Dutch Cartoons in the News, Yet Again

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

A story we should all be familiar with now.

A right wing political figure announces an event to draw the Muslim prophet Muhammad, and large numbers of citizens of Islamist countries complain, through loud and sometimes violent protests.

This time, the event was canceled, which is not always the case. Again, several countries in the OIC are continuing to petition the UN and EU to draw some kind of exception to freedom of expression law, in order to prevent the offending of religious sentiments.

I'm interested in what the posters here at R&P have to say about this event, and draw Muhammad events in general.

I'm perfectly fine with those event, the problem is that the far right are trying to subvert them for there own political goal. They organize them knowing full well that they'll stir trouble, trouble happen and they go "look you need us to defend against them". But ultimately most muslim don't really care, they might be annoyed the same way most Christian are when caricature of Jesus are done, but there not gonna make a big deal out of it. But it's a lot easier to represent on TV a bunch of muslim being angry and burning stuff than the vast majority not really caring.

Ultimately this plays into the hands of the extremist of both side. The fanatic nationalist can talk about how great there value and how dangerous the others are while the fanatic religious can just say how disrespectful the other side is how they need to strengthen there faith. I guess my point is, we'd be so much better if extremist of all side just lived together and the rest of us could go on our live without having to deal with them.

Will we ever get a Muhammad movie that portrays as accurately and respectfully as possible?

Samtemdo8:
Will we ever get a Muhammad movie that portrays as accurately and respectfully as possible?

Well, there's this movie:

Meiam:
Snip

I think it plays into the ideology of the far-right because one of the posited statements is that Islam and the West are in conflict about several key things, and one of these things is free speech. And as long as there are any Muslims willing to riot and kill over this, this gives their statement some legitimacy.

I've always wondered... how can you draw a picture of Mohammad when all pictures have been banned

CM156:

Samtemdo8:
Will we ever get a Muhammad movie that portrays as accurately and respectfully as possible?

Well, there's this movie:

Meiam:
Snip

I think it plays into the ideology of the far-right because one of the posited statements is that Islam and the West are in conflict about several key things, and one of these things is free speech. And as long as there are any Muslims willing to riot and kill over this, this gives their statement some legitimacy.

When I thought of making a movie about Muhammad, Disney-esque style was not the first thing I would think.

trunkage:
I've always wondered... how can you draw a picture of Mohammad when all pictures have been banned

Jaden Smith, is that you?

Samtemdo8:

CM156:

Samtemdo8:
Will we ever get a Muhammad movie that portrays as accurately and respectfully as possible?

Well, there's this movie:

Meiam:
Snip

I think it plays into the ideology of the far-right because one of the posited statements is that Islam and the West are in conflict about several key things, and one of these things is free speech. And as long as there are any Muslims willing to riot and kill over this, this gives their statement some legitimacy.

When I thought of making a movie about Muhammad, Disney-esque style was not the first thing I would think.

It's a pro-Islam film, but I think it handles the history somewhat better than would be expected.

CM156:
SNIPO

2 points:

1). The Muslim people that are getting this upset over the depiction of their prophet are being idiots. I don't know many muslim people, but those that I know have talked about putting up with far more personally relevent and insulting issues or incidents than this every month of the year and they are simply sighing in irritation over the whole issue.

There are criticisms to be made over Islamic policy [Edit: I should say specific denominations of Islam of course, and specifically severe conservative ones within that. I thought I added this when posting the original but obviously didn't. Apologies.] (A friend of mine can't hang out in the local area without her Hijab because of fear of retribution) but everyone that I have talked to agrees that this is not the solution to those problems. They argue in fact that this will only make things worse for everyone.

2). The people setting up this contest (Wilders, right? if so QED) are childish buffoons who have no idea how to actually help a situation so their next best move is to antagonize it until their claims are proven right. There is no value to poking a bear like this, not even the faux free speach "I did it because we should be able too!" works in this case. No one is saying that the cartoonists should die, just that they are absolute idiots for exacerbating a situation that was already "explosive" to begin with. Dying on a hill this pointless is just childish.

ineptelephant:
No one is saying that the cartoonists should die,

Except, you know, all the people in other countries who have argued that cartoonists like this should die, in their opinion.

Lmao don't offend muslims or they may kill you.

Do the fucking contest. Having your country held hostage by violent religious extremists in your own nation is pathetic.

CM156:
Except, you know, all the people in other countries who have argued that cartoonists like this should die, in their opinion.

Ah, yes, quite right. That should read "No one criticizing the cartoonists for being idiots is saying they should die". The Islamic hardliners are most certainly advocating for it, as everyone and their dog's fleas could have predicted they would.

In my mind the free speech issue is regarding everyone else who thinks that perhaps provoking potentially dangerous people for effectively no reason isn't a great idea. Clearly the people threatening and or commiting murder over this are somewhat excluded from the free speech debate, but I at least would like to have a discussion over what exactly the point of free speech in this scenario is if its only use is to bait people into attacking you purely for political gain from the martyrdom.

Also, if we are going off what people in other countries have argued should happen, I should remind you of certain elected officials in the United States who regularly speak (or spoke) about the desperate need to "bomb, bomb, bomb Iran". After Charlie Hebdo we all know that this isn't just something we can ignore; but equally I would say that after Iraq and Afganistan the words of McCain et al isn't something that Iranian's can ignore either.

ineptelephant:
I at least would like to have a discussion over what exactly the point of free speech in this scenario is if its only use is to bait people into attacking you purely for political gain from the martyrdom.

"People are willing to murder me for saying this" is a pretty good reason to draw attention to the thing that's being said.

That, and these sort of events (and the violent reaction, and people's reaction to the violent reaction) draw attention to the poorly integrated parts of society that those on the far-right feel as though they are told to ignore or stop emphasizing. Some examples here and here

Well, shame on the contest cause it was no doubt intentionally antagonizing Muslims.

But I have no love for religious nutjobs, so the freaking out over drawings of Muhammad I also think is absurd.

See, I think something like a "Draw Muhammad Day" would be useful in helping less hardline Muslims breakaway from the more fundamentalist clerics of their religion...if done with respect.

Like most right wing events, that's not what they're actually trying to do. They don't actually believe in free speech or freedom of expression, they're just trying to be as offensive as possible to get a response.

CM156:
"People are willing to murder me for saying this" is a pretty good reason to draw attention to the thing that's being said.

What are you drawing attention to though? This is the equivalent of putting on your most extravagent clothes and/or most expensive jewelry and marching into the poorest local area. Why not prove your right to freedom of navigation by parking your nice brand new car right in front of the poorest part of the inner city for a night? You can, there is no law to stop you from doing so, but I will still tell you that its a stupid idea. Also that the reason you might get that reaction is not as simple as you think.

That, and these sort of events (and the violent reaction, and people's reaction to the violent reaction) draw attention to the poorly integrated parts of society that those on the far-right feel as though they are told to ignore or stop emphasizing.

The first 3 pages were in French so I am afraid I can't read them. The 4th and only English is quite interesting. It ends with the paragraphs:

Which I would be interested to hear your opinion on.

EDIT: As to your point, the majority of the violent protest is going on outside of Europe and the Americas. How well integrated people in Somalia or Pakistan are isn't of much relevence. Perhaps the pages you linked showed French Muslim anger, but outside of that there hasn't been a major reaction in Europe as far as I can tell.

ineptelephant:
What are you drawing attention to though? This is the equivalent of putting on your most extravagent clothes and/or most expensive jewelry and marching into the poorest local area. Why not prove your right to freedom of navigation by parking your nice brand new car right in front of the poorest part of the inner city for a night? You can, there is no law to stop you from doing so, but I will still tell you that its a stupid idea. Also that the reason you might get that reaction is not as simple as you think.

So, basically, they're asking for it? Basically, it's a form of victim blaming. "Yes, you can do this, but you should have known it would set these people off." It's a shitty argument when applied to other cases, and it's a shitty argument here. Don't teach cartoonists not to draw Muhammad. Teach these radicals not to behave like barbarians who kill people over drawings.

The first 3 pages were in French so I am afraid I can't read them. The 4th and only English is quite interesting. It ends with the paragraphs:

Your browser doesn't have a built in translator?

Which I would be interested to hear your opinion on.

I don't approve of my government's rendition and torture.

Why did it continue? Because again, free speech. Those who use lethal violence to suppress speech should be subject to the harshest penalties the law can offer.

ineptelephant:

CM156:
"People are willing to murder me for saying this" is a pretty good reason to draw attention to the thing that's being said.

What are you drawing attention to though? This is the equivalent of putting on your most extravagent clothes and/or most expensive jewelry and marching into the poorest local area. Why not prove your right to freedom of navigation by parking your nice brand new car right in front of the poorest part of the inner city for a night? You can, there is no law to stop you from doing so, but I will still tell you that its a stupid idea. Also that the reason you might get that reaction is not as simple as you think.

That, and these sort of events (and the violent reaction, and people's reaction to the violent reaction) draw attention to the poorly integrated parts of society that those on the far-right feel as though they are told to ignore or stop emphasizing.

The first 3 pages were in French so I am afraid I can't read them. The 4th and only English is quite interesting. It ends with the paragraphs:

Which I would be interested to hear your opinion on.

I can only read the English one too. On the bit you put in spoilers, I'd agree. All Muslims have they're freedom of speech restricted in Western society. And I'd point out that far right and left people aren't well assimilated into western society, irrelevant of religion.

Double post

The nationalist right vs. the religious right... Whoever wins, society loses.

CM156:
So, basically, they're asking for it? Basically, it's a form of victim blaming. "Yes, you can do this, but you should have known it would set these people off." It's a shitty argument when applied to other cases, and it's a shitty argument here. Don't teach cartoonists not to draw Muhammad. Teach these radicals not to behave like barbarians who kill people over drawings.

If I could wave a magic wand and change the world then cartoonists would be allowed to draw Muhammad without threat or injury to their hearts content. In the real world though, what exactly do you want people to do? There isn't anyway to really stop a lone wolf attack if enough people are determined enough outside of unacceptably restrictive security. Unless Amsterdam is to turn into a fortress city with metal detecting checkpoints at every entrance then there really isn't a solution.

Do people really have to die over this? Its just so childish. Its a god damn cartoon, its not comparable to a women's right to wear whatever clothes they want without fear of being raped. Its petty unnecessary bullshit.

Your browser doesn't have a built in translator?

Apparently not

I don't approve of my government's rendition and torture.

Why did it continue? Because again, free speech. Those who use lethal violence to suppress speech should be subject to the harshest penalties the law can offer.

I don't understand. Most western countries are happy to suspend free speech and other civil liberties when it comes to Muslims. Why are they not happy to do so when it comes to people antagonizing Muslims? "Free speech" theoretically applies in both circumstances.

If you have no defense for Guantanamo then I don't see how you can have a consistent objection here. unless Guantanamo is somehow less of an affront to free speech than Muslims being so irate that western countries ban drawing pictures of a prohpet. Again, just to remind you, this is an issue over drawing a picture, not being carted off to a dungeon and tortured indefinitely.

trunkage:
And I'd point out that far right and left people aren't well assimilated into western society, irrelevant of religion.

Exactly. The idea that a lack of integration comes from being foreign is laughable. There are a lot of punks from 30 years ago that would have loved to have a chat about that.

ineptelephant:
If I could wave a magic wand and change the world then cartoonists would be allowed to draw Muhammad without threat or injury to their hearts content. In the real world though, what exactly do you want people to do? There isn't anyway to really stop a lone wolf attack if enough people are determined enough outside of unacceptably restrictive security. Unless Amsterdam is to turn into a fortress city with metal detecting checkpoints at every entrance then there really isn't a solution.

The solution is to continue doing this, and arrest anyone who tries to use violence, and subject them to the maximum penalty under the law. And keep doing it until the issue becomes so tried that these extremists cannot stop the activities. If every day, all over the world, there were at least a dozen of these events, the outrage machine would die.

Do people really have to die over this? Its just so childish. Its a god damn cartoon, its not comparable to a women's right to wear whatever clothes they want without fear of being raped. Its petty unnecessary bullshit.

Maybe it's not a right you value, but it's a right we value. You're right, nobody needs to die. So convey that to these terrorists that they don't have to kill anyone. They're the only problem here.

I don't understand. Most western countries are happy to suspend free speech and other civil liberties when it comes to Muslims. Why are they not happy to do so when it comes to people antagonizing Muslims? "Free speech" theoretically applies in both circumstances.

If you have no defense for Guantanamo then I don't see how you can have a consistent objection here. unless Guantanamo is somehow less of an affront to free speech than Muslims being so irate that western countries ban drawing pictures of a prohpet. Again, just to remind you, this is an issue over drawing a picture, not being carted off to a dungeon and tortured indefinitely.

Guantanamo is less an issue about Free Speech and more about right to trial, although I can see a free speech aspect. I am against Guantanamo as I see it as a violation of several human and constitutional rights. I want to make this clear: Guantanamo should not only be closed, the land should be returned to Cuba eventually (how the handover should take place is another matter, perhaps a leaseback of some sort). Anyone there should be given an open trial in the continental USA. If the military is unable to prove that each person they have detained is actually a criminal/terrorist, they get to walk, and should be compensated for their time in prison and the illegal torture they've endured. Hell, even if convicted they should still be compensated for the torture they were subjected to. Also, we shouldn't engage in the likely fourth amendment violating monitoring of Mosques we carry out. There. Do you understand my position better now?

Meiam:
But ultimately most muslim don't really care, they might be annoyed the same way most Christian are when caricature of Jesus are done, but there not gonna make a big deal out of it.

Tell that to the victims of Charlie Hebdo. Oh, you can't. They're dead.

Let's not pretend like Islam isn't a problem. It might not be as big of a problem as some right-wing lunatics believe, but it's a big problem nonetheless. Every religion is, but Islam just takes the freakin' cake and sets it on fire. Obviously it's not every Muslim, but quite a lot of them do not appreciate at all when you disrespect their moronic little fairy tale. In fact, they hate it to such a degree that they're willing to murder innocent people over it. So fuck them and fuck their pedophile prophet.

I got some mixed feelings about this. As awful as Wilders is he now found a situation were the other side is far worse than he is. There was nothing society could gain with this absurd cartoon contest but.....isn't caving in to violent Islamic threats a sign to those Islamist that violence works after all?

Wilders showed at least some wisdom in canceling the cartoon for the sake of public safety but it wasn't exactly a big sacrifice for him either. Wilders already got all he wanted to achieve with his contest. He is once again the center of attention and many PVV voters who might want to desert him for fellow populist Baudet might have cause to reconsider now. Wilders also strengthened his own argument. He claims that Islam is a violent, intolerant religion and Islam sure started proving him right this week.

i don't know which side i hate more. on the one hand we have people that really need to evolve their religion beyond the middle ages
and on the other side we have the people provoking them on purpose to score political points.

also Imran Khan is either dumb, dishonest or really naive
"We have failed to convey to the world how much it pains the Muslims across the globe by sacrilege of their Holy Prophet (peace be upon him),"
they know you hate it that's why they are doing it. the only way to make them stop is to ignore them.

My longstanding hatred of the Dutch aside, even though i feel it's important for a society to allow for the criticism, parody and satire of religion, this really is the absolute douchiest way of doing it. I sincerely doubt that the participants actually wish to call for meaningful change or take some kind of real stand as opposed to simply being edgy for the sake of edginess

I also like to assume the actions of a few Hardline/fundamentalist religious conservatives speak for everyone in that religion. Life is so much simpler that way. All christains are sexual abusers of young boys? Of course. Why would anyone think otherwise? Should probably look into that while I harrass any priest nearby on why they gotta like little boys so much. A literal threat to our youth, all of them. Should I even mention their less than savoury views towards the Jewish and their role in initiating the actual apocalypse? A bit cray, but nobody seems bothered for some reason.

This contest was a dick move, clearly done just to antagonize Muslims. Those Muslims who were so antagonized that they are petitioning for my freedom of speech to be taken away can go fuck themselves even more though. I dislike the fact that Wilders was actually intimidated away from doing this. In a free country his bigotry should be possible without gratuitous threats of violence.

In terms of politics, the sad thing is that both Wilders and his Pakistani bigoted counterparts probably win electorally by whipping everybody up in a frenzy about this nonsense. I don't think this is always such a good advice but in this case we should simply not feed the trolls (Wilders). There is a senate election coming up next year here and the current government, especially the centrist saps, are doing what they can to lose as many seats as possible by voting against their principles (D66, you fools) and pushing through a by now wildly unpopular tax cut for foreign investors. The question is, where will those voters go? A stunt like this, and the terrible reaction by Pakistani morons, might pull more people to Wilders when he and Baudet are already set to win over a fifth of the seats together according to some polls. And the sane people, Islamic or otherwise, now see freedom of speech threatened on the one hand by an asshole who wants to ban the Koran and on the other hand by assholes who want to ban my ability to draw whatever I bloody well want. And I imagine that in Pakistan the negative repercussions of this are similarly bad. There, the more extreme Islamic bigots get to profit by overreacting to this. The only good news is that by now a lot of people here are so used to Wilders' shenanigans that it won't even help him all that much anymore. This got considerably less attention than the last couple of times he pulled stunts like this.

Lastly, the OIC can talk to the EU all they want but article 10 of the ECHR or it's legal interpretation can't be changed by them anyway, and I don't expect them to do that just to appease some hysterical people living 10.000 miles away. The fact that there are other unfortunate restrictions on free speech in other western countries (they were apparently too lazy to look up Dutch law about offending the monarch or 'friendly' heads of state so they went for French anti-genocide-denial-laws) doesn't justify another one.

As for depicting the Islamic prophet Muhammad. I dislike doing it just to piss people off, even if I think they should not react so over the top. In theory drawing Muhammad could be a way to show Muslims that a depiction of their prophet is hardly that big a deal, but when it is consistently done by bigots in the way that it is, that makes it more of a statement of ill will than anything else.

On the one hand, this is such obvious sodding bait that I'm surprised anyone gives a shit. On the other hand; Islam, seriously, chill the fuck out about dickheads drawing cartoons. Everyone cops it, and the sooner the decent among you drown the hardlners in buckets of their own piss, the happier you will be because then these windup artists will not be getting the response they want.

Adam Jensen:

Meiam:
But ultimately most muslim don't really care, they might be annoyed the same way most Christian are when caricature of Jesus are done, but there not gonna make a big deal out of it.

Tell that to the victims of Charlie Hebdo. Oh, you can't. They're dead.

Let's not pretend like Islam isn't a problem. It might not be as big of a problem as some right-wing lunatics believe, but it's a big problem nonetheless. Every religion is, but Islam just takes the freakin' cake and sets it on fire. Obviously it's not every Muslim, but quite a lot of them do not appreciate at all when you disrespect their moronic little fairy tale. In fact, they hate it to such a degree that they're willing to murder innocent people over it. So fuck them and fuck their pedophile prophet.

I mean, gay people in some orthodox christian country are being tortured and murdered, does that mean we should organize "hey let's piss off orthodox" event? Rohingya are being murdered by Buddhist in Myanmar. Hinduism murder Muslim because they think they killed a cow.

I agree it's a problem, but every religion have there own stupid rule that there ready to kill over. And even non religious extremist kill people for there own twisted reasoning (here's an example not too far away https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks). The problem is extremist, not religion. So when you have a bunch of extremist make an event specifically designed to piss off other extremist in an attempt to make there own extremist position more popular, I fail to see how this will make the world better.

Meiam:
I mean, gay people in some orthodox christian country are being tortured and murdered, does that mean we should organize "hey let's piss off orthodox" event?

It doesn't mean that anyone should organize anything. But it doesn't mean that anyone shouldn't. Organizing such events shouldn't be seen as something controversial.

Adam Jensen:

Tell that to the victims of Charlie Hebdo. Oh, you can't. They're dead.

Yeah, I think 12 of them died. Which is tragic, those 12 people didn't deserve to die, but how shall we compare that to the deaths of Muslims around the world? Start with the hundreds of thousands killed in Iraq and Afganistan and and go from there? In terms of civilian deaths caused the West is way above Islam on the scoreboard. Far, far above.

Let's not pretend like Islam isn't a problem.

Oh dear. No mate: poverty is a problem, imperialism is a problem, extremists using belief systems and cultures to further their destructive ends is a problem. But Islam? Calling Islam the problem is like calling Christianity the reason why western nations frequently exploit developing countries. Chrstianity is certainly there and there is a somewhat disturbing Christian bent to neo-colonialism but that's the backround ideological trappings, not the reason why western nations are exploiting people.

Islam just like every conceptual framework can be fit around whatever practical concerns there are. Islam can be used to justify suicide bombings even though it goes against several tenants of the religion (especially the bombings of other muslims at mosques, which is so antithetical to Islamic teachings that its amazing they even call themselves muslims) just like Christianity can be used to justify massive greed, corruption and exploitation even though those three are equally antithetical to Christianity. Bill Hicks did a great segment on "Christians who kill":


Nothing like holding the worlds largest nuculear stockpile to showcase the idea of "turn the other cheek".

It might not be as big of a problem as some right-wing lunatics believe, but it's a big problem nonetheless. Every religion is, but Islam just takes the freakin' cake and sets it on fire. Obviously it's not every Muslim, but quite a lot of them do not appreciate at all when you disrespect their moronic little fairy tale.

How many exactly? Out of the religion of more than a billion, what percentage is actually persuing a murderous agenda rather than protesting and threatening?

In fact, they hate it to such a degree that they're willing to murder innocent people over it. So fuck them and fuck their pedophile prophet.

Sigh.

There's just no room for nuance in your position, is there?

CM156:
The solution is to continue doing this, and arrest anyone who tries to use violence, and subject them to the maximum penalty under the law. And keep doing it until the issue becomes so tried that these extremists cannot stop the activities. If every day, all over the world, there were at least a dozen of these events, the outrage machine would die.

What a pointless waste of human life. All for an abstract right to be the dankest edgelord that someone might choose to be.

Maybe it's not a right you value, but it's a right we value. You're right, nobody needs to die. So convey that to these terrorists that they don't have to kill anyone. They're the only problem here.

The difference is that I do not value a right inherently. When someone says "I should have the right to free speech" I would ask "to say what?" There is no legitimate criticism of government or other policy here. No debate, no reasoning, no actual attempt to express something using an artistic medium, just antagonism.

It seems as though your position is at odds the majority of your country and the vast majority of U.S. conservatives. Do you think we should also be organizing flag burning events in heavily conservative areas of the U.S.? Workshops to criticise the actions of the armed forces in towns that have military bases? Hang banners disputing the Christianization of Winter Solstice in front of nativity plays? There are a hundred hypocrocies sitting at your doorstep which you take a far less vitriolic stance over. Perhaps start by desensitising your own country to criticism and go from there before inviting death on other people on principle.

Guantanamo is less an issue about Free Speech and more about right to trial, although I can see a free speech aspect. I am against Guantanamo as I see it as a violation of several human and constitutional rights. I want to make this clear: Guantanamo should not only be closed, the land should be returned to Cuba eventually (how the handover should take place is another matter, perhaps a leaseback of some sort). Anyone there should be given an open trial in the continental USA. If the military is unable to prove that each person they have detained is actually a criminal/terrorist, they get to walk, and should be compensated for their time in prison and the illegal torture they've endured. Hell, even if convicted they should still be compensated for the torture they were subjected to. Also, we shouldn't engage in the likely fourth amendment violating monitoring of Mosques we carry out. There. Do you understand my position better now?

Yes I do, thank you for qualifying.

Meiam:
I'm perfectly fine with those event, the problem is that the far right are trying to subvert them for there own political goal.

The invent clearly has a particular political goal in the first place. It's to cause controversy and highlight the batshit crazy response of fundamentalists to a drawing. It's intentionally provocative, and would be regardless of which particular figures were involved.

But, without causing controversy, things don't change. Look at the banning of the Life of Brian and other films the Catholic Church was offended by, and look at some of the stuff that doesn't get banned these days.

ineptelephant:
What a pointless waste of human life. All for an abstract right to be the dankest edgelord that someone might choose to be.

It is sad, but we view it as necessary.

The difference is that I do not value a right inherently. When someone says "I should have the right to free speech" I would ask "to say what?"

To which I would say "I no more need to justify my exercising of free speech than I need to justify owning a copy of a controversial book or practicing my religion"

It seems as though your position is at odds the majority of your country and the vast majority of U.S. conservatives. Do you think we should also be organizing flag burning events in heavily conservative areas of the U.S.? Workshops to criticise the actions of the armed forces in towns that have military bases? Hang banners disputing the Christianization of Winter Solstice in front of nativity plays? There are a hundred hypocrocies sitting at your doorstep which you take a far less vitriolic stance over

All of these are valid speech acts. Hell, I've been on the side of a protest where we've burned an American flag (in protest of the USA's action in the Middle East). And do you know how many death threats we got from that? None. I've also been at an event where a pride flag was burned. Again, no death threats against us, although we had some very angry people.

Perhaps start by desensitising your own country to criticism and go from there before inviting death on other people on principle.

Nah. But if that's what you want to do, go ahead. You have my unironic full support.

Meiam:
I mean, gay people in some orthodox christian country are being tortured and murdered, does that mean we should organize "hey let's piss off orthodox" event?

Are you fishing for ideas? I had a few in mind. A contest to draw Icons of Orthodox saints, but in a way that depicts the horror of life in modern Russia.

Rohingya are being murdered by Buddhist in Myanmar. Hinduism murder Muslim because they think they killed a cow.

All of which deserve to be criticized, and if religion is used as the justification, that can be criticized too.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked