See you guys this Saturday!
21 Littlegrey Comments:
This was fun.. lets all do it again someday..
You were right in your first post...but the conversation expanded a bit...
Droogs, "Sure, you're basically bending yourself to the will of a (in this case) terrorist organization, but is the freedom lost less than the freedom gained (or preserved)?" I won't quote Ben Franklin (or Thomas Paine) but I will point out that the American Revolution was over high taxes...that seems pretty minor when compared to the freedoms we're talking about here.
In the end, this is a major ethical dilemma there's no way to actually conclude here. As I wrote in my post below, what I've articulated so far does "not fully represent my views". I am not saying what we should or shouldn't do, or even what's right or wrong, just how it makes me feel.
i'll sum it up for you nika: "cynnicysm was right in the first post we are all just reiterating what he said anyway..blah blah blah..."
Goddamnit.. I just wall of txtd my self for over 9000 and died..
Hmm.. there are many aspects, of both religions which declare that thier religion is the one and true.. I have never read the Quran, but I would like to, so what I am about to say is from only what I have heard from Imams and practising Muslims, and that is, the Bible is part of the Quran, and any action against the Bible is an action against the Quran.. What the fanatics, from both sides tend to do however, is create laws which govern outside of the actual teachings of these two holy books.. there is a certain level of ignorance amongst both sides which eats away at the core beliefs of these two Religions, both within Sharia Law, and the Pope (being the two common ones) down all the way through to the splinter groups and variations of these religons.. Why hell, this ignorance is even exhibited by Athiests whom will go out of thier way to try and disprove religious people, even when these people arent doing anything to bother them.. What I am in the end trying to say is that, sure Christianity and Islam havent been the best of buddies in the past, but where was all the fighting over the last two or three hundred years? What happened to the trade centres was abhorrent in EVERY way, but it wasn't an attack on Christianity, there were all sorts of walks of life in those buildings, whatever happened to stir up these radicals of Islam happened over the last 30 or 40 years or so, yet then the Christian radicals claim it was attack on thier religion by another religion.. These people that we see on T.V arent the most accurate representations of these two Faiths, they are just the ones who sell the most newspapers or get the highest ratings.. after all, who wants to watch an Imam/Cleric and a Pastor/Father/Bishop sipping tea and discussing the subtleties of thier religions with the respect that I KNOW most of them would give to each other if the oppurtunity arose.. how boring.. lol..
Freedom of speech is certainly an essential right, but I think your analogy is a bit skewed. In this situation, the bully isn't threatening to pound the 'violating' kid's face, but some other totally unrelated kids instead, should the kid choose to enter the cafeteria. Would you still enter the cafeteria?
Essentially, I don't believe that things are quite as black and white when the well-being of a group of people is sacrificed by a distant and unrelated third party practicing its rights.
Sure, you're basically bending yourself to the will of a (in this case) terrorist organization, but is the freedom lost less than the freedom gained (or preserved)? Especially if there are much more effective ways to 'stand up' to the radicals (like military action).
If you follow my logic too far you get into all kinds of crazy totalitarian fantasies, but I want to hear what others think. Note that I'm not disputing the right to free speech but the ethical ramifications of this kind of situation. And please don't go a-quotin' Ben Franklin on me...although I suppose I can't stop you.
NogaXeh - "pit them in fierce televised battles to the death for the whole world to see..."
Isn't that pretty much this video?
"...and another point I might add is that you dont hear them declaring war on christian faith or burning bibles..."
There's a three step plan to answer this last one.
1. See the link below.
2. Read the Koran.
But...all that aside...my comments are not meant to say that I support burning anything or think this pastor fellow should have brought this up at all. As previously mentioned, I think all book burning is bad and has been the mark of tyranny for thousands of years (the Egyptians did it after a fashion though with a chisel instead of a flame).
Just because we have free speech doesn't mean you SHOULD say something but when someone comes along and threatens violence because you say it, I think that changes things. In this case they did actual violence just because it was threatened, in Kashmir and Afganistan Christians were dragged into the street and killed because this pastor said he was going to burn the Koran.
That type of threat is saying they are going to forcefully take a way your right to say it.
Now...enjoy the corner of your table...mmmmm....
I have a solution.. which.. potentially.. we could all make alot of money from!! We could get all the radicals from both of these religons.. dress them up from different periods of time (for theme and effect).. and then pit them in fierce televised battles to the death for the whole world to see..
Failing this.. I agree with Droogs.. altho I can see where you are coming from TM, I too am also the kind who would walk into that cafeteria.. sure your government could have handled it differently.. but I see something like burning the Quran as though your stooping to thier level.. they burn your flag to offend you, even though its NOT a holy symbol as much as it might be to some, and another point I might add is that you dont hear them declaring war on christian faith or burning bibles.. They just dont like America and Israel.. for obvious political and recent history reasons..
I dont think I make sense.. Im gonna chew the corner of my table now..
The burning did happen. Not this church, but others went ahead with it.
We hold freedom of speech as a fundamental right in America. It's a right that is fundamental not only to managing our government concerns, but goes toward self-actualization.
It has been determined that burning things as a means of protesting is free speech. This is nothing new, we burned King George in effigy, hippies burned draft cards, women burned their bras. It's highly symbolic to us as a nation, which is why we get upset with people burn the flag, but we allow it and laws that have been passed to prevent it have all been deemed unconstitutional because the first amendment trumps the anger it causes.
I suppose I think of it in terms of a school yard bully. The mean kid tells the other kid, don't go into the cafeteria or I will pound your face. Everyone else knows about the threat, but no one is willing to do anything about it.
The little kid can either spend the rest of the year not going into the cafeteria giving up something that is a basic right or go in and risk the face pounding but standing by his rights.
The radicals (all radicals I would say) seek to take away rights. Perhaps it shows my stubborn side, but I would rather fight them, than give in. If it were me...I would go into the cafeteria.
I still don't see your point, TM, or at least I don't agree with it. I know the whole don't-mess-with-us-or-we'll-kick-your-ass thing is important in American culture, but the way I see it, condoning something solely to prove that we're not afraid, at the potential cost of the lives of soldiers/whoever in the East, is ridiculous. Obviously no direct political action should have been taken to stop the burning, but bringing up the point of putting lives at risk seems to be an important part of the whole society-regulating-radicals thing. And if your point is that showing fear may encourage attacks...well then I suppose it's a lose-lose situation. I do know that any violent Muslim radicals would have absolutely loved the propaganda potential if the burning had happened.
gotjen, unfortunately, groups of people in America have been summed up by the news media for at least the last 20 years and I think it's caused lots of problems.
Droogs, I am not saying the American people are affraid, but government representatives, i.e. the Attorney General and General Petraeus both made comments that doing this (burning) would increase attacks on the US and get soldiers killed. I really don't like that they said that. So, my point was, there are many reasons not to burn them, but that they would attack us because of it, is one reason to go ahead with it.
Whys, of course he doesn't represent America. his is a small church, and evidence suggests (as my first post pointed out) that it is a cult that even has members cut of ties with family (classic cult 101).
Sparks, nothing we do, or don't do, short of converting the US to sharia law will change the way radicals feel about us. It's pointless to try, which is why the comments from the above mentioned two are so disturbing to me.
Sparks, this only gives America a bad image because it gets so much attention. I'd like to think that Americans aren't as crazy as this man. I find comfort in thinking, as Droogs pointed out, he canceled his Koran burning because he was publicly pressured to do so.
We need to remember that we are not summed up by the radicals in our country, the ones who get attention.
I laughed when this video called Islam the religion of Terrorism but people like this Reverend need to realize that Muslims aren't summed up by the radicals to who make it into our news broadcasts.
I'm glad he didn't do it because it's really disrespectful and gives us a poor image as a nation. The important thing to note though is that he cancelled it after many news outlets said they would not publish images of the event. The guy doesnt believe what he is doing he believes in being on tv
For the 'reach out... and CRUSH A DOVE' part, all I could think was 'reach out and touch faith' from 'personal jesus' by Depeche Mode.
I'm pretty sure he's called it off, but for discussion's sake...
I agree with a lot of your points, TopMonkey, but (assuming religious tolerance is ethically superior to intolerance in this and all cases, which I suppose is up for debate) wouldn't a "peer pressure"-induced cancellation of the event go towards proving that America as a whole is above this kind of behavior, rather than showing that we are "afraid"? I might be missing your point.
A small, radical fringe of Muslims burns stuff of religious importance to Americans/Israelis/etc. I suppose that shows they aren't afraid of retaliation from the people they're offending, but it also shows that their culture as a whole can't regulate that kind of behavior. I guess I'm comparing apples to oranges in a way, as I know the religious atmosphere is very different in most of America than it is in parts of Muslim society, but I certainly don't think that anyone offended (assuming you're talking about Americans offended by a fellow American doing this kind of thing, not offended Muslims) should be offended in worse ways...I'm not sure if I understand the point of that. If you're saying that Muslims shouldn't be offended, then I totally agree...just as we shouldn't be angry at an entire people for radicals burning flags, etc.
Well explained TM. Personally, I'm hopeful he goes thru with it, but just him and like 2 of his most hateful followers. Then the cameras won't be able to zoom in close enough to obscure the fact that it's just like three people being stupid and burning a book all by themselves. That would be divine.
Oh...by the way...I Like! this video...it was well done satire.
Disclaimer: This is a small space to clearly articulate my thoughts on this so the below may not fully represent my views, or may not be my views at all, just my thought process designed to bring out conversation.
cynnicysm, yes, he has a 1st ammendment right to do it, but all the protects him from is the government not peer preasure. Not that you're doing it, but people always seem to cry first ammendment when it doesn't apply. The first ammendment says the government can't abridge your speech but anyone else can get pissy if they want, just because you have a right to say it, doesn't mean others don't have a right to tell you that you're stupid (not pointing this at you, just a general observation).
I agree that I wish they had not picked up on this story, but not for the same reason as you. To me, it's a non-story because this fellow is 1. insane and we shouldn't take the insane serious. 2. his church is actually a cult that tells members to cut ties to family and friends. 3. it's a small little church, the effect of which is miniscule and not newsworthy. 4. it clearly does not represent the view of most Christians.
One thing I am curious about...why are people getting so upset?
When people burn the American Flag, I don't get all pissy. When Muslims burn crosses and bibles I don't get all pissy.
I agree with your last sentence, "i'm pretty sure anyone who gets offended by this wanton silliness deserves to be offended in worse ways."
However, the US government is saying his doing this will cost soldiers their lives and the attorney general is saying it will increase terrorist attacks.
That says two things to me:
1. terrorism works. Clearly becauase our government is affraid of offending Muslims.
2. it actually is Muslims attacking us, which is why they are worried about offending that group.
If the above two are true...then I lean toward letting this putz do his thing just to offend them and let them know we aren't affraid, even though clearly the government is.
Funny concept, but it would have been better if they cut the video down to 0:30 and deepened the announcer's voice to a point slightly above indecipherable growling. Then add an echo to it. Maybe ended with the phrase, "Six bucks buys you the whole seat, BUT YOU'LL ONLY NEED THE EDGE."
i really wish the media hadn't picked up so happily on this story. you know, our constitution actually allows you to be an insensitive jerk, it's part of being free. this guy is an idiot, and all he really did was waste a ton of money on books he didn't want. i'm pretty sure anyone who gets offended by this wanton silliness deserves to be offended in worse ways.
WARNING: unregistered user's comments may be held for moderation before being posted. Registered user's comments do not require moderation.
Trader Of Stories: Chapter 1
suicidal rabbit - Discord group?
Java Project Help - John Arnold Is An Academic Writer Of The Dissertation-Guidance. Who Writes ...
Buy Homework Online - This Is Really A Great Stuff For Sharing. Keep It Up .Thanks For Sharing.
Trader Of Stories: Chapter 1
Jeihot - Yea and we should decide, like, soon. We got a month left apparently
Trader Of Stories: Chapter 1
Seto Kaiba - Well, if not on facebook, I'm open to other ideas as well. Facebook was just the first ...
Forum Users Online - Teflon Monkey