• 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

Seems the sponsors of the event where several right wing anti-Islam groups. I wonder if they were hoping an attack like this would happen to gain sympathy for their cause...

Two shot dead after they open fire at Mohammed cartoon event in Texas - CNN.com

I very much doubt they were aiming to get killed or blown up by muslim terrorists.

Of course that is a risk we all run.

Also, while I have no sympathy whatsoever for Geert Wilders, his politics are really rather left-wing when it comes to social-economic issues.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

/facepalm

Thanks to those who provided links to the story, btw.

Yes, we are fortunate enough to live in a country where freedom of speech is allowed; however, freedom from consequence is not allowed. WTF were these idiots thinking? "Gee, it would be fun to entice angry Muslims to come and try to kill us while we mock them?" Thankfully, it wasn't worse... but I can't imagine why anyone would think such an in-your-face outrage would be a swell idea.
I agree - complete absence of respect for all Muslims at minimum. More likely, outright inflammation. It's like a group of Muslims getting together for a party with a burn the Stars-and-Stripes theme and then pretending to be surprised at the bad reaction.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

We Americans put a very high value on the freedom of speech. That includes speech that mocks religious beliefs--we throw some elbows here, and you need a thick skin to live in a free country.
That is a recent development. If you mocked Christianity in some parts of the South back in the 1970's you would have been shot.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

I agree - complete absence of respect for all Muslims at minimum. More likely, outright inflammation. It's like a group of Muslims getting together for a party with a burn the Stars-and-Stripes theme and then pretending to be surprised at the bad reaction.

So you feel it would only be normal to try to assassinate people who burn the Us flag?
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

/facepalm

Thanks to those who provided links to the story, btw.

Yes, we are fortunate enough to live in a country where freedom of speech is allowed; however, freedom from consequence is not allowed. WTF were these idiots thinking? "Gee, it would be fun to entice angry Muslims to come and try to kill us while we mock them?" Thankfully, it wasn't worse... but I can't imagine why anyone would think such an in-your-face outrage would be a swell idea.

So no one should draw pictures of 'ANY' religious figures, for fear of being shot?
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

That is a recent development. If you mocked Christianity in some parts of the South back in the 1970's you would have been shot.

Yep. It's thanks to the atheists that freedom of speech really started getting respected when it comes to criticizing Christianity in this country.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

So you feel it would only be normal to try to assassinate people who burn the Us flag?
No - killing people is not justifiable except in self-defence. On a separate note, deliberately offending the deepest sensibilities of a group of religious believers is wrong and people shouldn't abuse their freedom of speech in this way.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

No - killing people is not justifiable except in self-defence. On a separate note, deliberately offending the deepest sensibilities of a group of religious believers is wrong and people shouldn't abuse their freedom of speech in this way.

Good, then your earlier post was simple nonsense.

Do you feel that people who insult the Catholic Church "abuse" their freedom of speech?
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Good, then your earlier post was simple nonsense.

Do you feel that people who insult the Catholic Church "abuse" their freedom of speech?
My earlier was post was not nonsense. Your logic escapes me. People who insult others generally abuse their freedom of speech. Sadly it happens all day long on the internet and clearly most of it is not serious enough to take action about. Sadly, some people choose to do some very stupid things to hurt other people's feelings and this event was one of them.

If people have a problem with the Catholic church, they should criticise it respectfully. Same goes for Islam, Evangelical Christians, Atheists and whatever faith you believe in too.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

My earlier was post was not nonsense. Your logic escapes me. People who insult others generally abuse their freedom of speech. Sadly it happens all day long on the internet and clearly most of it is not serious enough to take action about. Sadly, some people choose to do some very stupid things to hurt other people's feelings and this event was one of them.

If people have a problem with the Catholic church, they should criticise it respectfully. Same goes for Islam, Evangelical Christians, Atheists and whatever faith you believe in too.

So "freedom of speech" should only extend to any expression that nobody finds offensive for any reason?

From somebody who describes attempted murder as "a bad reaction", I'm not surprised.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

My earlier was post was not nonsense. Your logic escapes me. People who insult others generally abuse their freedom of speech. Sadly it happens all day long on the internet and clearly most of it is not serious enough to take action about. Sadly, some people choose to do some very stupid things to hurt other people's feelings and this event was one of them.

If people have a problem with the Catholic church, they should criticise it respectfully. Same goes for Islam, Evangelical Christians, Atheists and whatever faith you believe in too.

Its our right (US, doubt its the same in the UK) to exercise our first amendment rights. There is no conceivable case to justify the actions of the attackers here. None-and thats where the fault lies-get it straight.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Its our right (US, doubt its the same in the UK) to exercise our first amendment rights. There is no conceivable case to justify the actions of the attackers here. None-and thats where the fault lies-get it straight.
Agreed - even though these kind of attacks could have been anticipated, there is no justification for them. We can safely agree on that.

On the issue of the right to insult the religious beliefs of others (and most religious believers are peaceful), then people who organise activities like this one in Texas put legislators in a very difficult situation. They force them to choose between security and freedom of speech. I hope they don't repeat this kind of stunt for the sake of the security of the silly people who turn up to them, and also for the sake of freedom of speech of many people, which they are jeopardising.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

-- If people have a problem with the Catholic church, they should criticise it respectfully. Same goes for Islam, Evangelical Christians, Atheists and whatever faith you believe in too.

Free speech has consequences but there should be few limits on its nature.

Its our right (US, doubt its the same in the UK) --

I think the difference is that security in the US acted before the attackers got any victims. Such events in Europe have sadly had little armed official security in place and the consequences in France, Belgium and Denmark have been all too predictable.

The response to and speed of neutralising the attack is a lesson to Western European countries when these free-speech events take place.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Agreed - even though these kind of attacks could have been anticipated, there is no justification for them. We can safely agree on that.

On the issue of the right to insult the religious beliefs of others (and most religious believers are peaceful), then people who organise activities like this one in Texas put legislators in a very difficult situation. They force them to choose between security and freedom of speech. I hope they don't repeat this kind of stunt for the sake of the security of the silly people who turn up to them, and also for the sake of freedom of speech of many people, which they are jeopardising.

So you feel the threat of violence should win?
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

No. Message too short so I'll add another "no".

Then maybe you should start thinking about what you write before you post it.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Free speech has consequences but there should be few limits on its nature.



I think the difference is that security in the US acted before the attackers got any victims. Such events in Europe have sadly had little armed official security in place and the consequences in France, Belgium and Denmark have been all too predictable.

The response to and speed of neutralising the attack is a lesson to Western European countries when these free-speech events take place.
You seem to be suggesting that such events in Europe should now require armed vigilantes, instead of regular police. If there are security threats, I think we should leave it to the police to handle them, and of course the organisers should pay for the privilege.

Of course a more sensible route would be to consult Muslim groups and even ask them to contribute to such event so that offence can be minimised and positive relations between different groups can be strengthened. If the group in Texas had made this kind of effort, then this incident would probably have been avoided. Unfortunately, they think Muslims are bad people and deserve a good kicking.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

My earlier was post was not nonsense. Your logic escapes me. People who insult others generally abuse their freedom of speech.

Agreed the death cult of Islam is truly an abuse of the 1st amendment and should be treated the same as all hate groups.

“Muslims are the vilest of animals…”

“Show mercy to one another, but be ruthless to Muslims”

“How perverse are Muslims!”

“Strike off the heads of Muslims, as well as their fingertips”

“Fight those Muslims who are near to you”

“Muslim mischief makers should be murdered or crucified”
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

You seem to be suggesting that such events in Europe should now require armed vigilantes, instead of regular police. If there are security threats, I think we should leave it to the police to handle them, and of course the organisers should pay for the privilege.

Of course a more sensible route would be to consult Muslim groups and even ask them to contribute to such event so that offence can be minimised and positive relations between different groups can be strengthened. If the group in Texas had made this kind of effort, then this incident would probably have been avoided. Unfortunately, they think Muslims are bad people and deserve a good kicking.

So everybody who is threatened by violence from other intolerant people should pay for police protection?

And again you explicitely advocate violence against those who you find offensive.

Clearly you must disapprove very strongly of freedom of speech.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Agreed - even though these kind of attacks could have been anticipated, there is no justification for them. We can safely agree on that.

On the issue of the right to insult the religious beliefs of others (and most religious believers are peaceful), then people who organise activities like this one in Texas put legislators in a very difficult situation. They force them to choose between security and freedom of speech. I hope they don't repeat this kind of stunt for the sake of the security of the silly people who turn up to them, and also for the sake of freedom of speech of many people, which they are jeopardising.

Americans value their 1st amendment highly-mostly save some on the left. If the choice is between freedom of speech and censorship (and Im not saying it is), well im picking freedom of speech. Even if opponents say its "for our safety".

The problem here is violent islam, not our freedom of speech.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Agreed the death cult of Islam is truly an abuse of the 1st amendment and should be treated the same as all hate groups.

“Muslims are the vilest of animals…”

“Show mercy to one another, but be ruthless to Muslims”

“How perverse are Muslims!”

“Strike off the heads of Muslims, as well as their fingertips”

“Fight those Muslims who are near to you”

“Muslim mischief makers should be murdered or crucified”

You're really starved for attention, aren't you? Pretty sad.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Americans value their 1st amendment highly-mostly save some on the left. If the choice is between freedom of speech and censorship (and Im not saying it is), well im picking freedom of speech. Even if opponents say its "for our safety".

The problem here is violent islam, not our freedom of speech.

Indeed. And by the way, protection is provided in Europe as well (and is often necessary). But there is no foolproof protection against fanatic terrorists.
 
Re: Shooting at Muhammad Art Exhibit in Texas

Free speech has consequences but there should be few limits on its nature.



I think the difference is that security in the US acted before the attackers got any victims. Such events in Europe have sadly had little armed official security in place and the consequences in France, Belgium and Denmark have been all too predictable.

The response to and speed of neutralising the attack is a lesson to Western European countries when these free-speech events take place.

Its almost like it takes men capable of violence in close proximity to stop the violent acts of aggressors. Lolz at choosing texas for an attack.
 
Back
Top Bottom