Hundreds expected for Mohammed cartoon contest

I was talking about a consensus movement. I never speak in absolutes. So yeah...there are crazy people out there. But that is not a call to arms for the general population.

The IRA in it's various forms committed acts of violence in the name of Christianity for almost 100 years.

The IRA is a geo political entity.. They wanted the British out of Northern Ireland. They are not fighting so everyone has their same faith.

They were Christians fighting against other Christians. There was a definite religious facet to their existence. Don't try and downplay it.

I've read instances of people going into Ireland during their heyday and being asked what religion they were at the border, and not their ethnic heritage or even reason for being there. All they wanted to know is if they were Protestant or not.

I haven't been following this thread much but has anyone here actually been against the legality of this protest? To be honest I think these anti-Islam protesters are dumb just like the KKK and the Westboro Baptist church. But if they should be allowed to protest, I don't think was ever the point of contention. The discussion always revolves around whether or not they should, not if they could.

Honestly Fox it sounds like you are unfamiliar with the political history of Ireland. Yes...they are different religions. But the problems arose because of nationality and land.. Your ethnic heritage in Ireland generally coincided with your religion. But they were not fighting because someone was a different religion. They were fighting because land was taken from the indigenous people and given to transplants from the UK. They were no longer able to home rule. Eventually Ireland was mostly given back to the Irish but Northern Ireland remains under UK rule. That is the source of the fight. The IRA wanted the entire island back. Those in NI wish to remain British.

They killed people in the name of their religion. There were multiple aspects to the political turmoil in the country. Religion was merely one of the driving factors.

Again, stop trying to downplay it.

Should I bring up the Bosnian war next? Christians killing other Christians killing Muslims?

@Aljosa23: the fact of the matter is since the first one we had people implying that these people are the aggressors not the Muslims showing up with guns.. We saw this same shit with the tragic France shooting involving the newspaper printing cartoons of Mohammad. This kind of backwards thinking in victim blaming is what I am being critical of... It's apoligism where we all too often hear "I'm all for freedom speech, but".. In which the people demonstrating is suddenly seen as the root cause to violence by religious zealots. That some how these crazy assholes are merely a consequence and not the actual problem. More or less like blaming a rape victim for being raped because of their clothing or other such bullshit.

So I'm seeing an issue here, and that is that the protesters showed up at the doorstep of Muslims who were not the aggressors when it came to the violence over Mohammed cartoons. You can't blame all Muslims for the actions of a few Muslims which seems to be exactly what this group of protesters were doing.

For instance if Christians in say Nebraska got all pissed off at cartoons of Jesus in their town and decided to incite riots there, and the response was for a group of people to go protest at a Christian Church in the state of Alabama. Wouldn't that be potentially inciting violence in an area that had nothing to do with the situation? The protesters may be responding to an act of violence (meaning they didn't start this), but they are not only blaming the wrong people as well as creating the situation that could potentially start new violence in an otherwise peaceful area.

I second that response.

What a very incorrect and simplistic way to look at it. They are NOT fighting over religious beliefs. It's about autonomy, ethnicity, politics, and land. And really you might want to avail yourself of the issue rather than spout nonsense.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Troubles

I think defending freedom of speech is great, intentionally insulting something sacred to others just to practice it is stupid and hurtful and does not solve anything. If you truly want to defend the Constitution of the United States sign on the dotted line in the military.

I support them with the freedom of speech. Not exactly a nice thing to do, but it's their right in this country. Nobody should live in fear to express their point of view or draw a cartoon. You have a right to ignore what these people are doing.

@foxhound_fox: Neckbeardery

Since this will attract the attention of terrorists, it's like ignoring a shark in your swimming pool.

That is actually the mosque where those two cunts that started a shooting in Garland, Texas came from. These protesters are going to the source now. I hope nothing happens, but if any more violent criminals get weeded out and arrested or even shot, all will be well.

Exactly what I have been saying. @uninspiredcup, dawg, check it out.

People use this all the time but what does it even mean? Most full beards cover the neck.

If you have to ask I don't think you'll get it.

If I had to describe it, I'd call it SJW meets hipster meets uneducated know it all.

If this rally wakes people up and makes everyone realise whats really going on, then i'm fine with it.

The worshipers of freedom of speech again.

I'd like to see what this god called "freedom of speech" will do for you in the near feature when you run out of your wealth and influence.

Why do you defend intimidation?

I don't.

My point is there are more important things in the world than "freedom of speech."

When the wealth and influence are gone, this freedom of speech won't be bringing them back. That shows how little freedom of speech matters in this realistic world we live in contrary to the fantastic world that some people live in where people should be willing to "die" for something that's not all that beneficial to them except for making them feel a little better about themselves by making them believe they are the harbingers of "freedom."

It’s pretty much like worshiping a false god.

why be redundant?

@Serraph105: no of course it fucking wouldn't be considered inciting violence... To believe people actually think this shit is baffling. You do not have the right to shut people up that offend you through coercion or violence. I don't give a **** what religion or political thought it involves. People need to grow up, no one gives a **** what you think and you do not have the right to silence that person because they said mean words to you.

What does redundant mean here?

You are saying that respecting the Constitution of the United States is basically the same as worshiping it. If that is the case, I would expect that you criticize everyone who respects anything besides the god you believe in.

@BranKetra: Respecting the constitution of the United States IN the United States is fine. But when you try to force it on other nations (Muslim nations) then it becomes sort of a crusade for a god called "freedom of speech" or in that case the constitution.

Haha wut? Neckbeards hate SJWs for the most part. To waaaaay different cultures.

I have absolutely no idea what your talking about.. We are talking about freedom of speech in the west with drawings of Mohammad in places like the US and France.... The only people I see enforcing anything are extremist scum killing people because they drew something they didn't like... I then see apologist excusing this behavior and basically resorting to victim blaming.. I also have seen a disturbingly large amount of Muslims condone the behavior to out right supporting it for breaking a law of theirs...

Without meaning harshness, this thread is about an event in the United States, so I do not see how that is relevant, here.

Anyway, America has international partners that respect the U.S. Constitution by sending criminals to them that they call for like Sweden.

Do you think that Muslim nations should not have any with the United States (not quite understanding what you mean)?

Nobody is condoning any killing over cartoons. People are simply pointing out that the only point in this "protest" is antagonistic in nature. They aren't changing any minds, nor are they trying, much in the vein of the Wesboro baptist morons.

Nobody is trying to limit your freedom to speak, we're simply pointing out that your words and actions often have consequences. You're tilting at windmills here, Sub.

We all know that, but when has that stopped people crazy enough to enact violence to shut people up? People don't have the right to gun down innocent strangers in a drive-by shooting, but that happens, doesn't it?

All most of us are saying is: To what end does this protest serve? To many of us, it appears to serve no end other than to antagonize.

it's a joke on your writing of "false god"

it's implied that god is false, so saying "false" explicitly makes the phrase redundant :P

nevermind.

That maybe the case but in no way should the first response should be that they should stop doing it, or the had it coming.. This is falling yet again into the victim blaming.. "she shouldn't have dressed so slutty and shouldn't have been out so late, then she wouldn't have gotten raped'.. Your either for free speech or not, and if you have a problem with it because it may cause more violence... Guess what? The problem is the people who want to kill a person for it, not the ones who are peacefully protesting... As agnostic atheist I hear alt of vile crap said to me and my group.. The Duck Dynasty guy has said some awful things about he group I am apart of. If a atheist gunned down the Duck Dynasty guy do you think everyone would say "well he did antagonize him saying all that vile stuff." **** no. This is no different and when you get down to it you are going to offend some one some where out there when you say something.

think what your saying.. The very idea that you shouldn't do this because it will antagonize violence insist that the extremists control what we do... Have you seen the groups out there opposing gay rights in dehumanizing gays and saying ho vile they are? How in the hell is this any different? Self righteousness? You think a gay person going on a shooting spree with a protest like that would create the same response?

If you'd like the Muslim world to remain the backwater shit hole that it is, by all means continue this crusade of your own lamenting free speech (Ignoring the irony of you posting freely on a western site acting as an apologist to violence).

I encourage drawing, painting and sculpting the Islamic prophet Muhammad.

And its their right to voice them.. When fuckers come to an event with guns to kill people.. The first response should not be about how the people who exercised their first amendment rights shouldn't have held the event. But about the fuckers who were going to shoot up the place. GET this through your skull the motives of why they did the event is irrelevant, I personally don't care one way or the other. And these events need to continue for the sole reason to spit in the fae of extremists of any kind that they do not have the right to control others.. If we are to stop events based upon the threat of violence, we have effectively lost the battle with extremists and are cowards.

@alim298: It's the same Constitution that protects your rights to belong to any religion and practice it, freedom of religion and from it.

Why do people insist on bringing this crap up? Who is killing thousands of people right now in 2015? Who has been mass killing for the past 20 years? Christian or Muslim terrorists? Let's see if you can answer with an ounce of intellectual honesty. I dare you.

I do not excuse people crapping on Islam because a small percentage of their religion is wacko, but I also will call this bs out.

Pretty much this.

@comp_atkins: I get it now. Good one.

Of course you don't.

If it's about the United States alone, then why do you point fingers to Muslims every time such incidents happen? You call them "Muslim extremists" you don't call them "American Muslim extremists." These Muslims who carry out these attacks are not important to us. We've got the real Muslim extremists, the ISIS and the Nusra front here. We couldn't care less about this freedom of speech or those who undermine it or those who support it. To us these people can't be called Muslim extremists compared to the ISIS. And yet undermining this freedom of speech god is a greater act of "extremism" than what the ISIS does, to Americans. Well it’s not, to us. You worship your god we worship ours. And freedom of speech isn’t our god. Our God tells us to protect the lives of innocents at all cost. He does not permit us to kill innocents or hold events that endanger innocent lives just to prove a point or for a greater cause. Killing one innocent man means killing an entire nation to us. We value human lives and freedom of speech to us isn’t greater than human lives. Again that’s our God. So don’t force yours on us. We Muslims will never believe in your freedom of speech so quit calling all Muslims extremists because they don’t believe in this vile god of yours and deal with your internal terrorism problems internally.

What a moronic comment. Come to any Islamic forum and I can assure you, you'll be freer than anywhere on the internet to comment on Islam and the Prophet. But only if you bring forth proof as we don’t stand for mere slander and vile manners.

Of course proof is needed as without it your comments will be shunned by the community. We Muslims don't lie and libel, we bring forth proof instead of idiotically slandering people. If slandering is what makes your "civilization" great and seeking proof instead of blindly slandering makes ours "backward" then we are the most backward nations ever I agree.

And to be honest, no offend to the GS staff and members but GS isn't the "freest" forum out there to begin with.

Buddah is the same god that protects you in every moment of your life and provides for you and helps you on your spiritual and worldly journey. Why don't you believe in him then? You should believe in Buddah or else you're just a backward raghead.

This is the difference between us Muslims and them the worshippers of freedom of speech.

That and the fact that we wear rags.

These events don't only spit in the face of the extremists, it spits in the face of every Muslim that holds beliefs against the visual depiction of Allah or Muhammad. I'll defend your right to say whatever you want, but I'll also call you an asshole for what you say. These people in Arizona are assholes.

@alim298: I don't believe in any God for that matter pal, waiting patiently for eternal damnation. So far none of those vindictive gods ( Allah, God, Jehova, etc ) you and others believe ( pick your choice ) has struck me with lightning right at the very instant I say they are creations of the human imagination. See, I'm still here .......... Waited a few minutes and nope, nothing has happened. By the way, let me tell you, if for a single moment anybody promotes trying to ban you from worshiping the words of your peadophile child molester and little girl rapist prophet I will defend your right to do so, have a nice day.

Yeah they should all wear that "**** Islam" shirt too right?

fool.

If a society reacts to extremists in kind, making a space for them in public life, it debunks any claims of mastery over them by letting them dictate part of public life. A scenario in which extremists introduce a change to public life is a victory of theirs that is relative to the size of the change. Ten years ago no one gave this drawing fetish any thought; today? it's becoming all the rage and it's starting to rupture a society that once prized itself for being a beacon of multiculturalism, accommodating a growing Muslim community in times when such a demographic in other parts of the world was being increasingly antagonized. If this is your idea of victory and liberty, you have no faculty for the organization of a prosperous and sturdy society.

Let's approach this from a legal perspective. A society that ordains uncapped freedom of speech punishes an attempt at its suppression as it punishes larceny, arson, fraud, murder and the rest of criminality. When someone pulls a heist, society doesn't clamor for the protection of the right of private property, it merely demands justice to be served in a court of law. The only way this affair can be different is if it transcends jurisprudence and becomes a demographic issue, which isn't the case since as I continue to reiterate, if the U.S and Europe had a problem with their Muslim demographics entire they would be dealing with a truly dire situation. Yet you and others insist that Muslims should and shouldn't.

Lastly, I'm not insinuating, I'm avowing that provocateurs who stir up a hornet's nest without legitimacy partake in aggression more than the stirred up hornets; aggression by definition entails initiative.

Assuming of course that they are all Christians, I'm sure some of them aren't Christians, there may be some Jews and some religiously unaffiliated people at that cartoon contest.

Is it just me or does it seem like this is kind of a cyclical thing that just perpetuates itself and gets worse: People deliberately do things that they know will offend Muslims because they know doing so would be illegal in most Muslim countries and hence they use this a statement of supporting free speech by utilizing their legal right to do something in the U.S., France, or other Western countries that they would get arrested for in other countries, Muslims get offended and feel that their religion is being attacked/slandered, and some of them react violently. The violent reaction galvanizes people who do these cartoons, because now if they stopped it would be seen as backing down in the face of violence and essentially mean that the terrorists had won and send the message that violence and threats will silence people, so after an attack these cartoonists feel like they have to continue, and maybe even be more brazen and offensive. And the Muslims get even more offended and they feel under attack. And so on and so on and so on.

It's kind of like a situation where too friends have a disagreement, one bashes the other on twitter, the other guy retaliates on Facebook. They take turns insulting each other. And as the feud progresses they have to constantly one up the other guy and throw in a better dig then the one the guy just threw at him, and they both wind up saying hurtful things that they would have never thought they would say at the beginning of the feud. But the thing takes on a momentum of its own and the conflict escalates and carries them on to new levels of vitriol and depravity before they realize what's happening, and when they do realize it, they don't like it, but neither wants to be the first to offer the olive branch (which of course leaves one vulnerable to having the peace offer rejected) which would be seen as backing down.

hey, y'know what would be funny?

if there was some poorly written bronze age nonsense authored by a bunch of sheep shagging primitives about an unstable, mean spirited, vain, genocidal, vengeful, childish creator and people were killing each other over it 3500 years later.

lulz, can you even imagine such a silly thing?

people would be all "my magic sky daddy is the one true magic sky daddy and i will hurt you to prove it!"

how funny would that be?

If you guys were wondering how it turned out, here: