Is Labour Prosecuting A Class War?
News0 min ago
Why insult Mohammad?
135 Answers
There seems to be a lot of effort in recent years to insult Mohammad, seemingly just for the heck of it. This has led to a lot of unpleasantness due to Muslims feeling they need to protest against this sort of thing and so in and so forth.
So why bother insulting him in the first place, what does it achieve?
So why bother insulting him in the first place, what does it achieve?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by flobadob. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
<publishing something was likely to lead to the death of not you, your friends or family, but some innocent third party>
I can't imagine how that could happen.
Unless it specifically commanded the reader to commit that murder and perhaps provided instructions on how to do so.
The cartoons and videos cited here do no such thing.
People who choose to react to them by commiting violence need to grow up and take responsibility for their own choices and actions.
I can't imagine how that could happen.
Unless it specifically commanded the reader to commit that murder and perhaps provided instructions on how to do so.
The cartoons and videos cited here do no such thing.
People who choose to react to them by commiting violence need to grow up and take responsibility for their own choices and actions.
LazyGun> explain how shouting "fire" in a crowded cinema is even remotely analogous here....
Shouting "Fire" in a public theatre is an example of speech which serves no conceivable useful purpose and is extremely and imminently dangerous. This is the classic example of where free speech is not necessarily a right to be upheld. We can draw analogies about the useful purpose of a lie versus a childish insult (beyond each simply demonstrating the right to free speech), and the extent to which the expression creates danger. It's debatable.
Zeuhl> I can't imagine how that could happen.
OK, but I assume you can see that people do die, and that somebody is to blame. People are dying when people who aren't grown up are insulted by people who supposedly are grown up - that's if hurling insults is a grown up thing to do, and reacting to them isn't.
> People who choose to react to them by commiting violence need to grow up and take responsibility for their own choices and actions.
You're choosing to lay the blame squarely at the door of people who by your own admission aren't grown up. My question to you is "How do you get people who aren't grown up to grow up?" Is it by insulting them?
And if they're not currently "grown up" and they don't "grow up" to our liking, do those people who are supposedly "grown up" not bear any responsibility for the outcome of publishing and re-publishing their unfunny, unimportant cartoons and videos?
I agree that the principle of free speech is important, but it's not the only thing. Sanctity of human life, taking responsibility for your own actions and acting in a grown-up way are also important when lives are at stake. If the intended outcome is world peace, I don't see how we get there through childish insults hurled at people who aren't grown up! And, I would suggest, the people hurling the insults have some growing up to do too.
Shouting "Fire" in a public theatre is an example of speech which serves no conceivable useful purpose and is extremely and imminently dangerous. This is the classic example of where free speech is not necessarily a right to be upheld. We can draw analogies about the useful purpose of a lie versus a childish insult (beyond each simply demonstrating the right to free speech), and the extent to which the expression creates danger. It's debatable.
Zeuhl> I can't imagine how that could happen.
OK, but I assume you can see that people do die, and that somebody is to blame. People are dying when people who aren't grown up are insulted by people who supposedly are grown up - that's if hurling insults is a grown up thing to do, and reacting to them isn't.
> People who choose to react to them by commiting violence need to grow up and take responsibility for their own choices and actions.
You're choosing to lay the blame squarely at the door of people who by your own admission aren't grown up. My question to you is "How do you get people who aren't grown up to grow up?" Is it by insulting them?
And if they're not currently "grown up" and they don't "grow up" to our liking, do those people who are supposedly "grown up" not bear any responsibility for the outcome of publishing and re-publishing their unfunny, unimportant cartoons and videos?
I agree that the principle of free speech is important, but it's not the only thing. Sanctity of human life, taking responsibility for your own actions and acting in a grown-up way are also important when lives are at stake. If the intended outcome is world peace, I don't see how we get there through childish insults hurled at people who aren't grown up! And, I would suggest, the people hurling the insults have some growing up to do too.
naomi24> No one has insulted Mohammed - he's dead. This is taking offence by proxy.
That's playing with semantics. Mohammed's followers worship him. Perhaps the closest a rational atheist can get to understanding how his followers feel is to compare it to love.
If somebody insulted the cherished memory of someone you loved, who had died, you might well take offence. If their headstone was defaced, or or some lie (as you, who love them, saw it) was told and spread that was detrimentally affecting how others perceived your loved one, they wouldn't care - they're dead - but you might!
And even if it is taking offence by proxy ... so what? It's still taking offence. If those that are taking offence are not grown up enough to deal with it, how do we help them to grow up? By dishing out more offence?
seadogg> How do we prevent people hurling childish insults in a free society? in the short to medium term that is.
That is an excellent question. I'm not sure that we can, completely. It's the flip side to the question "How do we prevent prevent people from reacting childishly to insults?" Both societies should try their best.
That's playing with semantics. Mohammed's followers worship him. Perhaps the closest a rational atheist can get to understanding how his followers feel is to compare it to love.
If somebody insulted the cherished memory of someone you loved, who had died, you might well take offence. If their headstone was defaced, or or some lie (as you, who love them, saw it) was told and spread that was detrimentally affecting how others perceived your loved one, they wouldn't care - they're dead - but you might!
And even if it is taking offence by proxy ... so what? It's still taking offence. If those that are taking offence are not grown up enough to deal with it, how do we help them to grow up? By dishing out more offence?
seadogg> How do we prevent people hurling childish insults in a free society? in the short to medium term that is.
That is an excellent question. I'm not sure that we can, completely. It's the flip side to the question "How do we prevent prevent people from reacting childishly to insults?" Both societies should try their best.
@ellipsis
I think you argument is essentially a council of despair -throwing your hands in the air and saying there is nothing we can do, we must accept that these people will respond with murderous intent, and the best thing we can do is to appease them.
I do not agree.I do not accept that we should just meekly lie down and accept the inevitability of their reaction. Unlike fire, people can learn, can change. Cultures can change, with increasing exposure to new ideas, new perspectives. People can grow up, mature. Proactively through education or reactively through the application of law and reason.
A Fire cannot become enlightened. Cultures can. But it will take longer if violent and murderous over-reaction by a regressive minority is allowed to suppress free expression. If ideologies and religions attempt to preserve and protect their ideas through law and severe penalty, that should be challenged too.Thats how ideas and beliefs are changed. Evolution works on ideas, as well as on life.
I think you argument is essentially a council of despair -throwing your hands in the air and saying there is nothing we can do, we must accept that these people will respond with murderous intent, and the best thing we can do is to appease them.
I do not agree.I do not accept that we should just meekly lie down and accept the inevitability of their reaction. Unlike fire, people can learn, can change. Cultures can change, with increasing exposure to new ideas, new perspectives. People can grow up, mature. Proactively through education or reactively through the application of law and reason.
A Fire cannot become enlightened. Cultures can. But it will take longer if violent and murderous over-reaction by a regressive minority is allowed to suppress free expression. If ideologies and religions attempt to preserve and protect their ideas through law and severe penalty, that should be challenged too.Thats how ideas and beliefs are changed. Evolution works on ideas, as well as on life.
> I think you argument is essentially a council of despair -throwing your hands in the air and saying there is nothing we can do, we must accept that these people will respond with murderous intent, and the best thing we can do is to appease them.
Not at all! My argument is simply that insults are not the best way forwards.
> Unlike fire, people can learn, can change. Cultures can change, with increasing exposure to new ideas, new perspectives. People can grow up, mature. Proactively through education or reactively through the application of law and reason.
Fine words. I agree. But in this thread we're not talking about education or reason. We're talking about childish insults, childishly responded to.
Not at all! My argument is simply that insults are not the best way forwards.
> Unlike fire, people can learn, can change. Cultures can change, with increasing exposure to new ideas, new perspectives. People can grow up, mature. Proactively through education or reactively through the application of law and reason.
Fine words. I agree. But in this thread we're not talking about education or reason. We're talking about childish insults, childishly responded to.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
birdie1971> Are we talking about childish insults? Or are we talking about satire
It makes no difference.
> Violent protests, riots, arson and murder and not 'childish'. You're over simplifying.
Just picking up on the tone of others who have said they need to "grow up" or "mature". Sure the outcomes are serious, but as for the attitudes of the worst aspects of the two sides ... definitely childish. It's like watching a petulant four-year-old winding up an ignorant two-year-old, who smacks him back in protest. What next? Probably not a decision best left to either of them ...
It makes no difference.
> Violent protests, riots, arson and murder and not 'childish'. You're over simplifying.
Just picking up on the tone of others who have said they need to "grow up" or "mature". Sure the outcomes are serious, but as for the attitudes of the worst aspects of the two sides ... definitely childish. It's like watching a petulant four-year-old winding up an ignorant two-year-old, who smacks him back in protest. What next? Probably not a decision best left to either of them ...
Members of Islam seem to equate Mohammad with Allah [ Arabic / God] putting him on an equal footing...
If Allah was the creator, as Islam claims, surely he is powerful enough to protect himself...and would NOT require his human subjects to act on his behalf...When you think it through, they are actually insulting their own 'god', not giving him the credit to be powerful enough to protect himself...
Many can insult the Christian god yet its followers do not react adversely...
And are aware of what Jesus said...
" They hated me and will hate you also...John 15: 18
If Allah was the creator, as Islam claims, surely he is powerful enough to protect himself...and would NOT require his human subjects to act on his behalf...When you think it through, they are actually insulting their own 'god', not giving him the credit to be powerful enough to protect himself...
Many can insult the Christian god yet its followers do not react adversely...
And are aware of what Jesus said...
" They hated me and will hate you also...John 15: 18
has anyone actually seen the whole video of that Dr Zakir speech. I have and i can tell you that it was all taken out of context. They took bits that suited them. Also, if Dr Zakir Naik was an extremist, he was invited for a chat with Oxford Students on videocam because he could not come here. So in that case why would a bunch of students and teachers want to listen to an extremist?
there you go. The whole video of that speech with the oxford students. I dont expect you to watch it but if you do, good. Just want to give evidence i am n not making it up.
there you go. The whole video of that speech with the oxford students. I dont expect you to watch it but if you do, good. Just want to give evidence i am n not making it up.
Ellipsis, //Mohammed's followers worship him.//
Your reasoning is skewed. If it wasn’t, all Muslims would be joining the madmen – but they’re not. Jesus’ followers worship him – but that doesn’t give them carte blanche to demand that everyone else does the same, it doesn’t give them carte blanche to murder people – and unlike the people we’re talking about, they don’t expect it to.
Lightbulb, //So in that case why would a bunch of students and teachers want to listen to an extremist?//
They want to listen to him for the same reason I read books written by people of religion. To learn. If you don’t find out what other people are thinking, you remain ignorant of their philosophy and therefore you are not qualified to offer an opinion on that philosophy.
I’ll watch it when I have time.
Your reasoning is skewed. If it wasn’t, all Muslims would be joining the madmen – but they’re not. Jesus’ followers worship him – but that doesn’t give them carte blanche to demand that everyone else does the same, it doesn’t give them carte blanche to murder people – and unlike the people we’re talking about, they don’t expect it to.
Lightbulb, //So in that case why would a bunch of students and teachers want to listen to an extremist?//
They want to listen to him for the same reason I read books written by people of religion. To learn. If you don’t find out what other people are thinking, you remain ignorant of their philosophy and therefore you are not qualified to offer an opinion on that philosophy.
I’ll watch it when I have time.
If you are uncertain as to who Dr. Zakir Naik is then the following link may be of interest..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zakir_Naik
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zakir_Naik
naomi24> Ellipsis ... your reasoning is skewed. If it wasn’t, all Muslims would be joining the madmen
You suggested no offence could be taken by the dead. I pointed out how people could take offence. How those people then deal with that offence is a different matter. Some deal with it in a mature way. Some resort to violence.
You suggested no offence could be taken by the dead. I pointed out how people could take offence. How those people then deal with that offence is a different matter. Some deal with it in a mature way. Some resort to violence.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.