Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ScaredWebWarrior
That doesn't mean that we have to go out of our way to insult, but that equally applies to the 'injured' party not going out of their way to be 'aggrieved'.
|
I agree with that, I think that we are lucky the Islamic community here were more inclined to react as they did on Saturday, rather than the scenes earlier in the week, but in general I think the confontational placard waving, 'death to' chanting & flag burning is seen too often as a response to any implied slur on Islam - to the point it is difficult for an observer to have a perspective on the severity of the problem.
---------- Post added at 14:05 ---------- Previous post was at 13:53 ----------
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by punky
Charicaturing Mohammed is wrong - if you are Muslim. If you aren't Muslim then you aren't bound by the same rules and laws.
With regards to your example, I wouldn't say that counts as criticism, its a joke at their expense. That vaguely does come under insults. The reason the cartoons were created wasn't a joke at Muslim's expense, it was proof that Islam is the only religion you can't even comment on, let alone criticise.
|
Yes I agree they weren't originally created as an insult, but I'm not sure that the feeling of Muslims were known when they were re-published, as, if they were, then the act of re-publishing could be taken as insulting & confrontational? Thats what I am trying to say, that a joke can be funny in the abstract, even at the expense of a minority, but if you know it will actually cause offence & be taken as an insult, then you should be more wary of the implications??