The West should be free to Critcize Islam?

[Sassylassie]

I came across this article on a Military Site:

The West Should Be Free To Criticize Islam

By DANIEL PIPESSeptember 19, 2006

A D V E R T I S E M E N T


A D V E R T I S E M E N T

[Continued from page 2 of 3]

The Vatican responded by establishing an extraordinary and unprecedented security cordon around the pope. Further away, the incitement spurred some violence, with more likely on the way. Seven churches were attacked in the West Bank and Gaza, as well as one in Basra, Iraq (prompting this ironic headline at the "RedState" blog: "Pope implies Islam a violent religion ... Muslims bomb churches"). The murder of an Italian nun in Somalia and two Assyrians in Iraq also appear connected.

Second reflection: This new round of Muslim outrage, violence, and murder now has a routine quality. Earlier versions occurred in 1989 (in response to Salman Rushdie's novel "The Satanic Verses"), 1997 (when the U.S. Supreme Court did not take down a representation of Muhammad), 2002 (when Jerry Falwell called Muhammad a terrorist), 2005 (the fraudulent Koran-flushing episode), and this February (the Danish cartoon incident).

Vatican leaders tried to defuse the pope's quotation, as well as his condemnation of jihad. The Catholic News Service reported that the papal spokesman, Federico Lombardi, said Benedict did not intend to give "an interpretation of Islam as violent. ... Inside Islam there are many different positions and there are many positions that are not violent." Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the secretary of state, said in a statement that the pope "sincerely regrets that certain passages of his address could have sounded offensive to the sensitivities of the Muslim faithful."

Then, in what may be an unprecedented step by a pope, Benedict himself proffered the sort of semi-apology often favored by those feeling the heat. "I am deeply sorry for the reactions in some countries to a few passages of my address," the official Vatican translation into English reads, "which were considered offensive to the sensibility of Muslims. These in fact were a quotation from a medieval text, which do not in any way express my personal thought."

In the Italian original, however, Benedict says only "sono rammaricato," which translates as "I am disappointed" or "I regret."

Third reflection: The Muslim uproar has a goal — to prohibit criticism of Islam by Christians and thereby to impose Shariah norms on the West. Should Westerners accept this central tenet of Islamic law, others will surely follow. Retaining free speech about Islam, therefore, represents a critical defense against the imposition of an Islamic order.

Bingo I agree with this article one hundred percent, the last paragraph is bang on.

 

[fuzzylogix]

criticism: the making of judgements; the act of approving or disapproving; an analysis of merits and faults.

disparage: speak slightingly of, belittle, discredit, lower the reputation of.

Freedom of speech means you may criticize things, including religion based on your interpretation of facts and events, etc. It is acceptable to undergo a critical analysis of religion. It is acceptable to not believe the tenets of Islam and to differ in your beliefs. It is acceptable to think that Islam is not a good religion.

BUT Freedom of speech does not give any of us the right to be disparaging of things like religion. This is a big difference, Sassy, that you and many people in the world don't get. Making a mockery of Muhammed, or deriding Islam is not freedom of speech, it is an unwarranted assault on other people's beliefs.

Freedom of speech must be used with moral and ethical values.

For example, I may have a fat friend. Now, I may be critical, in that I might discuss with her that she is overweight, and that I dont think it is healthy for her, and I would point out problems that I perceive in her being overweight. I might use this as a means of helping her by providing solutions along with my criticism.

Now, alternately, I could just be disparaging and call her a FAT FU##ING PIG. Now, I suppose, technically I might have the freedom of speech to speak my mind, but I am abusing this freedom because I am crossing the line of moral, kind ethical talk. I think we would all agree that I should not be disparaging to her. I would sound like a sh*t , and I would certainly lose a friend. And I would certainly be expected to recognize what the outcome would be by talking this way.

The west has not got into trouble by discussing their belief that women should not be forced into purdah, or that Muhammed did not mean for Muslims to kill Christians. They have got into trouble by disparaging Muhammed, and as for what the Pope said, Well I think he should not have been surprised at all at the outcome of his remarks. They were blatantly disparaging and insulting. And for a man of GOD to speak this way, I am disgusted.

Muslims are no more violent and their religion is no more violent than any other religion. And their religion may even be more accepting of other religions than many Christian groups.

Just because you CAN say something, doesnt mean that it is RIGHT to say something. And in this age where we are rapidly increasing the animosity between religions, we all need to think peace and control our mouths, and think " What do I gain by saying this? What do I lose?"

Spend less time fussing over whether you are losing your freedom of speech and more time over using that freedom wisely.

The last paragraph should read: The Muslim uproar seeks to prohibit disparaging unwarranted attacks on Islam.

 

[EastSideScotian]

Ah yes but do Muslims agree with the law of Freedom of speech? Maybe our Socitys rules colide in the first place. Which is why we have such hard times coming to agreements and terms with our shared issues int he world.

 

[fuzzylogix]

You wont force freedom of speech onto other people by taunting and disparaging them. When the west is rude, it merely reinforces the ugly image that the Muslim community has of us.

My mother always said, " If you cant say something nice, then dont say it" This doesnt mean however, that you cant discuss differences. But in politics and diplomacy, you CANNOT be nasty, or spiteful, or insulting no matter how much you despise your opponent, or you lose automatically at the diplomatic table.

Or more simply. Two wrongs dont make a right. You well know that if you think someone has insulted you, insulting them back is not justified and does not help the situation.

 

[Said1]

RE: The West should be fr

Who cares. We don't have freedom of speach here in Canada. :shrug:

 

[Zzarchov]

Actually it is a direct insult to imply the Koran is not irrevocabley true.

Merely by existing the Pope is a direct insult to islam.

My (new) religion states Muslims must be second class citizens forbidden to build or repair places of worship and pay a heavy tax for their beliefs, and they should be firebombed and beheaded if they disbelieve this.

If you tell me this is incorrect you are disparaging my new religion of Snarfblatism.

I think we can agree If I tried to sell that, everyone would call me a bigot and insult my religion anyways.

So why not Islam?

I mean people Disparage Catholocism (as they should) for its practices, they have already forced it to give up many of them .. no one does that for islam.

 

[Sassylassie]

LOL Said1 we won't for much longer. I will never stop speaking out about the horrible things that are done to Women and Children in the name of Islam. It's barbaric, they may practice their Sharia Law in their Home Land but not in Canada. I will not allow my voice to be silenced in the name of Islam, it's not my religion, thus I will not practice it's laws.

 

[Colpy]

BUT Freedom of speech does not give any of us the right to be disparaging of things like religion. This is a big difference, Sassy, that you and many people in the world don't get. Making a mockery of Muhammed, or deriding Islam is not freedom of speech, it is an unwarranted assault on other people's beliefs.

So, you think the "artist" that made the Piss Christ should charged and jailed?

You think the author of the cartoon showing an armed, tattooed Christ in front of a Walmart should be stoned to death?

Or is it only Islam that should be free of insulting comment?

What if I said that Mohammed is the False Prophet spoken of in the Bible, essentially the Anti-Christ? Is that free speech, or is it an insult to Islam?

Please clarify.

 

[Colpy]

Muslims are no more violent and their religion is no more violent than any other religion. And their religion may even be more accepting of other religions than many Christian groups.

Oh, I guess you missed the cartoon flap.......

This is just silly. Those of you that are apologists for the absolute worst aspects of Islamist fanaticism should really give your head a shake.

As far as I know, the "artist" responsible for the Piss Christ is NOT under death sentence.

Get real.

Seriously, you are fantasizing, or something.

How many people have been sentenced to death in fatwas for speaking their mind or writing a book, or making a movie?

How many have died in riots over anti-Islam cartoons, or Papal speeches?

And how many of these were killed by Christians?

 

[gopher]

Daniel Pipes is a noted racist Islamophobe. You may be well advised to take his ravings with the proverbial grain of salt.

 

[Colpy]

Re: RE: The West should be free to Critcize Islam?

Daniel Pipes is a noted racist Islamophobe. You may be well advised to take his ravings with the proverbial grain of salt.

Daniel Pipes is a noted racist Islamophope like I am a noted transexual impersonator of Julia Roberts.

Spare me.

 

[Daz_Hockey]

Re: RE: The West should be free to Critcize Islam?

Daniel Pipes is a noted racist Islamophobe. You may be well advised to take his ravings with the proverbial grain of salt.

Daniel Pipes is a noted racist Islamophope like I am a noted transexual impersonator of Julia Roberts.

Spare me.

Hello Julia!!!!.....How's Eric doing?, I hear he was in a Marah Carrey video!!! get him!!!......and whatever happened to that nice Lyle Lovett chap eh?...such a nice fellow!!!

 

[Sassylassie]

Sometimes the truth hurts, Islam a religion of peace? ITN stay tuned I have come across some great articles on what is reallllllllllllly happening to our right to speak. Shush don't wanna offend their "False God".

 

[Chukcha]

Re: RE: The West should be free to Critcize Islam?

Ah yes but do Muslims agree with the law of Freedom of speech? Maybe our Socitys rules colide in the first place. Which is why we have such hard times coming to agreements and terms with our shared issues int he world.

Tough luck, if they don't agree, they should stop critising the West too. It sounds a bit unfair to me.

 

[tamarin]

Muslims, it's painfully obvious, are becoming a very high maintenance collective. That's unfortunate. Because the western world is struggling to break free of the straitjacket of PC. We're tired of deferring. Increasingly, we refuse to defer. So the world's largest group of religious crybabies better get used to a good slap on the head and a spanking!

 

[Researcher87]

criticism: the making of judgements; the act of approving or disapproving; an analysis of merits and faults.

disparage: speak slightingly of, belittle, discredit, lower the reputation of.

Freedom of speech means you may criticize things, including religion based on your interpretation of facts and events, etc. It is acceptable to undergo a critical analysis of religion. It is acceptable to not believe the tenets of Islam and to differ in your beliefs. It is acceptable to think that Islam is not a good religion.

BUT Freedom of speech does not give any of us the right to be disparaging of things like religion. This is a big difference, Sassy, that you and many people in the world don't get. Making a mockery of Muhammed, or deriding Islam is not freedom of speech, it is an unwarranted assault on other people's beliefs.

Freedom of speech must be used with moral and ethical values.

For example, I may have a fat friend. Now, I may be critical, in that I might discuss with her that she is overweight, and that I dont think it is healthy for her, and I would point out problems that I perceive in her being overweight. I might use this as a means of helping her by providing solutions along with my criticism.

Now, alternately, I could just be disparaging and call her a FAT FU##ING PIG. Now, I suppose, technically I might have the freedom of speech to speak my mind, but I am abusing this freedom because I am crossing the line of moral, kind ethical talk. I think we would all agree that I should not be disparaging to her. I would sound like a sh*t , and I would certainly lose a friend. And I would certainly be expected to recognize what the outcome would be by talking this way.

The west has not got into trouble by discussing their belief that women should not be forced into purdah, or that Muhammed did not mean for Muslims to kill Christians. They have got into trouble by disparaging Muhammed, and as for what the Pope said, Well I think he should not have been surprised at all at the outcome of his remarks. They were blatantly disparaging and insulting. And for a man of GOD to speak this way, I am disgusted.

Muslims are no more violent and their religion is no more violent than any other religion. And their religion may even be more accepting of other religions than many Christian groups.

Just because you CAN say something, doesnt mean that it is RIGHT to say something. And in this age where we are rapidly increasing the animosity between religions, we all need to think peace and control our mouths, and think " What do I gain by saying this? What do I lose?"

Spend less time fussing over whether you are losing your freedom of speech and more time over using that freedom wisely.

The last paragraph should read: The Muslim uproar seeks to prohibit disparaging unwarranted attacks on Islam.

This is the best statement I have heard. You can criticize but if you blatantly attack someone for their values, that is not friendly and they are not going to be friendly to you. What do you expect, expect you to call them animals and call their religion evil and their prophet nothing more than a suicide bomber and expect them to say;

Okay we love you you westerners for showing us our wrongs. Hell no. That's the stupidest thought I ever heard.

 

[Researcher87]

criticism: the making of judgements; the act of approving or disapproving; an analysis of merits and faults.

disparage: speak slightingly of, belittle, discredit, lower the reputation of.

Freedom of speech means you may criticize things, including religion based on your interpretation of facts and events, etc. It is acceptable to undergo a critical analysis of religion. It is acceptable to not believe the tenets of Islam and to differ in your beliefs. It is acceptable to think that Islam is not a good religion.

BUT Freedom of speech does not give any of us the right to be disparaging of things like religion. This is a big difference, Sassy, that you and many people in the world don't get. Making a mockery of Muhammed, or deriding Islam is not freedom of speech, it is an unwarranted assault on other people's beliefs.

Freedom of speech must be used with moral and ethical values.

For example, I may have a fat friend. Now, I may be critical, in that I might discuss with her that she is overweight, and that I dont think it is healthy for her, and I would point out problems that I perceive in her being overweight. I might use this as a means of helping her by providing solutions along with my criticism.

Now, alternately, I could just be disparaging and call her a FAT FU##ING PIG. Now, I suppose, technically I might have the freedom of speech to speak my mind, but I am abusing this freedom because I am crossing the line of moral, kind ethical talk. I think we would all agree that I should not be disparaging to her. I would sound like a sh*t , and I would certainly lose a friend. And I would certainly be expected to recognize what the outcome would be by talking this way.

The west has not got into trouble by discussing their belief that women should not be forced into purdah, or that Muhammed did not mean for Muslims to kill Christians. They have got into trouble by disparaging Muhammed, and as for what the Pope said, Well I think he should not have been surprised at all at the outcome of his remarks. They were blatantly disparaging and insulting. And for a man of GOD to speak this way, I am disgusted.

Muslims are no more violent and their religion is no more violent than any other religion. And their religion may even be more accepting of other religions than many Christian groups.

Just because you CAN say something, doesnt mean that it is RIGHT to say something. And in this age where we are rapidly increasing the animosity between religions, we all need to think peace and control our mouths, and think " What do I gain by saying this? What do I lose?"

Spend less time fussing over whether you are losing your freedom of speech and more time over using that freedom wisely.

The last paragraph should read: The Muslim uproar seeks to prohibit disparaging unwarranted attacks on Islam.

This is the best statement I have heard. You can criticize but if you blatantly attack someone for their values, that is not friendly and they are not going to be friendly to you. What do you expect, expect you to call them animals and call their religion evil and their prophet nothing more than a suicide bomber and expect them to say;

Okay we love you you westerners for showing us our wrongs. Hell no. That's the stupidest thought I ever heard.

 

[fuzzylogix]

Thanks Researcher87, my point exactly, well summed up

At least someone else here can think beyond just throwing the next blow.

 

[I think not]

Re: RE: The West should be free to Critcize Islam?

Sometimes the truth hurts, Islam a religion of peace? ITN stay tuned I have come across some great articles on what is reallllllllllllly happening to our right to speak. Shush don't wanna offend their "False God".

Knock'em dead Sassy.

"The greatest threat to freedom is the absence of criticism."

 

[I think not]

This is the best statement I have heard. You can criticize but if you blatantly attack someone for their values, that is not friendly and they are not going to be friendly to you. What do you expect, expect you to call them animals and call their religion evil and their prophet nothing more than a suicide bomber and expect them to say;

Okay we love you you westerners for showing us our wrongs. Hell no. That's the stupidest thought I ever heard.

How about sticks and stones may break my bones but names can never hurt me?