Here is the deal. I work for an Iranian company. The President of the company is Baha'i', and many of our customers are Muslim. I have Muslim friends, and they are just as American as you are. Many of them fly the American flag in their front yard, and are patriotic. So when I see people like you post slander against them, I see it for what it is.... Bigotry. And yes, what you are posting is exactly that.... Slander, racism, and hatred. You seek to stain a whole race of people with what extremists do. It is exactly this kind of mindset that allowed Hitler to murder 6 million Jews. He made them look subhuman enough that it seemed only right to murder them. This is exactly what you are doing against Muslims..... Make them look subhuman, so that murdering them is OK, because after all, they are all murderers anyways.
Last edited by danarhea; 01-07-15 at 11:58 AM.
The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016
Now we wait to see how France; and the west, deal with this. In a very narrow scope or in a broad defensive manner. I'm for the latter. It's also probably wise for Muslims in France to stay off the streets for a while, however I don't think that France will invading Iraq.
Last edited by jet57; 01-07-15 at 12:01 PM.
You can dance without a lawyer
Do you disagree that most Muslim population is unedcutated, and lack logical reasoning?
Do you disagree that Muslim population can't integrate to the social life of the country they migrated to?
Aren't they obliged to integrate to a country's social life, laws and values?
Reading this thread, I was disheartened to see some blame placed on the publication's staff, editors, and/or cartoonists. I vigorously disagree, even as I might not like some of the content in question. IMO, John Stuart Mill made among the strongest arguments for free speech (a free press can logically be viewed as an extension of free speech) in On Liberty. He wrote:
First, if any opinion is compelled to silence, that opinion may, for aught we can certainly know, be true. To deny this is to assume our own infallibility.
Secondly, though the silenced opinion be an error, it may, and very commonly does, contain a portion of truth; and since the general or prevailing opinion on any object is rarely or never the whole truth, it is only by the collision of adverse opinions that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being supplied.
Thirdly, even if the received opinion be not only true, but the whole truth; unless it is suffered to be, and actually is, vigorously and earnestly contested, it will, by most of those who receive it, be held in the manner of a prejudice, with little comprehension or feeling of its rational grounds. And not only this, but, fourthly, the meaning of the doctrine itself will be in danger of being lost, or enfeebled, and deprived of its vital effect on the character and conduct: the dogma becoming a mere formal profession, inefficacious for good, but cumbering the ground, and preventing the growth of any real and heartfelt conviction, from reason or personal experience.
IMO, the second point touches on the heart of the matter related to Charlie Hebdo's satirical work. The power of the cartoons, from the perspective laid out by Mill, is not that they are "truth" per se, but that they convey contemporary perceptions. In turn, those perceptions are rooted in events and developments. Those events and developments are, as Mill put it, "a portion of truth." It is that "portion of truth" that represents a good starting point for a serious dialogue among Muslims and also between Muslims and non-Muslims. It is not a recipe for attacking all Muslims or their faith. It is an opening to focus on the narrower political Islamist movement and its smaller set of actors, some of whom have been condemned by Muslims i.e., as happened most recently in Australia and in France, where the extreme individual (Australia) or individuals (France) have been publicly condemned by some leading Muslim religious authorities.
In sum, that this terrorist attack occurred is all the more reason for a vigorous defense of free speech and a free press. It should not be used as an occasion for a retreat from those bedrock liberties, otherwise, much more will be lost in the process from such a retreat.