User Tag List

12311 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 111

  1. #1
    figsfiggyfigs
    Guest

    Default Muhammad (S.A.W.) cartoons and the boundaries of satire

    The Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy began after 12 editorial cartoons, most of which depicted the Islamic prophet Muhammad, were published in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten on 30 September 2005. The newspaper announced that this publication was an attempt to contribute to the debate regarding criticism of Islam and self-censorship. Danish Muslim organizations that objected to the depictions responded by holding public protests attempting to raise awareness of Jyllands-Posten's publication. Further examples of the cartoons were soon reprinted in newspapers in more than 50 other countries, further deepening the controversy.
    This led to Islamic protests across the Muslim world, some of which escalated into violence with instances of firing on crowds of protestors (resulting in a total of more than 100 reported deaths),[1] including the bombing of the Danish embassy in Pakistan and setting fire to the Danish Embassies in Syria, Lebanon and Iran, storming European buildings, and burning the Danish, Dutch, Norwegian, French and German flags in Gaza City.[2][3] Various groups, primarily in the Western world, responded by endorsing the Danish policies, including "Buy Danish" campaigns and other displays of support. Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen described the controversy as Denmark's worst international crisis since World War II.[4]
    Critics of the cartoons described them as Islamophobic or racist,[5] and argued that they are blasphemous to people of the Muslim faith, are intended to humiliate a Danish minority, or are a manifestation of ignorance about the history of Western imperialism.
    Supporters have said that the cartoons illustrated an important issue in a period of Islamic terrorism and that their publication is a legitimate exercise of the right of free speech, explicitly tied to the issue of self-censorship. They claim that Muslims were not targeted in a discriminatory way since unflattering cartoons about other religions (or their leaders) are frequently printed. [6] They question whether some of the riots were spontaneous outpourings as they took place where no spontaneous demonstrations are allowed, and whether the images of Muhammad per se are offensive to Muslims, as thousands of illustrations of Muhammad have appeared in books by and for Muslims.[7]

    Do you think it's okay to offend hundreds of millions of people in the name of satire, just for the sake of doing so?
    I personally don't think so, and I was pretty mad during the abovementioned controversy. I believe it in inexcusable to mock something so many people find precious and sacred. It was also a pretty stupid move by the newspaper. They must have known that the cartoons would create a big reaction in the Middle East.

  2. #2
    Habitual Fi LineStepper JocktheMotie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,193

    Default

    In general, yes, it's okay. We cannot claim to be a society of free expression if we're going make exceptions for every delicate sensibility. However, in this specific case, it seems it can be argued the newspaper's goal was to essentially troll the entire faith in the name of "opening discussion." I don't know enough about the details, and lack the will to seek them out.



  3. #3
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    xkcd
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INT_
    Posts
    10,733

    Default

    Blasphemy is funny.

    They had the right to print them, though it probably was not the wisest course of action. On the other hand, Muslims need to learn to handle these kinds of situations better.

  4. #4
    Superwoman Red Herring's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,644

    Default

    OMG, you just opened a can of worms. This is a very slippery issue!

    Let's see...


    First of all, the cartoons were of bad quality and unfunny.

    Was it the newspaper's right to print them? Sure.
    Did many in the Muslim world overreact? Definitely yes, especially when people assumed the Danish government should somehow intervene and control the media. That's just not how it works (or is supposed to work).

    On the other hand, I deeply mistrust the motives of those who pretend to defend Western free speech and free journalism when it comes to Islam and the Middle East but would get highzly sensitive if one of their holy cows was the target of something similar. It isn't too long ago that the Catholic church raised a little scandal about the animated tv series Popetown.



    And in Germany the satirical magazine Titanic has repeatedly gotten into trouble for covers like this one:



    If you want freedom of speech and consider religions fair game, then you should be consistent. But I don't think the real line of demarcation runs between Muslims and Christians. Actually, I can imagine that a lot of Christians would share the Muslims discomfort about this. Within every community, there seem to be those who think religion is fair game and those who don't. To me, that is the real frontline.

    As an atheist, I mostly respect other people's beliefs (however stupid I might think they are) as long as they don't intrude on my freedom. But I do not consider religion a sacred good that somehow deserves special protection and must not be made fun of. Therefor I am against laws that protect whatever religion from the right to free speech.

    That is religion. People and ethnic groups is a whole different story.
    And, in Europe, with Islam, it is sometimes hard to say who is being targeted. I do not know what the author of the cartoons and the editors of Jyllandsposten had in mind or what those who liked the cartoons think about Islam on the one hand and Arab and Middle Eastern immigrants on the other hand. I can only suspect. It is often hard to tell religious criticism from racism and I think Muslims intuitively know this as well, which is what probably caused part of the outrage.

    So while I find the cartoons stupid and of poor taste, I will defend the right to publish them.

    Yet another question is the reaction to them. I am not a big fan of moral relativism, but this case (which was probably heated up even more by the general political backdrop of the story) is an interesting case of totally different perceptions of what crosses a line and what doesn't.
    I just read an article about Israel where the author argues that Israel is superior to its Arab neighbors because it is basically a western democracy among a bunch of dictatorships (he also assumed, Zeus knows why, that Arabs are inherently incapable of living in a democracy that observes human rights, maybe they lack a gene or something...) and that it is unfair to compair Israel to European standards of human rights and blame them for breaches against international law. He argued that it was unfair to use Western instead of Middle Eastern standards to judge Israeli politics.
    I would argue that, on the contrary, since Israel is a wealthy, educated, Western style democracy, it should be held to Western standards while societies that have different problems to cope with should be given some leeway while they are economically catching up.

    In a nutshell:
    cartoons=stupid
    publication= stupid, but their right to do
    outraged criticism= exaggerated but partially understandable
    defenders= often hypocritical
    religion = should be a private affair but sadly is de facto still very

    The good life is one inspired by love and guided by knowledge. Neither love without knowledge, nor knowledge without love can produce a good life. - Bertrand Russell
    A herring's blog
    Johari / Nohari

  5. #5
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default



    In response to the OP:
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
    - Evelyn Beatrice Hall

  6. #6
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    xkcd
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INT_
    Posts
    10,733

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Herring View Post
    And the USA wins again!

  7. #7
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YWIR View Post
    I believe it in inexcusable to mock something so many people find precious and sacred.
    I find free speech (not to mention other basic civil rights) precious and sacred, and I believe attempts to limit it because one is offended to be inexcusable. And what I find inexcusable, I will mock.

  8. #8
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YWIR View Post
    Do you think it's okay to offend hundreds of millions of people in the name of satire, just for the sake of doing so?
    I personally don't think so, and I was pretty mad during the abovementioned controversy. I believe it in inexcusable to mock something so many people find precious and sacred. It was also a pretty stupid move by the newspaper. They must have known that the cartoons would create a big reaction in the Middle East.
    Millions of Americans would want to kick someone's ass for burning the flag.. but it's completely allowed. People troll others all the time--it isn't nice, and I'm not saying actions don't have consequences, but they're technically allowed to do it.
    Kantgirl: Just say "I'm feminine and I'll punch anyone who says otherwise!"
    Halla74: Think your way through the world. Feel your way through life.

    Cimarron: maybe Prpl will be your girl-bud
    prplchknz: i don't like it

    In Search Of... ... Kiwi Sketch Art ... Dream Journal ... Kyuuei's Cook book ... Kyu's Tiny House Blog ... Minimalist Challenge ... Kyu's Savings Challenge

  9. #9
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JocktheMotie View Post
    In general, yes, it's okay. We cannot claim to be a society of free expression if we're going make exceptions for every delicate sensibility.

    My thoughts, exactly.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Helios's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    273

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YWIR View Post
    Do you think it's okay to offend hundreds of millions of people in the name of satire, just for the sake of doing so?
    I personally don't think so, and I was pretty mad during the abovementioned controversy. I believe it in inexcusable to mock something so many people find precious and sacred. It was also a pretty stupid move by the newspaper. They must have known that the cartoons would create a big reaction in the Middle East.
    Heaven forbid things that are popular be mocked.

    Yes, everything should be open to derision, and in the most offensive ways possible. I found the reaction in the Middle East hilarious, and I hope someone else produces that same reaction again.

Similar Threads

  1. Type and the Use of Emoticons
    By MerkW in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 07-09-2010, 12:59 PM
  2. [INFP] INFPs and the Lack of Initiative
    By nolla in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 09-02-2008, 01:38 PM
  3. Replies: 23
    Last Post: 07-30-2008, 08:38 PM
  4. "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix" review...
    By The Ü™ in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-22-2007, 03:34 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO