Teacher beheaded near Paris after showing cartoons of Prophet Muhammad

[stevoc]

So you are saying that Muslims have no right to be angry? That's ridiculous. Yes they have no right to violence but now Muslims must not get angry because they are showing cartoons of The Prophet?
Macron is right that violence has no place not only in France but in any country because of the cartoons. He is right the extremism should stop.
But he has poured fuel into the fire by supporting the cartoons to be displayed publicly.

People have the right to be angry but anger and violence don’t live in independent vacuums. The former usually proceeds the latter.

So given the history of past attacks the response from the Muslim world to the cartoons being republished should have been toned down with the possibility and likelihood of extremists hearing the fresh outpouring of anger and being riled up to the point of feeling the need to behead people.

 

[Dr. Funkenstein]

@Abizzz @utdalltheway

Now you're conflating criticism (reasonable) with Islamophobia (unreasonable) which are different.

The difference is that islamophobia doesn't exist. There's never been a case of someone getting terribly frightened with no reason when seeing a mosque or someone looking like a muslim. People who get scared of islam because they're about to get their head cut off or fear muslims will attack their freedom of speech have no irrational fear, but a very real and justified one, so that's not a phobia either.

Islamophobia is a propagandistic term introduced by extremists to silence criticism and warnings for their ideology. Using that word is helping radical islam.

This wasn't the case though? Macron ordered the cartoons to be projected onto government buildings, was there a need to do this?

Yes, absolutely. There is no right not to be offended. It's everybody's freedom of religion to not abide someone else's religious rules and ridicule anyone they want, that's exactly the same freedom of religion that allows muslims to be in France and practice their religion in the first place. Not showing the cartoons is kneeling for the totalitarian rule of islam, the claim that their religious rules apply to everybody.

I would agree it's not nice and polite to shove those cartoons under muslim's noses in front of a mosque or something. But that's not the issue with the cartoons. It became an issue because the cartoons were there, in the back of a kiosk in some obscure magazine. So those muslims actually had to make an effort to get offended, and they did. That's not because they're offended in their personal religious feelings, they're offended in their feeling islam rules over everybody so there should not be a drawing that breaks their religious rules anywhere. With a vast majority of muslims worldwide not supporting freedom of religion, and a majority of French muslims, a line has to be drawn. It's not just cartoons, it's also the oppression of moderate muslims in muslim neighbourhoods, often effectively enforcing the headscarf and banning alcohol, it's the difficulty teaching kids about the holocaust en the general antisemitism among muslims. That's not the case in France and that has to be stated clearly, to remind the French muslims who's the boss and to remind them there's freedom religion for all the French, it's not a right of a religion and certrainly not only one religion, but a right of all French citizens. France does not bow to intimidation like so many other countries and everybody who wants freedom should applaud them.

 

[MadMike]

So you are saying that Muslims have no right to be angry? That's ridiculous. Yes they have no right to violence but now Muslims must not get angry because they are showing cartoons of The Prophet?
Macron is right that violence has no place not only in France but in any country because of the cartoons. He is right the extremism should stop.
But he has poured fuel into the fire by supporting the cartoons to be displayed publicly.

The fuel was poured into the fire by extremists killing people over a period of 5 years, not by Macron.

If there are people getting angry over the cartoons, instead of getting angry over the killings they are part of the problem. No ifs, no buts, no coconuts.

Even taking the killings out of the equation, it's still ridiculous to get riled up over a harmless cartoon. There's thousands of religious-themed memes and jokes being shared on the internet every second, making fun of everyone. Do you get angry over all of those too?

 

[MadMike]

People have the right to be angry but anger and violence don’t live in independent vacuums. The former usually proceeds the latter.

So given the history of past attacks the response from the Muslim world to the cartoons being republished should have been toned down with the possibility and likelihood of extremists hearing the fresh outpouring of anger and being riled up to the point of feeling the need to behead people.

Having a right and being right are different things. Getting angry over a cartoon by a tiny, fringe satirical magazine is a problematic response. It's like getting angry because of a meme on the internet.

You don't have to like it or find it funny by all means. But if it bothers you so much that you're getting angry about it, then yes you have issues. The adult response is to roll your eyes and move on.

 

[Penna]

I have to say, Christians see things which mock their religion every single day. We're told to respond with forgiveness and prayer, not with anger.

 

[fishfingers15]

The difference is that islamophobia doesn't exist. There's never been a case of someone getting terribly frightened with no reason when seeing a mosque or someone looking like a muslim. People who get scared of islam because they're about to get their head cut off or fear muslims will attack their freedom of speech have no irrational fear, but a very real and justified one, so that's not a phobia either.

Islamophobia is a propagandistic term introduced by extremists to silence criticism and warnings for their ideology. Using that word is helping radical islam.

Yes, absolutely. There is no right not to be offended. It's everybody's freedom of religion to not abide someone else's religious rules and ridicule anyone they want, that's exactly the same freedom of religion that allows muslims to be in France and practice their religion in the first place. Not showing the cartoons is kneeling for the totalitarian rule of islam, the claim that their religious rules apply to everybody.

I would agree it's not nice and polite to shove those cartoons under muslim's noses in front of a mosque or something. But that's not the issue with the cartoons. It became an issue because the cartoons were there, in the back of a kiosk in some obscure magazine. So those muslims actually had to make an effort to get offended, and they did. That's not because they're offended in their personal religious feelings, they're offended in their feeling islam rules over everybody so there should not be a drawing that breaks their religious rules anywhere. With a vast majority of muslims worldwide not supporting freedom of religion, and a majority of French muslims, a line has to be drawn. It's not just cartoons, it's also the oppression of moderate muslims in muslim neighbourhoods, often effectively enforcing the headscarf and banning alcohol, it's the difficulty teaching kids about the holocaust en the general antisemitism among muslims. That's not the case in France and that has to be stated clearly, to remind the French muslims who's the boss and to remind them there's freedom religion for all the French, it's not a right of a religion and certrainly not only one religion, but a right of all French citizens. France does not bow to intimidation like so many other countries and everybody who wants freedom should applaud them.

I'm sorry, what? Why are we always in the extremes ffs

 

[pratyush_utd]

This is what prominent Muslim journalist thinks

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

They have no clue what Charlie Hebdo is. Portraying a cartoon is bullying apparently. Normalisation of beheading and other vile disgusting act is quite staggering. Islamic world regularly insults Jews and other religion. I struggle to remember how many offended people went and killed in the name of their god. Maybe because hardly any minority is left in these countries.

 

[pratyush_utd]

I have to say, Christians see things which mock their religion every single day. We're told to respond with forgiveness and prayer, not with anger.

Dan Brown literally wrote a book in which Jesus was portrayed as having a kid and married. They even made a movie out of it. I can buy that book at my local store and watch the movie on Netflix.

 

[utdalltheway]

She's equating the murderous violence to the offence that the cartoons created.
Uses the same word, so no difference
What a dope!

 

[Dr. Funkenstein]

I'm sorry, what? Why are we always in the extremes ffs

What do you mean? I'm not extreme, I'm very moderate. It's about clarity, who's claiming what right over whom. From that giving in to muslims who claim to be offended would be extreme.

 

[Abizzz]

The difference is that islamophobia doesn't exist. There's never been a case of someone getting terribly frightened with no reason when seeing a mosque or someone looking like a muslim. People who get scared of islam because they're about to get their head cut off or fear muslims will attack their freedom of speech have no irrational fear, but a very real and justified one, so that's not a phobia either.

Islamophobia is a propagandistic term introduced by extremists to silence criticism and warnings for their ideology. Using that word is helping radical islam.

That's just semantics. I can personally guarantee that there's people with an irrational fear of Islam, people who display hate towards Islam, people who are violent towards Muslims for being Muslim. You might want to call that something else, but it does exist and should be fought just as hard as the extremists themselves. Tolerance has to end when the intolerant demand tolerance of their intolerance.

 

[coolredwine]

This is what prominent Muslim journalist thinks

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

They have no clue what Charlie Hebdo is. Portraying a cartoon is bullying apparently. Normalisation of beheading and other vile disgusting act is quite staggering. Islamic world regularly insults Jews and other religion. I struggle to remember how many offended people went and killed in the name of their god. Maybe because hardly any minority is left in these countries.

Well done using words of one and projecting it on others.

 

[RoadTrip]

I have to say, Christians see things which mock their religion every single day. We're told to respond with forgiveness and prayer, not with anger.

The issue isn’t this though. I don’t think Islam teaches violence or indeed anger. It’s sadly that extremists have warped what the religion says.

I think it’s also important to consider what is unique here isn’t that different religions are against certain things. That applies to all religions. Hindus treat cows as sacred and people who eat beef or work leather and considered lower cast. Christians are against contraception and abortion and it’s clear what impact and influence that has all over the world. Obviously these are more significant issues but principally the same in that what isn’t an issue in one religion may be in another.

The real issue here is how people react and whilst of course you have extreme Hindus and Christians and whatever, extremism in Muslims is more prominent overall and that’s the issue that needs resolving.

 

[MadMike]

That's just semantics. I can personally guarantee that there's people with an irrational fear of Islam, people who display hate towards Islam, people who are violent towards Muslims for being Muslim. You might want to call that something else, but it does exist and should be fought just as hard as the extremists themselves. Tolerance has to end when the intolerant demand tolerance of their intolerance.

That I can fully agree with. And sadly that is only going to increase in the spate of these recent events.

 

[fergieisold]

This is what prominent Muslim journalist thinks

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

They have no clue what Charlie Hebdo is. Portraying a cartoon is bullying apparently. Normalisation of beheading and other vile disgusting act is quite staggering. Islamic world regularly insults Jews and other religion. I struggle to remember how many offended people went and killed in the name of their god. Maybe because hardly any minority is left in these countries.

Seems to me rather than condemn the attacks they are trying to justify it. big victim mentality.

 

[nimic]

The next time I teach sociology I reckon I'll show the cartoons.

 

[fergieisold]

The next time I teach sociology I reckon I'll show the cartoons.

brave man!

 

[Abizzz]

That I can fully agree with. And sadly that is only going to increase in the spate of these recent events.

Yes, sadly If anyone had asked me 15 years ago I would have answered that progress will take care of it, things will get better with time. Now i'm not so sure anymore.

 

[RoadTrip]

The difference is that islamophobia doesn't exist. There's never been a case of someone getting terribly frightened with no reason when seeing a mosque or someone looking like a muslim. People who get scared of islam because they're about to get their head cut off or fear muslims will attack their freedom of speech have no irrational fear, but a very real and justified one, so that's not a phobia either.

Islamophobia is a propagandistic term introduced by extremists to silence criticism and warnings for their ideology. Using that word is helping radical islam.

Yes, absolutely. There is no right not to be offended. It's everybody's freedom of religion to not abide someone else's religious rules and ridicule anyone they want, that's exactly the same freedom of religion that allows muslims to be in France and practice their religion in the first place. Not showing the cartoons is kneeling for the totalitarian rule of islam, the claim that their religious rules apply to everybody.

I would agree it's not nice and polite to shove those cartoons under muslim's noses in front of a mosque or something. But that's not the issue with the cartoons. It became an issue because the cartoons were there, in the back of a kiosk in some obscure magazine. So those muslims actually had to make an effort to get offended, and they did. That's not because they're offended in their personal religious feelings, they're offended in their feeling islam rules over everybody so there should not be a drawing that breaks their religious rules anywhere. With a vast majority of muslims worldwide not supporting freedom of religion, and a majority of French muslims, a line has to be drawn. It's not just cartoons, it's also the oppression of moderate muslims in muslim neighbourhoods, often effectively enforcing the headscarf and banning alcohol, it's the difficulty teaching kids about the holocaust en the general antisemitism among muslims. That's not the case in France and that has to be stated clearly, to remind the French muslims who's the boss and to remind them there's freedom religion for all the French, it's not a right of a religion and certrainly not only one religion, but a right of all French citizens. France does not bow to intimidation like so many other countries and everybody who wants freedom should applaud them.

I think there is a fine line here which I think you miss.

No one is saying that people don’t have a right to show these cartoons. They do.

But that’s a separate consideration from the consequence of enacting that right. Just because you’re free to say what you want doesn’t mean people shouldn’t be upset if you do something that is against their beliefs or simply put if it annoys them.

I could go into a cinema and shout over the film. I could never shower and stink out an office. I could sit in the middle of two seats on a train and not move over if someone wants to sit down. I have a right to do these things but I don’t because it’s just antagonising people and I would just be being a dick. So I’d probably make 2 main points:

- One consideration is should we put out these cartoons if we know it irritates and makes people angry? Not doing so isn’t succumbing to their religion, it’s just a sensible thing to do. Kind of like me not doing the things above. Not putting up those cartoons isn’t going to change your life. I’ve a right to do it if I want, but the question is, why do it if we know it causes a reaction like this?
- On the other hand, i also think Muslims must adapt to not be so offended by things like this even if it’s against their religion. I don’t have a leg to stand on when I say that but that’s what I think. And the only way to tackle that is tackling the radicalisation of what the religion teaches. And frankly I don’t know the answer in terms of how to solve that.

 

[fergieisold]

4 attempted attacks in France today according to the mail.

 

[OleBoiii]

I have to say, Christians see things which mock their religion every single day. We're told to respond with forgiveness and prayer, not with anger.

It's not so much a matter of religion as it is how far certain countries have/haven't advanced. For whatever reason(I don't want to derail the thread), traditionally Christian countries are way ahead of Muslim countries when it comes to progressiveness.

But let's not pretend that there haven't been any atrocities in the name of Christianity.

 

[Zehner]

The difference is that islamophobia doesn't exist. There's never been a case of someone getting terribly frightened with no reason when seeing a mosque or someone looking like a muslim. People who get scared of islam because they're about to get their head cut off or fear muslims will attack their freedom of speech have no irrational fear, but a very real and justified one, so that's not a phobia either.

Islamophobia is a propagandistic term introduced by extremists to silence criticism and warnings for their ideology. Using that word is helping radical islam.

Yes, absolutely. There is no right not to be offended. It's everybody's freedom of religion to not abide someone else's religious rules and ridicule anyone they want, that's exactly the same freedom of religion that allows muslims to be in France and practice their religion in the first place. Not showing the cartoons is kneeling for the totalitarian rule of islam, the claim that their religious rules apply to everybody.

I would agree it's not nice and polite to shove those cartoons under muslim's noses in front of a mosque or something. But that's not the issue with the cartoons. It became an issue because the cartoons were there, in the back of a kiosk in some obscure magazine. So those muslims actually had to make an effort to get offended, and they did. That's not because they're offended in their personal religious feelings, they're offended in their feeling islam rules over everybody so there should not be a drawing that breaks their religious rules anywhere. With a vast majority of muslims worldwide not supporting freedom of religion, and a majority of French muslims, a line has to be drawn. It's not just cartoons, it's also the oppression of moderate muslims in muslim neighbourhoods, often effectively enforcing the headscarf and banning alcohol, it's the difficulty teaching kids about the holocaust en the general antisemitism among muslims. That's not the case in France and that has to be stated clearly, to remind the French muslims who's the boss and to remind them there's freedom religion for all the French, it's not a right of a religion and certrainly not only one religion, but a right of all French citizens. France does not bow to intimidation like so many other countries and everybody who wants freedom should applaud them.

While I agree with much you're claiming, I disagree regarding the Islamophobia part. Here in Germany, we've got a far right wing organisation called PEGIDA (Patriotic Europeans Against The Islamisation Of The Occident) who try convincing people that the islamisation of the western world is a real thing and that they should fear that Europe in the near future becomes a conservative muslim nation. That's not a rational fear, that's clearly irrational.

I agree with the part regarding France though. Satire should be allowed about/against everything and the Islam has to learn to live with it, like it or not. If they take offense with it, that's a problem but it can't be solved by granting them special treatment. Right now, free people are in fear of making jokes about the islam because of the potebtial consequences and Macron is doing the right thing by fighting this situation.

 

[hobbers]

Is all critique and commentary on this subject Islamophobic? No.

In fact, none of it is.

The difference is that islamophobia doesn't exist.

I wouldn't go that far. There are behaviours that are islamophobic, no doubt, but we've already seen in this thread how easy some people seem to find it to label something islamophobic with no basis in reality whatsoever. The word has been overused and misused so much by this point it's verging on meaningless.

 

[nimic]

brave man!

I'm not looking for your support, I'm just a teacher.

I don't want any part of your agenda.

 

[RoadTrip]

This is what prominent Muslim journalist thinks

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

They have no clue what Charlie Hebdo is. Portraying a cartoon is bullying apparently. Normalisation of beheading and other vile disgusting act is quite staggering. Islamic world regularly insults Jews and other religion. I struggle to remember how many offended people went and killed in the name of their god. Maybe because hardly any minority is left in these countries.

Seems to me rather than condemn the attacks they are trying to justify it. big victim mentality.

Agreed and this is what irritates me the most. Extremists aren’t going to be convinced by non Muslims that their views are wrong. The only way that the radicalisation of Islam will ever stop is if the Islamic community themselves “take back their religion” for use of a better phrase. They’re the only ones who have a chance.

And whilst I can understand her point principally, her focus shouldn’t be on justifying the reaction because of the things that are wrong (which do need fixing), but instead focusing on dealing with the violence and saying it’s wrong. The reality is if extremism in the religion stopped, that would itself contribute to stopping these issues she raises. Of course goes hand in hand though, if Muslims felt more respected maybe the extremism would decline. Reality is everyone needs to change and somehow come together but instead right now everyone is focussed on defending their agenda.Nothing changes until that’s resolved.

 

[RoadTrip]

It's not so much a matter of religion as it is how far certain countries have/haven't advanced. For whatever reason(I don't want to derail the thread), traditionally Christian countries are way ahead of Muslim countries when it comes to progressiveness.

But let's not pretend that there haven't been any atrocities in the name of Christianity.

I think there are many factors to consider here also. In particular, historically Christian countries are the most developed which means typically have had a history of immigration and thus the populations of these countries are far more diverse and so progressiveness ensues in terms of comparability between views and beliefs.

 

[pratyush_utd]

Agreed and this is what irritates me the most. Extremists aren’t going to be convinced by non Muslims that their views are wrong. The only way that the radicalisation of Islam will ever stop is if the Islamic community themselves “take back their religion” for use of a better phrase. They’re the only ones who have a chance.

And whilst I can understand her point principally, her focus shouldn’t be on justifying the reaction because of the things that are wrong (which do need fixing), but instead focusing on dealing with the violence and saying it’s wrong. The reality is if extremism in the religion stopped, that would itself contribute to stopping these issues she raises. Of course goes hand in hand though, if Muslims felt more respected maybe the extremism would decline. Reality is everyone needs to change and somehow come together but instead right now everyone is focussed on defending their agenda.Nothing changes until that’s resolved.

Her point is devoid of any reality as Charlie Hebdo has mercilessly mocked other religions and fascism. Why should they mock Homosexuality and deny holocaust just to satisfy her? Cartoon in question doesn't even come close to some of their work.

 

[UncleBob]

It's not so much a matter of religion

But let's not pretend that there haven't been any atrocities in the name of Christianity.

are we back to bringingup the crusades?

 

[OleBoiii]

I think there are many factors to consider here also. In particular, historically Christian countries are the most developed which means typically have had a history of immigration and thus the populations of these countries are far more diverse and so progressiveness ensues in terms of comparability between views and beliefs.

Yup. We should also not underestimate the power of education and financial stability. If I'm not mistaken, Bangladesh's birth rate dropped from almost 7 kids to around 2 kids(slightly above the "Western" average) in a matter of 10 years.

I can guarantee you that in 1 or 2 generations, unless something dramatic happens, most Muslim countries are going to be significantly more progressive. Perhaps as progressive as "Western" countries are today.

 

[Penna]

It's not so much a matter of religion as it is how far certain countries have/haven't advanced. For whatever reason(I don't want to derail the thread), traditionally Christian countries are way ahead of Muslim countries when it comes to progressiveness.

But let's not pretend that there haven't been any atrocities in the name of Christianity.

I wouldn't dismiss any atrocities carried out in the name of a religion - they're all wrong, whether historical or happening today. However, when someone seeks out ordinary people in a place of worship and murders them, that's particularly shocking. I don't draw any distinction between the worshippers, they might be Muslim, Jewish or Christian or whatever. They're all innocent victims.

 

[Vitro]

People have the right to be angry but anger and violence don’t live in independent vacuums. The former usually proceeds the latter.

So given the history of past attacks the response from the Muslim world to the cartoons being republished should have been toned down with the possibility and likelihood of extremists hearing the fresh outpouring of anger and being riled up to the point of feeling the need to behead people.

An issue is that a sizeable minority of the Muslim population feels the cartoons (blasphemy) are a bigger offence than the terror attacks. So when a cartoon is published, knowing what has resulted in the past, instead of showing forbearance and muting the outrage for the sake of the future victims of an inevitable terror attack, they instead contribute to the feeling within the community that plays a big part in why the attacks occur.

 

[RoadTrip]

are we back to bringingup the crusades?

Isn’t this a function of how people perceive this and also how it’s reported? If a Muslim commits a crime it is labelled terrorism and islamic extremism and rightly so. But when a Christian kills Muslims, it isn’t labelled as Christian extremism.

 

[MadMike]

Isn’t this a function of how people perceive this and also how it’s reported? If a Muslim commits a crime it is labelled terrorism and islamic extremism and rightly so. But when a Christian kills Muslims, it isn’t labelled as Christian extremism.

It's certainly how it's perceived but not how it's reported. I very vividly remember Christchurch shootings being labelled as terrorism.

And that wasn't even a killing in the name of Christianity. It was a killing because of Islamophobia. The killer didn't do it in the name of a religion, he wasn't shouting "Jesus is greatest" and didn't target any random person on the street. He attacked Muslims in a mosque, because he hated Muslims.

Those guys are far-right bigots. Their views on Islam are that it's incompatible with the Western ideals and that fuels their violence. But they aren't and don't claim to be devout Christians, like Muslim extremists do. It's not a love of religion that radicalised them. There's a clear discernible difference. Hence they are not reported as "Christian extremists", but as "far right extremists". Because, you know, it's correct.

 

[2cents]

Isn’t this a function of how people perceive this and also how it’s reported? If a Muslim commits a crime it is labelled terrorism and islamic extremism and rightly so. But when a Christian kills Muslims, it isn’t labelled as Christian extremism.

It depends on the motivation. If a Christian killed a Muslim and explained that he did because he believed it to be a religious duty, then he’d absolutely be labeled a Christian extremist.

 

[KirkDuyt]

Gotcha.. still confused why Erdogan waded in and why is no one going after him for fueling this fire

Geert Wilders did and Erdogan sued him over it. Far be it from me to defend Geert fecking Wilders, but...

Ok I'm now officially one of the "Im not a Truml fan, but" people. Kill me now.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

How can a non-believer commit blasphemy? I don't see any logic there.

 

[fishfingers15]

What do you mean? I'm not extreme, I'm very moderate. It's about clarity, who's claiming what right over whom. From that giving in to muslims who claim to be offended would be extreme.

Of course Islamophobia exists. Are you saying it doesnt exist in your zip code? Or in the world?

 

[fergieisold]

I'm not looking for your support, I'm just a teacher.

I don't want any part of your agenda.

And what agenda would that be?

 

[MadMike]

How can a non-believer commit blasphemy? I don't see any logic there.

The whole concept of blasphemy is so outdated that it's laughable.

And the idea that non-religious people or people of different religions, should abide by the rules of another one is a downright dangerous fascist concept. Fully incompatible with secular democracy.

 

[fergieisold]

Agreed and this is what irritates me the most. Extremists aren’t going to be convinced by non Muslims that their views are wrong. The only way that the radicalisation of Islam will ever stop is if the Islamic community themselves “take back their religion” for use of a better phrase. They’re the only ones who have a chance.

And whilst I can understand her point principally, her focus shouldn’t be on justifying the reaction because of the things that are wrong (which do need fixing), but instead focusing on dealing with the violence and saying it’s wrong. The reality is if extremism in the religion stopped, that would itself contribute to stopping these issues she raises. Of course goes hand in hand though, if Muslims felt more respected maybe the extremism would decline. Reality is everyone needs to change and somehow come together but instead right now everyone is focussed on defending their agenda.Nothing changes until that’s resolved.

I got attacked for claiming the same thing, reform has to come from the muslim community. There is hope for peace but it requires big changes within the religion and I’d imagine there’s a lot of resistance to that. I was quite convinced by a debate someone here posted that clearly showed Islam can be a religion of peace with change but as it stand currently it is anything but.