• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Two Shot at Muhammad Art Exhibit [W:439, 529, 978, 1489]

Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Fearandloathing said:
We have come to the point that the same people issuing death threats over ****ing pizza now side with terrorists.
Click to expand...

Meet the new left. Isis isn't the problem, conservatives are. And the TEA party is worse than Hamas. See how this works?
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

US Conservative said:
Perhaps that unlike europe, in the US we wont be intimidated by medieval thugs?
Click to expand...

I don't find insulting someone because they're not allowed to hit you back to be very praiseworthy. Do you think a KKK march through an all black community to be justified based on the idea that white racists won't be intimidated?

What if you had a neighbor that started to post racist signs... (This neighborhood believes in white power) etc.. and then publicized it on social media. Someone responds by torching your house. While your neighbour did nothing legally wrong, do you think that they're somewhat responsible for your house being burned down?
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Mithros said:
Sidenote: This post is a great example of why the GOP isn't going to have a successful presidential candidate for many years.

Rally 1: People gathering to express pride in who they are, and to show the public at large which didn't accept them that they do in fact exist.
Rally 2: People gathering for the sole purpose of performing acts designed to anger another group.

And you can't tell the difference.
Click to expand...

The difference here is in how you PERCEIVE the two rallies.

It used to be the left would rally behind an artist to defend the art and expression-remember piss Christ?

But if its a muslim who might be offended (imagine that) and suddenly its crickets.

You dont have to agree with my observation just understand how you appear.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

US Conservative said:
Her and everyone there had their speech curtailed when two ISIS terrorists with guns and bombs decided to crash the party.
Click to expand...
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Her first amendment rights were not violated.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Mithros said:
I don't find insulting someone because they're not allowed to hit you back to be very praiseworthy. Do you think a KKK march through an all black community to be justified based on the idea that white racists won't be intimidated?

What if you had a neighbor that started to post racist signs... (This neighborhood believes in white power) etc.. and then publicized it on social media. Someone responds by torching your house. While your neighbour did nothing legally wrong, do you think that they're somewhat responsible for your house being burned down?
Click to expand...

You are confusing two concepts-if something is "praiseworthy" (subjective) or if they should be able to exercise their freedoms (should be objective, not always the case). Now in the examples you cite-the KKK march and racist signs should absolutely be allowed.

Why would the neighbors be responsible if they did nothing? The people who ACTED (in this case torching or intimidating) are to blame, not the others.

Just as ISIS is to blame here.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Mithros said:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Her first amendment rights were not violated.
Click to expand...

Her SPEECH was curtailed by bombs and bullets, even if not from the govt. Whats hard to understand here?
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

US Conservative said:
The difference here is in how you PERCEIVE the two rallies.

It used to be the left would rally behind an artist to defend the art and expression-remember piss Christ?

But if its a muslim who might be offended (imagine that) and suddenly its crickets.

You dont have to agree with my observation just understand how you appear.
Click to expand...
Agreed, which makes my point.

Mithros said:
Insulting someone else for the sole purpose of provoking a retaliation that you can demonize isn't defending free speech. It's being human garbage while hiding behind the flag.
Click to expand...
tech30528 said:
Sounds like every LGBT rally ever.
Click to expand...
FearandLoathing conflated the two, not seeing any difference between an LGBT rally and an event solely devoted to provoking retaliation. The GOP is doomed to fail on a national level until people like that are no longer the majority of the GOP base.


Why doesn't anything I've previously said not apply PissChrist..Piss Christ - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yes the artist has a right to produce the art, but does his right to produce it free him from the consequences of making that art? When you do things to cause a reaction, especially one that wouldn't have happened otherwise, then you share in the blame for the consequences.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

US Conservative said:
Her SPEECH was curtailed by bombs and bullets, even if not from the govt. Whats hard to understand here?
Click to expand...

The first amendment is a protection from the government, not private entities. The terrorist scum who attacked the gathering may be guilty of a lot, but they weren't guilty of violating her constitutional rights.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Mithros said:
Agreed, which makes my point.



FearandLoathing conflated the two, not seeing any difference between an LGBT rally and an event solely devoted to provoking retaliation. The GOP is doomed to fail on a national level until people like that are no longer the majority of the GOP base.


Why doesn't anything I've previously said not apply PissChrist..Piss Christ - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yes the artist has a right to produce the art, but does his right to produce it free him from the consequences of making that art? When you do things to cause a reaction, especially one that wouldn't have happened otherwise, then you share in the blame for the consequences.
Click to expand...

Again, you assume to know why Geller did what she did (merely to antagonize muslims), your premise is that you know best, and so therefore she is wrong. Get over it.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Mithros said:
She most certainly deserves blame. Sorry but when the entire point of your "speech" is to provoke another group into committing a crime you deserve some culpability when people from that group are provoked.

This does not mean that extremists who attacked the other extremists are in any way justified. They're not. But its' like a white supremacist walking through Compton in full KKK regalia shouting racial slurs, or an abortion clinic posting signs saying that "Jesus loves abortion". When you use your free speech for the sole purpose of pissing people off, then you assume some culpability for the actions you provoke.

Just because someone is 100% in the wrong, doesn't mean that someone else can't be in the wrong as well.
Click to expand...

WRONG WRONG WRONG

in a free society, leaders of cults, politicians, celebrities etc are all going to be the target of criticism. I don't recall any Christians shooting up an artu museum in reaction to the "piss Christ" exhibit.

making fun of Mohammed is a free speech exercise that we Americans should protect and defend. and if people want to commit violence as a result, I say shoot them down as the cop did in this case
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Chomsky said:
We're all Americans & all for free speech, but this is striking me more as antagonism, baiting, and hate - rather than a legitimate free-speech issue.

What the hay is the point in getting in the mud with Muslim extremists?

Even when you win, you've still lost.
Click to expand...

MIght as well lure them into the open where they can be dealt with as in this case rather than waiting for them to pull another 9-11?
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Mithros said:
The first amendment is a protection from the government, not private entities. The terrorist scum who attacked the gathering may be guilty of a lot, but they weren't guilty of violating her constitutional rights.
Click to expand...

She still silenced her, thats the issue. Nobody said the govt did this.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Mithros said:
Why would I agree with a muslim cleric?
Click to expand...
You don't have to agree with him. I'm only saying that the analogy used earlier is legitimate because there are cases of that view, by Muslims, being expressed.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

This is perhaps the most bizarre logic I've ever seen.

Ms Geller had a gathering devoted to drawing the prophet Muhammed because it's highly offensive to Muslims and has provoked violent reactions in other countries. You in turn make the claim that saying she is at least partially culpable for the shooting which happened is analogous to a women wearing a skirt asking to be raped. But not because they're factually related. They're analogous because a muslim cleric said that women who don't wear modest clothes are asking to be raped and (assumingly) muslims attacked Ms Geller's gathering.

That's not how analogies work. The Tortoise and the Hare and the Fox and the Hare aren't analogous because they both contain a hare.

Thrilla said:
wearing short skirts has been argued to be a justification of rape...the analogy fits this scenario pretty well.

drawing Mohammed may incite anger in the same way a short skirt incites sexual thoughts.... neither justify an unlawful response, though... in both cases, the victim is 100% innocent of wrongdoing.
Click to expand...
Mithros said:
This is childish reasoning.

Someone wearing a short skirt isn't wearing the short skirt to taunt a rapist. They're wearing it she wants to wear it. They aren't comparable.
Click to expand...
Grant said:
Actually it's spot on. http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dg...o-be-raped-arrested-for-trying-to-rape-woman/
Click to expand...
Mithros said:
Are you seriously arguing that women dress nice to taunt rapists?
Click to expand...
Grant said:
Geez, man!! It was a Muslim cleric saying that if women don't dress properly they deserve to be raped. If you don't take the time to look at the link you shouldn't bother responding to it.
Click to expand...
Mithros said:
Why would I agree with a muslim cleric?
Click to expand...
Grant said:
You don't have to agree with him. I'm only saying that the analogy used earlier is legitimate because there are cases of that view, by Muslims, being expressed.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Mithros said:
This is perhaps the most bizarre logic I've ever seen.

Ms Geller had a gathering devoted to drawing the prophet Muhammed because it's highly offensive to Muslims and has provoked violent reactions in other countries. You in turn make the claim that saying she is at least partially culpable for the shooting which happened is analogous to a women wearing a skirt asking to be raped. But not because they're factually related. They're analogous because a muslim cleric said that women who don't wear modest clothes are asking to be raped and (assumingly) muslims attacked Ms Geller's gathering.
Click to expand...
There is a large possibility that you don't understand the 'blame the victim' comparison.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Grant said:
The Mormons have demonstrated how a truly sophisticated and intelligent people should respond to criticism or farce, one far removed from many of the barbarians attached to Islam. Perhaps this approach will rub off on some of the more 'moderate' Muslims.
Click to expand...
Rather than putting the boot into Islam or Muhammed or anything else negative, how about looking at the situation from a compassionate point of view?

Until these extremists got some guns and decided to try to kill people, they were worth something to somebody. As far as I know they were American citizens, welcome in America like anyone else. But they were also heading down a sad and lonely road of anger and grievance, caused by whatever material they were feeding themselves with - perhaps hate preacher stuff. Behind that may have been a story of identity problems, family problems, religious indoctrination and desperation to belong and be valued. Their Muslim faith and cultural background will have given them especially big problems in in terms of integrating happily into any Western society (was one a convert? If so, comparable problems).

I wouldn't know how to reach such people but if they are to continue to be welcome in the USA, then hopefully some good people - Muslims and non - should try and be supported in such a difficult task. In England, the problems are similar but Muslim ghettoes are widespread, numbers larger and the social cohesion of the white English population seems to be weaker than in Texas. I'm learning about the issues in my city from chatting with a client of mine of Somali origin, who lives in a ghetto. The future looks bad for us on this issue, in my opinion. But in the USA, the scale of the problem seems to be more containable, at least at the moment. Perhaps Americans will baulk at making a special case for Muslims but really they are a special case, and not many people could have imagined it.

Now I see that Muslims in Texas are fearful of a backlash and many Texan politicians are making gestures to show their disapproval of Islam. There are 200,000 Muslims in Texas alone so potential for many more problems in the future. Texas Muslims fear for safety after Iraqi man shot dead in Dallas attack | US news | The Guardian
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Montecresto said:
Geller is an antagonist, provocateur and trouble maker. She isn't pressing any free speech issue. Hope she got what she was looking for this time.
Click to expand...
We've got a comparable rent-a-gob in England at the moment - Katie Hopkins. She makes inflammatory comments on radio and in the press about immigrants, most recently about the Africans crossing the Mediterranean, just to get publicity. Geller sounds a bit more intelligent and ideological which probably makes her more dangerous. The fact that she is now ramping up the tension by planning another stunt shows that she knows how to press buttons and work the audience. The best thing we can do is ignore her but I doubt that will happen.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

US Conservative said:
Meet the new left. Isis isn't the problem, conservatives are. And the TEA party is worse than Hamas. See how this works?
Click to expand...

I had my head handed to me by a so-called "liberal" for suggesting way back in 2009 that Obama's "enemies" were not the same as America's enemies. Since then he and his stupid voter followers have been proving me right.

Benghazi was a terrorist attack on US soil, and NOTHING was done about it. But, we have to see the government 'shut down' a few times to be reminded that the reeal "enemies" are Americans, members of congress in fact.

Terrorists walk free, but Republicans must be demonized. You would think aliens had come
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Grant said:
There is a large possibility that you don't understand the 'blame the victim' comparison.
Click to expand...
Wow, that's really sad.

They're not analogous, nor do they become so because there are bigoted Muslim clerics. Women don't dress up for the sole purpose of taunting potential rapists. Their choice of clothing doesn’t' change depending on if they'll be seen by potential rapists. Ms Geller on the other hand WAS taunting Muslims. The sole purpose to holding and publicising the event was to make sure that Muslims KNEW she was offending them. Texas is 0.7% muslim, you have to try pretty hard to make sure they notice.

Please don't try to conflate the intentional and hateful actions of Ms Geller with how a rape victim chooses to dress. And what is it with you hard core conservatives and rape?????
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Digging through the last several pages of the thread, it seems that several conservatives seem to believe that defending Geller's right to free speech entails condoning or refraining from criticizing her hateful rhetoric. Somehow, in this alternate universe, pointing out that she's a hateful bigot (even while pointing out she has the right to be) means liberals are "against free speech."
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

My favorite drawings at the Muhammad cartoon festival in Texas were the two chalk outlines out front.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Fearandloathing said:
I had my head handed to me by a so-called "liberal" for suggesting way back in 2009 that Obama's "enemies" were not the same as America's enemies. Since then he and his stupid voter followers have been proving me right.

Benghazi was a terrorist attack on US soil, and NOTHING was done about it. But, we have to see the government 'shut down' a few times to be reminded that the reeal "enemies" are Americans, members of congress in fact.

Terrorists walk free, but Republicans must be demonized. You would think aliens had come
Click to expand...

You have completely lost your mind.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

US Conservative said:
Meet the new left. Isis isn't the problem, conservatives are. And the TEA party is worse than Hamas. See how this works?
Click to expand...

Nobody said anything of the sort. More blatant strawmen.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

TurtleDude said:
no she doesn't. If Bush supporters had come a gunning for someone who drew a picture of Bush looking like a chimp or the ass who posted a bill board that had OBL sodomizing Bush, would you claim that the BDS artist deserved having hit men gunning for him?

Look, this is a free society. Those who get their panties in a wad over opinions they don't like need to deal with it. and if they react violently, they need to end up like those two scum bags in Texas did

on a slab
Click to expand...

If you do something intentionally knowing that it will cause violence you are partially responsible. Just a fact.

Kids know this. We teach them to ignore or move on when dealing with an asshole but we also teach the asshole that their behaviour is unacceptable.

Disagree all you want. I really don't care.

Also, Bush is not a religion, race, gender or sexuality... Bush is a person. You created a Straw Man, nothing more.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

I know of nothing besides religious faith that could drive a person to take it upon themselves to murder someone over a cartoon. People can be paid to do that kind of thing, or threatened, all for the glory or power of a dictator. But no one just decides to kill over a cartoon without religious zeal driving them to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom