How Much Damage Can A Cartoon Do?

[Paco]

For 10-years I suffered through a hypocrisy known as Roman Catholicism!

I've been saying this for decades, and will continue to do so... religion is a waste of time, is the main reason we have war and they will destroy this world.

So far (from what I've read and heard) two people have died because of mere drawings done in bad taste (something which they are also guilty of), of a 'person' whom some seem to think was a 'prophet'.

The damn followers of the Christian and Muslim/Islam creed have made innocent people (those that that do not follow their blind faith) suffer, for way too long and it will continue so long as they exist! The two are destroying this planet and are by far the biggest concern to humanity... not 'global warming', drugs and all the other false crusades.

[rhys]

oh pleuzz.... cut the drama. that's as bad as all the canadians crying about the Conservervatives being elected in Canada. Well, they took office today and the world hasn't cum to an end. women can still get abortions and gay men can still get married.

religion is what u make of it.

things start going bad when you give up your free will and allow others to make the decisions about what is good and bad for you.

that is what is known as a cult.

[desslock]

Steve, You seem to be under the impression this is some kind of government controlled issue, it isnt, a private business printed the cartoons, the newspapers that printed them are the ones at fault here, not the EU or Denmark.

Think of it like this, if an American adult company published and, distributed illegal adult content (CP, beasty etc), would you be saying that the private company was at fault or the 'industry' as whole?

Well that's not the same. I am talking about newspapers publishing critical cartoons about religion... those newspapers are not guilty of anything!

When we were all frolicing in Vegas last month, I decided to spend one of my evenings at the Hustlaball. Well, the individual who tore my $100 ticket to this forgettable evening was a "Sister of Perpetual Indulgence" .... this individual was clearly acting in a way to either lampoon or arguably defame the Catholic Church.... Whatever it was, you will not see the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence working the door at an official papal visit.

This idea of the ability to comment about religion is a value is clearly a differentiation between our culture and the Muslim one.

Denmark was one of the first places to legalize gay marraige. It is arguably one of the most tolerant places for pornography. It clearly represents the kind of society we want to see... and to watch the governments of the world criticize papers for printing someone's ideas is sad. Plus the protesters have pinned this specifically on the country of Denmark, by attacking its embassies and boycotting its products.

This is the same ideology that calls for you and me to be beheaded in a public square, because as homosexuals we are infidels. I'm sorry if some of you were inconvenienced by having to go to Catholic School, attend church on some days, or whatever - there is a clear difference between religion in the West versus what those guys are practicing.

The Religious Right on their absolutely worst day has nothing on these guys.

Steve

[gaystoryman]

Interesting point of view, but don't you think Steve that some of all this religious fervour in the Middle East also has to do a lot with the countries economics as well as its supposed system of governments?

Frankly while the western culture has evolved with technologies, the middle east and third world nations are still eons behind in many things, including education. Also consider that European culture is relatively older, while many of these Middle East countries are rather new on the scene, such as Iraq...

As for religion, it is what you want to make of it. I don't know if saying that in the west our reaction is less, maybe as a nations our populations don't go around rioting as frequently, but then again, it wasn't all that long ago that they did. The riots in the 60's? I mean that isn't that far back.

Then too, look at the riots whenever the WTO conferences are held in western cities? Isn't about religion, but issues tend to make people irrational at times, if they perceive something as a dire threat.

I think a great deal of what happens over there is due to the economic situations most of the populace find themselves in, without hope or a light at the end of their misery, so they turn to cults or fanatical sects of the main religion.

Considering some of the things said by current western leaders, one wonders what they would do if they were say in charge and had the power that the Iranian Clerics have, as an example?

[desslock]

Interesting point of view, but don't you think Steve that some of all this religious fervour in the Middle East also has to do a lot with the countries economics as well as its supposed system of governments?
I think a great deal of what happens over there is due to the economic situations most of the populace find themselves in, without hope or a light at the end of their misery, so they turn to cults or fanatical sects of the main religion.

I disagree (hehe surprise, eh?)

Saudi Arabia is a country with a fantastic amount of money. Another example: Iran. Those countries' economic situations are a direct consequence of the fact that their governments are heavily dominated by state enterprise mixed in with an unfree society. Another example, all those countries over there only allow newspapers that are state owned.

Maybe that is why those people draw such a link between what a Danish newspaper prints or a French newspaper, and the actual countries of Denmark and France. In their newspapers, if it's printed then that is literally the voice of the country.

One last thing - the state owned oil company in Saudi Arabia is like 100 times greater in wealth and assets then Exxon... which is the largest private oil company in the world. Those people don't need money - they need a new system of government.

And it is not a question of "riots are bad" ... those people are rioting about very specific ideas: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press.

Considering some of the things said by current western leaders, one wonders what they would do if they were say in charge and had the power that the Iranian Clerics have, as an example?

Then you would not be living in a Western country. But then what do you mean when you say "things spoken" by current western leaders?

Steve

[Lee]

Saudi Arabia is a country with a fantastic amount of money. Another example: Iran. Those countries' economic situations are a direct consequence of the fact that their governments are heavily dominated by state enterprise mixed in with an unfree society. Another example, all those countries over there only allow newspapers that are state owned.

They may have money but, they lack something almost every other country in the world has, a mature religion, by mature, i mean one that has been around long enough to understand some of the things written in its texts are complete crap, eating lobster, stoning people to death, etc etc.

All things that Christians DONT take literally, unlike many of the militant muslims.

Maybe that is why those people draw such a link between what a Danish newspaper prints or a French newspaper, and the actual countries of Denmark and France. In their newspapers, if it's printed then that is literally the voice of the country.

Interesting stuff, but, it isnt their newspaper that printed it and, even if it were, there are, no doubt, thousands of Muslims who arent rioting right now, why arent they being given a voice? Simple, because it doesnt suit the needs of the ones who are militant in their beliefs.

And it is not a question of "riots are bad" ... those people are rioting about very specific ideas: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press.

Right but, why are they rioting about these things? Because their specific religion, as it currently stands, is being taken literally which, brings me back to my first statement, their current religion hasnt mature enough yet for them to know any better, it is written, therefore it must be done.

Many of these individuals are using what they [Muslims] have been taught about their religion to get their message across, many of these people really do think that citizens in the Western World are infidels, because that is what they have been taught and, unfortunately, will continue to be taught for many hundreds of years until there is some major changes in their social and political systems. Much like we had a civil war in the US over slavery which one part of the country thought was okay whilst another thought it wasnt.

There actually are Mulsims who dont go around rioting whenever their religious leader tells them to, these extremist groups really dont represent Muslims as a whole, its a case of one group having a much louder voice than the other and, a case of the media putting its usual spin on things to get ratings.

The ONLY time we hear about the Muslim world in the US IS whenever it is directly associated with violence, in any form.

Another thing that i find funny about this whole issue is that, for many, many years Mohammed has been depicted in various forms by various well know artists throughout time, including many Muslim artists, he has been depicted as the devil, as a child molester, as a monster, you name it, Mohammed has been depicted as it throughout the years. If that is the case, why, all of a sudden, have they decided to riot because of some cartoons? Why arent we hearing of Muslims rioting in the United States? If it is such a big issue for them, you'd figure they would all be rioting, all across the globe.

All of that is neither here nor there though, these people who are rioting, arent doing so because of a cartoon, they are rioting because they want to recruit more people for their cause... To eliminate the infidels... Us and, unfortunately, this small group, is going to do all Muslims a huge injustice because all people are now going to hear or read is the word 'muslim' whether it is preceeded by 'militant' or 'right wing' thus grouping them all together as 'bad' in much the same way many people think all Christians are kooks, they arent, its only the militant ones that are the problem.

Regards,

Lee

[gaystoryman]

Course I knew you might disagree, however, when we talk about wealth, there is wealth of a select few while the vast majority live in abject poverty, while in our western society, the wealth does spread down. The middle class is the largest group in a western society, well the poor and wealthy considerably smaller. In Saudia Arabia and other countries, the middle class is what we'd call our working poor for the most part, while the wealthy are indeed super wealthy.

So to me, poverty is the issue. The various revolutions of note, such as the Russian one was built on ending poverty. Bread not Rifles... even the American revolution was about 'unfair taxes' so economics I think is one that plays a much greater role in how people react.

Granted, the news there is indeed state run, and so it is indeed slanted, but so is the free press at times.

I suppose what I am saying is that they turn to more fanatical sects of Islam as it satisfies their need for hope or whatever. They riot against what is perceived by them as something that wants to take away what little they have, for lack of knowing the truth. Yes, they do need a change of government in some respects, but it has to be their will and choice, not an outsiders.

Trouble is we want them to accept our ideas, thoughts, and visions, while we tell them their thoughts and ideas are crap or unworthy. Freedom is not an easy task to uphold... even in a democracy like the western world. Ask the immigrants in France who rioted recently, or were at least blamed in part for it.

Riots are borne out of frustration, not necessarily at what they might be rioting about either, but at their own inability to effect change that benefits them.

just me 2 cents

[Lee]

So to me, poverty is the issue.

See to me, the issue really isnt a poverty one, the people who are lampooning these actions really arent 'poor'.

The people organizing these riots are the ones with the money, the ones that are capable of not getting their hands dirty but rather pushing the buttons the 'poor' people need to hear to incite them in to violence.

I have never met a poor guy i didnt like but, ive met plenty of rich guys i thought were complete assholes.

Regards,

Lee

[gaystoryman]

True, its the leadership or religious fanatical leaders who are pushing the rioting, but if they had a smaller poverty class, it would be considerably harder for them to succeed... so it is poverty, in the sense that while Saudia Arabia is indeed extremely wealthy, the average citizen isn't... in fact the majority live very badly... hence they are basically cannon fodder for those who can influence them, either with money or with religious zeal..

[desslock]

Good points guys. You know, the specific reason those people are rioting... you guys may be right. I'm not an expert. And frankly, I am the worst authority anywhere on religion, because I've spent so little time with it.

I just think that these riots very significant, and very clearly show that group's attitude and position towards the Western values we all enjoy.

I once read - It's an unfortunate fact: Not all Muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslims.

Steve

[Lee]

True, its the leadership or religious fanatical leaders who are pushing the rioting, but if they had a smaller poverty class, it would be considerably harder for them to succeed... so it is poverty, in the sense that while Saudia Arabia is indeed extremely wealthy, the average citizen isn't... in fact the majority live very badly... hence they are basically cannon fodder for those who can influence them, either with money or with religious zeal..

Right but, that doesnt really make it a poverty issue in itself.

In the instance you described, its a manipulation issue, the fact they are being manipulated because of their 'income class' is neither here nor there.

Here's another example, this post im writing now, is probably going to make you reply to it correct? Manipulation, to a point, you are doing what i would like you to do.

It is no different to what is happening with these riots, you cant be blamed for making another reply, no more than the people who are actually rioting can be blamed for what they are doing, that is what they have been manipulated in to doing.

Regards,

Lee

[gaystoryman]

Well in a sense you could call it manipulation, however I think there is a basic difference in what is being manipulated. Certainly there are choices, but if you are going to work people into a frenzy, you aren't going to get rich folks wanting to go burn down their own homes... you are gonna incite those who have little to lose, are far more easily manipulated... so if you have less living in abject poverty, and I don't mean that they only have one colour television or one cell phone, I mean where they fight for the food that we would throw out, you have less people that can be easily manipulated.

Also, lets be honest. There will always be fanatics who will try to incite, no matter what country they are living in. If there is sufficient dissatisfied people listening, they can succeed, but if you attack the root of the issue, take away the easy victims, you wind up curtailing the effects of those types of people.

[Lee]

but if you attack the root of the issue, take away the easy victims, you wind up curtailing the effects of those types of people.

Right but, unfortunately, that wont happen unless we [The United States] decides they need 'liberating' which, will cause more problems for us at home.

It really is a no win situation for us right now, we either attack free speech in the press or attack these militant Muslims.

Either way we end up screwing somebody over.

Regards,

Lee

[gaystoryman]

I'll assume tongue in cheek... but I don't see it changing by any 'liberation' but by helping to create jobs, schools, rather than simply hand outs. ANd it requires patience too, as poverty doesn't end overnight.

Kind of like the Jewish explanation for why it took Moses 40 years to go from Eygpt to Israel... the snappy answer is that he was a typical man and didn't ask for directions when he got lost, while the other serious answer, is that God wanted only free born to enter the land, so they wouldn't be tainted by the memories of slavery... poverty is like that, it will take a concerted effort over a very long time before change comes.. sad really.

[desslock]

I'll assume tongue in cheek... but I don't see it changing by any 'liberation' but by helping to create jobs, schools, rather than simply hand outs. ANd it requires patience too, as poverty doesn't end overnight.

Change out your Western lenses. Remember, in those countries... women can't even drive a car. how do you expect them to "get jobs" ? *that* is their problem... it's not because there isn't money. It's not because of cruel poverty. It's the form of government, which is a product of the ideas that they are advocating....

Also, I think you are mischaracterizing their need for schools. I recall that education in Iran is very comprehensive, with a high literacy rate. I am surprised that you are bringing this up regards to that part of the world.

Are you arguing that poverty is what causes terrorism? Because I am making the case that their religion is essentially what is behind it, and not their economic plight.

Steve