"Blasphemy is not a human right" sign.

[TUMe]

So the demonstrator outside of the Mohammed cartoon exposition carries the above sign.

But wait, what if I decide what they believe is blasphemy. History is full of burning other people's saints at the stake. When they got around to the Bill of Rights, the very first one was called, oddly enough, The First Amendment. And it was about freedom of religion and freedom of expression.

 

[WATU2]

And your point is? What? That hosting an anti-Islamic competition was a great idea and the whole purpose was to further our Constitutional interests in free speech, not to provoke some sort of violent response? There's no justification for the attack or the murder, but the Mayor was dead set against it and the local Muslim community went out of its way to ignore it, but will get slimed because of it.

Heard one of the moronic backers of this event on the radio saying that he was protecting free speech, and it was not anti-Islamic. Do you believe him?

 

[TUMe]

My point is that the protesters don't seem to understand that freedom of expression is a right here. Sometimes it's unpleasant. Nazis have marched through Jewish communities, South Park did a show on Jesus and Moses. Neither religion brought out the assault rifles.

Of course it is anti-Muslim. There is no law against being anti-Muslim or anti-Christian. Things that we don't dislike don't need protecting. Nobody gets violent because they are against Mothers Day.

And what is blasphemy? By the way, no pictures of Mohammed is in direct response to pictures of Jesus which they did not approve of. Muslims see equating Jesus with God as blasphemy, Christian see not doing so as blasphemy.

The Constitution says you can say either one or neither. It's not a new idea. And it is not going to change.

 

[TUMe]

By the way, WA, it was a bad idea. But that doesn't mean people have to die. And the ability to display unpopular expression whether in word, or print, or art is a human right.

 

[WATU2]

By the way, WA, it was a bad idea. But that doesn't mean people have to die. And the ability to display unpopular expression whether in word, or print, or art is a human right.

You know there are limitations on the freedom of speech. Most of which have to do with common sense, such as the example that SCOTUS has repeatedly used: yelling "Fire' in an crowded auditorium.

What I find interesting is that of all the elements that one could comment about this terrible event, someone would choose to go after those who protested what is a purposefully inflammatory event. BTW peaceful protesting is also protected speech.

 

[aTUfan]

This same venue hosted a so called "pro muslim" event in January. Its speakers have ties to terrorists groups. Also no-one that was non-muslim was allowed to attend.

a number of opposing groups protested, but noone tried to shoot the attendees.

 

[TUMe]

"Fire" is what the first terrorist said to the second.

Yes they have the right to protest and I have the right to say their logic is incorrect about rights. Let me point out that I do not like what Westborough Baptist Church does in protesting at funerals of soldiers because of the US policy on same sex marriages. It makes me furious. But that would not excuse killing them.

Just because a protest is legal and even protected, doesn't mean one has to approve of it. I'm going to guess that you don't approve of the funeral protests. There is a interesting word: "Protected"

The cartoon art, whether anyone likes it or not, is protected. Something that offends me is protected. Something that offends you is protected. The expedition was offensive. The attack was unwise and illegal. When we start saying you can't give an opinion verbally or graphically it is a dangerous road to go down.

 

[URedskin54]

It's the event organizers' fault. They wouldn't have been shot at if they weren't dressed so slutty

 

[noble cane]

Since we're talking about blasphemy.. how about a blast from the past that was hailed as free speech and art....

I don't remember the Vatican threatening a Crusade against the Artist or the Museum that hosted the exhibit...

 

[rabidTU]

Here's what a good Muslim should do instead of attempt to murder their fellow human beings. Go out and legally/peacefully protest this "blasphemy". By doing that, they will have gotten their point across, abided by the laws of the nation they live in and satisfied the will of Allah by not condoning the blasphemy.

Unfortunately, we have a radical element of liberals who would rather defend murderers and attempted murderers as religious victims. The problem IMO are both those who commit these acts of violence and those who defend those who commit them.

 

[2PoorTUFans]

It's the event organizers' fault. They wouldn't have been shot at if they weren't dressed so slutty

i bet this was really funny in your head when you were typing it out

 

[lawpoke87]

Plenty of "art" work around depicting Jesus in a light considered blasphemous to Christians. Heck....some of its even government funded. One of our greatest strengths is the freedom of speech and expression. Basically, the right to offend Christians, Muslims, etc.

I'm on record as not a fan of organized religion. I believe it's responsible for millions of needless deaths throughout history. However, I also don't see the value or need to mock any religion although I recognize the right to do such that. Islam must take a harder stance on violence and intolerance. Until it does the criticism is justified.

 

[URedskin54]

i bet this was really funny in your head when you were typing it out

It made me lol and rofl and lmao