** would not understand this... (not calling you one just to be clear mods)
Sorry, but it's your side blaming the victim. Some things never changeYou think that women wearing short skirts is anlogous to those inciting anger from radical Muslims and you think that this somehow reflects poorly on how I view women in short skirts? You analogy and your thought process is ridiculous sophomoric.
lulzTwo shot dead outside Muhammad Art Exhibit in Garland
This was at a facility in Garland, Texas, near Dallas.
I gather this was an exhibit of artwork that depicts Muhammad, a la Charlie Hebdo, in defiance of radical Muslims and in affirmation of freedom of speech.
Two guys drove up armed with guns and explosives, opened fire, and were killed straight away by return fire.
It's a bad idea to go gunning for any group of Texans without a lot of firepower.
On the musical THE BOOK OF MORMON:
The response of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to the musical has been described as "measured".[70] The church released an official response to inquiries regarding the musical, stating, "The production may attempt to entertain audiences for an evening, but the Book of Mormon as a volume of scripture will change people's lives forever by bringing them closer to Christ."[71] Michael Otterson, the head of Public Affairs for the church, followed in April 2011 with measured criticism. "Of course, parody isn't reality, and it's the very distortion that makes it appealing and often funny. The danger is not when people laugh but when they take it seriously—if they leave a theater believing that Mormons really do live in some kind of a surreal world of self-deception and illusion", Otterson wrote, outlining various humanitarian efforts achieved by Mormon missionaries in Africa in recent years.[72][73]
Stone and Parker were unsurprised:[9]
The official church response was something along the lines of "The Book of Mormon the musical might entertain you for a night, but the Book of Mormon,"—the book as scripture—"will change your life through Jesus." Which we actually completely agree with. The Mormon church's response to this musical is almost like our Q.E.D. at the end of it. That's a cool, American response to a ribbing—a big musical that's done in their name. Before the church responded, a lot of people would ask us, "Are you afraid of what the church would say?" And Trey and I were like, "They're going to be cool." And they were like, "No, they're not. There are going to be protests." And we were like, "Nope, they're going to be cool." We weren't that surprised by the church's response. We had faith in them.
Two shot dead outside Muhammad Art Exhibit in Garland
This was at a facility in Garland, Texas, near Dallas.
I gather this was an exhibit of artwork that depicts Muhammad, a la Charlie Hebdo, in defiance of radical Muslims and in affirmation of freedom of speech.
Two guys drove up armed with guns and explosives, opened fire, and were killed straight away by return fire.
It's a bad idea to go gunning for any group of Texans without a lot of firepower.
The Mormons have demonstrated how a truly sophisticated and intelligent people should respond to criticism or farce, one far removed from many of the barbarians attached to Islam. Perhaps this approach will rub off on some of the more 'moderate' Muslims.Here is how free speech works with a real not-insane religion when you poke fun at it: Also, Parker and Stone have received death threats for their depiction of Mohammed in South Park
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?