What's new

Hate speech on social media

[MENTION=146370]Tubs[/MENTION]

Free speech when insulting any religious figure will bring out a violent reaction. I notice how you like society in general are obsessed with the Prophet of Islam here more then anyone else. Interestingly your free speech have hardly ever attacked any other religious figure as they fully well know politicians and world leaders will condemn it with all their might. One rule for Muslim's and another for the rest is what your "free speech is". No Jesus does not get insulted half as much as Muhammad(saw) does at all, what world do you live in. I don't care either that money was lost as long as the job was done and it was so very effectively shutting them up permanently.

Many places? Yeah perhaps in private house holds but not openly in magazines like it was during that period. The media does not make it common like it did back then so to tell Muslim's "this is what we are doing to your Prophet" inviting a violent reaction. I am afraid when it comes to our sensitivities we don't need to hear from you non-Muslim's of how to feel or behave. Out of two billion people there will be some who take the law in to their own hands no matter what so your freedom of speech as I said before is not that at all. Once more such acts have greatly dies down after the said event.

Since when has the media ever said anything good about the Muslim's then we should worry about what they or anyone else thinks?. They blame the Muslim's for everything that is wrong in the world anyone to the degree that we've become immune to it. If you mean that we should happily tolerate such blasphemy then it will never happen, there will always be some sort of reaction. You will not be so tolerant or philosophical if certain language was used towards your mother let me tell you that, also Muslim's love their Prophet who is not a "public figure" for us more then we do our family. Muhammad(saw) made inflammatory comments?? In insulting him you are hurting those who hold him in the highest regard provoking violence that will cause religious disharmony amongst communities. Once again we are not asking for west to regard him as anything at all other then someone who deserves a bit of respect just like normal people. Just like you would not insult a passerby there is no need to do him either even for the sake of good relations between the west and Muslim countries. They can hate him in their hearts as well all they want, water of my back. If they paint pictures or use swear words then don't hold others responsible.

I do not need to hear from you where I can or can not live. I am not calling for Islamic or Shariah law to be implemented in the west either neither am I that learned in the subject. What I am saying is that there will be all kinds of reactions when insulting the Prophet of two billion people, simple. Calling out the west for it's hypocrisy and double standards does not mean I don't love or respect the place. By your childish logic all westerners should also leave Muslim countries as well if it bans them from insulting the Prophet of Allah. I am here on a website where most are Muslim's so if anyone should leave this website it's you not me!
 
PakLFC said:
So do you expect the supreme himself to you!!? People will fight over land, money, wealth, earth's resources and whatever else because Allah tells us to but it is in our nature. It is absurd of you to compare fictional characters to what people consider as the greatest people ever to have walked the earth. No one is asking you to become part of anything just don't initiate trouble by deliberately saying something offensive that will trigger it off. I will not get violent but millions of all faiths will do so leading to conflict so your belief of saying anything whenever you want in nonsensical. Problem is people like you too are regularly made to obey the law of the country you live in yet think it is okay to say whatever you want. Doesn't make sense at all.
Click to expand...

"offensive" is a relative term. What is offensive to you, may not be offensive to another Muslim. If someone quotes quran wrongly, you may get offended and become violent yet another Muslim may not be offended but could just be establish the context and then explain the words in its true meanings.

We obey the law of the land because it is an establish institution where every entity does exist in real world. It isn't faith but these are rules. Religion operates in faith manner which I refuse to agree with.

I didn't state I am the supreme himself. What I stated was, I refuse to follow a "supreme" who is not existent and relies on belief of the people. I'll rather a follow a person rather than some entity which is yet to be found.
 
PakLFC said:
[MENTION=146370]Tubs[/MENTION]

Free speech when insulting any religious figure will bring out a violent reaction. I notice how you like society in general are obsessed with the Prophet of Islam here more then anyone else. Interestingly your free speech have hardly ever attacked any other religious figure as they fully well know politicians and world leaders will condemn it with all their might. One rule for Muslim's and another for the rest is what your "free speech is". No Jesus does not get insulted half as much as Muhammad(saw) does at all, what world do you live in. I don't care either that money was lost as long as the job was done and it was so very effectively shutting them up permanently.

Many places? Yeah perhaps in private house holds but not openly in magazines like it was during that period. The media does not make it common like it did back then so to tell Muslim's "this is what we are doing to your Prophet" inviting a violent reaction. I am afraid when it comes to our sensitivities we don't need to hear from you non-Muslim's of how to feel or behave. Out of two billion people there will be some who take the law in to their own hands no matter what so your freedom of speech as I said before is not that at all. Once more such acts have greatly dies down after the said event.

Since when has the media ever said anything good about the Muslim's then we should worry about what they or anyone else thinks?. They blame the Muslim's for everything that is wrong in the world anyone to the degree that we've become immune to it. If you mean that we should happily tolerate such blasphemy then it will never happen, there will always be some sort of reaction. You will not be so tolerant or philosophical if certain language was used towards your mother let me tell you that, also Muslim's love their Prophet who is not a "public figure" for us more then we do our family. Muhammad(saw) made inflammatory comments?? In insulting him you are hurting those who hold him in the highest regard provoking violence that will cause religious disharmony amongst communities. Once again we are not asking for west to regard him as anything at all other then someone who deserves a bit of respect just like normal people. Just like you would not insult a passerby there is no need to do him either even for the sake of good relations between the west and Muslim countries. They can hate him in their hearts as well all they want, water of my back. If they paint pictures or use swear words then don't hold others responsible.

I do not need to hear from you where I can or can not live. I am not calling for Islamic or Shariah law to be implemented in the west either neither am I that learned in the subject. What I am saying is that there will be all kinds of reactions when insulting the Prophet of two billion people, simple. Calling out the west for it's hypocrisy and double standards does not mean I don't love or respect the place. By your childish logic all westerners should also leave Muslim countries as well if it bans them from insulting the Prophet of Allah. I am here on a website where most are Muslim's so if anyone should leave this website it's you not me!
Click to expand...

Jesus is insulted far, far more. It's seen as a 'white man's' religion in the West, so it's 'safer' to joke about (probably true due to the fanatics that you support). Simpsons to make a quick example makes a lot of jokes about Jesus, as do many, many, many forms of Western media. And no, people haven't been shut up permanently. The more you chest-thump about it, the more that it will be done.

Again, you obviously support violent action against blasphemers. Well done, so civilised of you.

There with the victim mentality, always crying about how the media is demonising you. You are supporting murder over hurt feelings, and giving many Muslims a bad name. Muhammad was a very public figure, and a historical one. His life is well-documented, so he can be criticised, and even ridiculed. Many Muslims like to quote verses where he didn't react to ridicule and violence towards him (at least before he became powerful) so why don't you follow that example and ignore the ridicule? You're also allowed to use your freedom of speech to challenge those ideas. You do realise that many people consider many integral Islamic teachings to be offensive (hijab, homosexuality being a sin, hudud punishment, lashes for adultery, etc), but I support your right to believe and vocalise those beliefs (though I disagree with all of them with the exception of hijab assuming there has been absolutely no coercion and it is the woman's sole choice to don it). Many of those beliefs are inherently violent and offensive, far more inflammatory than insulting Muhammad, but you're allowed to vocalise those beliefs in a free society. And yes, Muhammad certainly has said inflammatory things, and things which are deeply offensive and intolerant. But guess what, he is allowed to say them whether it be in Ancient Arabia or now (some of the things he said would be an incitement to hatred though, so they would be banned here as it's not speech). What do you really propose happens to those who blaspheme in the West? Should someone really go to jail for calling Muhammad a derogatory name for marrying Aisha at the age that she did (since he's supposed to be the timeless example of all time, the 'it was okay at the time' argument doesn't hold), for example?
 
Itachi said:
"offensive" is a relative term. What is offensive to you, may not be offensive to another Muslim. If someone quotes quran wrongly, you may get offended and become violent yet another Muslim may not be offended but could just be establish the context and then explain the words in its true meanings.

We obey the law of the land because it is an establish institution where every entity does exist in real world. It isn't faith but these are rules. Religion operates in faith manner which I refuse to agree with.

I didn't state I am the supreme himself. What I stated was, I refuse to follow a "supreme" who is not existent and relies on belief of the people. I'll rather a follow a person rather than some entity which is yet to be found.
Click to expand...

Drawing pics of the Prophet is offensive to most Muslim's just that we express it differently. Lets now be silly here by comparing the Qur'an with blasphemous pictures.

I do believe in the law of the country we live in having priority over everything else which is why it should be altered here. When you insult any religion then there will be a reaction one way or another. So if people are demanding that hate groups like the EDL be banned then there is nothing wrong with it at all.

You may not believe in any God but the vast majority of the world does in some supreme being. I said the same some years back when Hindu Gods where drawn on shoes that such acts will only derive hate and anger in a community. Sorry to be a killjoy but it is not about you but the sensitives of over 2 billion people.
 
Tubs said:
Jesus is insulted far, far more. It's seen as a 'white man's' religion in the West, so it's 'safer' to joke about (probably true due to the fanatics that you support). Simpsons to make a quick example makes a lot of jokes about Jesus, as do many, many, many forms of Western media. And no, people haven't been shut up permanently. The more you chest-thump about it, the more that it will be done.

Again, you obviously support violent action against blasphemers. Well done, so civilised of you.

There with the victim mentality, always crying about how the media is demonising you. You are supporting murder over hurt feelings, and giving many Muslims a bad name. Muhammad was a very public figure, and a historical one. His life is well-documented, so he can be criticised, and even ridiculed. Many Muslims like to quote verses where he didn't react to ridicule and violence towards him (at least before he became powerful) so why don't you follow that example and ignore the ridicule? You're also allowed to use your freedom of speech to challenge those ideas. You do realise that many people consider many integral Islamic teachings to be offensive (hijab, homosexuality being a sin, hudud punishment, lashes for adultery, etc), but I support your right to believe and vocalise those beliefs (though I disagree with all of them with the exception of hijab assuming there has been absolutely no coercion and it is the woman's sole choice to don it). Many of those beliefs are inherently violent and offensive, far more inflammatory than insulting Muhammad, but you're allowed to vocalise those beliefs in a free society. And yes, Muhammad certainly has said inflammatory things, and things which are deeply offensive and intolerant. But guess what, he is allowed to say them whether it be in Ancient Arabia or now (some of the things he said would be an incitement to hatred though, so they would be banned here as it's not speech). What do you really propose happens to those who blaspheme in the West? Should someone really go to jail for calling Muhammad a derogatory name for marrying Aisha at the age that she did (since he's supposed to be the timeless example of all time, the 'it was okay at the time' argument doesn't hold), for example?
Click to expand...

You see in the Christian tradition as well as most others the failful themselves draw pictures of their holy figures. Here we go again with your complete hogwash of being a fanatic just coz I oppose pictures of the Holy Prophet. It is for the Christians to complain if they find programmes insulting Jesus to be insulting and yes it has been ages since such insults towards the Prophet of Islam were at least made public. Seems as if this has really upset you for some reason, why's that?

Once again where did I support murder? You are obviously seeing things now after having failed in convincing me that such pics is your idea of freedom of expression. Yes the Prophet can be questioned even rejected but drawing pictures of him is offensive to Muslim people no matter how much you beat your chest it is against Islamic tradition. How am I giving Muslim's a bad name by saying this?

Yes I realise that many Muslim's quote the Prophet that is not to suggest we should tolerate pictures of him by non-Muslims. After that you will ask us to tolerate things like cartoons and comics being produced on him, never! What you fail to understand is that many Muslim's not be will resort to violence thereafter to make their point creating a lot of trouble between communities. So how is hijab and such Muslim practises offensive to people of other faiths, ehh? I have no problems in ladies dressing in mini's or bikinis at all. Are you saying that a lady dressing up is offensive where as dressing down is liberating? Now let it be known just for the record that I am no fans of the niqab either.

Now let us not go in to what the Prophet said or did not say when such debates have been done to death. You can not compare life in ancient Arabia to how it is today for crying out loud! Those who insult Islam in the west should be made to understood that it will effect community and relations with the majority Muslim world. I am not proposing them being lashed or anything in case you are wondering. They should be eduacted that Muhammad did not marry for reasons they think or the nonsense you are saying.
 
PakLFC said:
You see in the Christian tradition as well as most others the failful themselves draw pictures of their holy figures. Here we go again with your complete hogwash of being a fanatic just coz I oppose pictures of the Holy Prophet. It is for the Christians to complain if they find programmes insulting Jesus to be insulting and yes it has been ages since such insults towards the Prophet of Islam were at least made public. Seems as if this has really upset you for some reason, why's that?

Once again where did I support murder? You are obviously seeing things now after having failed in convincing me that such pics is your idea of freedom of expression. Yes the Prophet can be questioned even rejected but drawing pictures of him is offensive to Muslim people no matter how much you beat your chest it is against Islamic tradition. How am I giving Muslim's a bad name by saying this?

Yes I realise that many Muslim's quote the Prophet that is not to suggest we should tolerate pictures of him by non-Muslims. After that you will ask us to tolerate things like cartoons and comics being produced on him, never! What you fail to understand is that many Muslim's not be will resort to violence thereafter to make their point creating a lot of trouble between communities. So how is hijab and such Muslim practises offensive to people of other faiths, ehh? I have no problems in ladies dressing in mini's or bikinis at all. Are you saying that a lady dressing up is offensive where as dressing down is liberating? Now let it be known just for the record that I am no fans of the niqab either.

Now let us not go in to what the Prophet said or did not say when such debates have been done to death. You can not compare life in ancient Arabia to how it is today for crying out loud! Those who insult Islam in the west should be made to understood that it will effect community and relations with the majority Muslim world. I am not proposing them being lashed or anything in case you are wondering. They should be eduacted that Muhammad did not marry for reasons they think or the nonsense you are saying.
Click to expand...

I'm not upset about Jesus being ridiculed at all, it's all fair game, and Muhammad too. Check out the Jesus and Mo comics.

You definitely would rather the Charlie Hebdo attacks have happened, rather than them be free to depict Muhammad, no matter how disparagingly. You're giving Muslims a bad name by saying 'the West knows not to mess with Muhammad because of repercussions'. You know what you mean by that.

Muslims (or anyone) resorting to violence is the problem. No one should be attacked for hurt feelings. Hijab is only 'offensive' or bad if the woman is coerced into it (either by being told she will burn in hell if she doesn't wear it from a young age, actual pressure from family members, or otherwise). The other aspects I mentioned a far, far worse. Lashing for homosexual intercourse, stoning for adultery, etc are all issues which are offensive, far more than depicting Muhammad, yet I support your right to believe in an ideology which calls for that (being the Shariah). I have no problem with hijab at all if it is the woman's sole choice, with no coercion at all. The same goes for niqab, it's just that niqab may violate some certain situations, where faces can't be covered, or where it can be abused by people who want to commit nefarious acts and not be identified, but that's a different issue.

If you can't compare ancient Arabia to today, then why even listen to the Quran at all? That is a ridiculous statement coming from a 'defender of Islam'. The Quran was conceived in ancient Arabia, and is a product of its time. And don't try to hand-wave the Aisha issue away. There a sahih hadith that mention 'thighing' but that's beyond the scope of the conversation. Regarding this 'education' you mention about Muhammad. What if after this 'education' they still insult him? What is the next course of action? How long until they are jailed for blasphemy in your ideal scenario?
 
Over the past year, many pakistani facebook pages have made alot of hateful and racist memes against sindhis
 
Pakistan’s science and tech minister is an expert at this. Spouts unlimited nonsense. E.g. calling India, Endia etc.. Can’t believe this filth has been given an important post under IK.
 
Tubs said:
I'm not upset about Jesus being ridiculed at all, it's all fair game, and Muhammad too. Check out the Jesus and Mo comics.

You definitely would rather the Charlie Hebdo attacks have happened, rather than them be free to depict Muhammad, no matter how disparagingly. You're giving Muslims a bad name by saying 'the West knows not to mess with Muhammad because of repercussions'. You know what you mean by that.

Muslims (or anyone) resorting to violence is the problem. No one should be attacked for hurt feelings. Hijab is only 'offensive' or bad if the woman is coerced into it (either by being told she will burn in hell if she doesn't wear it from a young age, actual pressure from family members, or otherwise). The other aspects I mentioned a far, far worse. Lashing for homosexual intercourse, stoning for adultery, etc are all issues which are offensive, far more than depicting Muhammad, yet I support your right to believe in an ideology which calls for that (being the Shariah). I have no problem with hijab at all if it is the woman's sole choice, with no coercion at all. The same goes for niqab, it's just that niqab may violate some certain situations, where faces can't be covered, or where it can be abused by people who want to commit nefarious acts and not be identified, but that's a different issue.

If you can't compare ancient Arabia to today, then why even listen to the Quran at all? That is a ridiculous statement coming from a 'defender of Islam'. The Quran was conceived in ancient Arabia, and is a product of its time. And don't try to hand-wave the Aisha issue away. There a sahih hadith that mention 'thighing' but that's beyond the scope of the conversation. Regarding this 'education' you mention about Muhammad. What if after this 'education' they still insult him? What is the next course of action? How long until they are jailed for blasphemy in your ideal scenario?
Click to expand...

Of course being an atheist insulting any religious figure is acceptable to you. What? Saying that Muhammad the Prophet of Allah should never be insulted is giving Muslim's a bad name!!? You really have lost all commonsense when blurting this out!

No the problem is inciting amongst different religious groups in the name of freedom that is the problem, simple. Those doing so are fully aware of possible reactions yet do so regardless to cause trouble in society. There is nothing to be gained by drawing pictures of any religious personality at all. I don't know what your comments on hijab have to do with the subject of hate speech we are talking about here?. I agree that killing in the name of Islam including gays and non Muslim's in majority Muslim countries is something I oppose as to do I the law of blasphemy in Pakistan. Two wrongs don't make a write. I am not a fan of the face veil either if if the government allows it.

"If you can't compare ancient Arabia to today, then why even listen to the Quran at all? That is a ridiculous statement coming from a 'defender of Islam' Not sure what you mean with this statement at all so come again. I prefer to stay on topic and so should you instead of talking of when and who the Prophet(saw) married and how old his wives were. This is not to say I am "ignoring" the question you raised rather it is not the subject here. Some form of action has to be taken if people continue to insult any religious figure deliberately after being told not to. They need to be told how it can lead to violence in society and so forth.
 
I have recently been following the FGC scene and Tekken and it's just tragic to see how needlessly toxic people are. They spew hatred for literally nothing and it's not even a big scene or something that matters to them.

Human beings are truly something else; all this technology, all this power, and all this enlightenment spent on name calling and spreading needless hate on people thousands of miles away and absolutely having no interest in your life.
 
PakLFC said:
Of course being an atheist insulting any religious figure is acceptable to you. What? Saying that Muhammad the Prophet of Allah should never be insulted is giving Muslim's a bad name!!? You really have lost all commonsense when blurting this out!

No the problem is inciting amongst different religious groups in the name of freedom that is the problem, simple. Those doing so are fully aware of possible reactions yet do so regardless to cause trouble in society. There is nothing to be gained by drawing pictures of any religious personality at all. I don't know what your comments on hijab have to do with the subject of hate speech we are talking about here?. I agree that killing in the name of Islam including gays and non Muslim's in majority Muslim countries is something I oppose as to do I the law of blasphemy in Pakistan. Two wrongs don't make a write. I am not a fan of the face veil either if if the government allows it.

"If you can't compare ancient Arabia to today, then why even listen to the Quran at all? That is a ridiculous statement coming from a 'defender of Islam' Not sure what you mean with this statement at all so come again. I prefer to stay on topic and so should you instead of talking of when and who the Prophet(saw) married and how old his wives were. This is not to say I am "ignoring" the question you raised rather it is not the subject here. Some form of action has to be taken if people continue to insult any religious figure deliberately after being told not to. They need to be told how it can lead to violence in society and so forth.
Click to expand...

You would obviously prefer a violent reaction to scare people into not insulting Muhammad, than for the people who insult him to be free to do it. That much is evident. When you say something should 'never' be insulted, what happens if it is insulted? What do you think should happen?

Again, on about these 'possible' repercussions. The ones who will attack and murder because of hurt feelings are the problem, not the ones being (and I admit, most likely unnecessarily, but are allowed to do so because they live in a free society) inflammatory. I was just mentioning hijab because it was used as an example before, but I agree we should drop that subject, same with Muhammad's marriage to Aisha, it was used as an example but it got out of hand. It's good that you oppose blasphemy and murdering gays and non-Muslims. But you should realise that in a secular country, where freedom of speech is a tenant, that feelings will unfortunately be hurt. I would rather everyone be respectful, but that will not happen. The more you tell people you cannot do x, as long as x is legal, they will want to do it more. I understand that you revere your prophet, but surely you know that no amount of bad words will tarnish his legacy that you so believe in.
 
Tubs said:
You would obviously prefer a violent reaction to scare people into not insulting Muhammad, than for the people who insult him to be free to do it. That much is evident. When you say something should 'never' be insulted, what happens if it is insulted? What do you think should happen?

Again, on about these 'possible' repercussions. The ones who will attack and murder because of hurt feelings are the problem, not the ones being (and I admit, most likely unnecessarily, but are allowed to do so because they live in a free society) inflammatory. I was just mentioning hijab because it was used as an example before, but I agree we should drop that subject, same with Muhammad's marriage to Aisha, it was used as an example but it got out of hand. It's good that you oppose blasphemy and murdering gays and non-Muslims. But you should realise that in a secular country, where freedom of speech is a tenant, that feelings will unfortunately be hurt. I would rather everyone be respectful, but that will not happen. The more you tell people you cannot do x, as long as x is legal, they will want to do it more. I understand that you revere your prophet, but surely you know that no amount of bad words will tarnish his legacy that you so believe in.
Click to expand...

Why do you want to insult other religions in the first place?

Believe whatever you want but don’t insult others
 
Ronaldo7 said:
Why do you want to insult other religions in the first place?
Click to expand...

That's human nature, has occurred since time immemorial and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. The main discussion here is that "Does anyone deserve to be killed for it"?
 
Ronaldo7 said:
Why do you want to insult other religions in the first place?

Believe whatever you want but don’t insult others
Click to expand...

I'm not advocating for insulting or being rude to beliefs, as you would understand if you read my posts. I'm just saying it shouldn't be illegal, nor should people be killed because of it, to insult Muhammad. If they want to insult, it's their freedom of speech. It's also your freedom of speech to respond. You just can't silence someone.
 
Tubs said:
You would obviously prefer a violent reaction to scare people into not insulting Muhammad, than for the people who insult him to be free to do it. That much is evident. When you say something should 'never' be insulted, what happens if it is insulted? What do you think should happen?

Again, on about these 'possible' repercussions. The ones who will attack and murder because of hurt feelings are the problem, not the ones being (and I admit, most likely unnecessarily, but are allowed to do so because they live in a free society) inflammatory. I was just mentioning hijab because it was used as an example before, but I agree we should drop that subject, same with Muhammad's marriage to Aisha, it was used as an example but it got out of hand. It's good that you oppose blasphemy and murdering gays and non-Muslims. But you should realise that in a secular country, where freedom of speech is a tenant, that feelings will unfortunately be hurt. I would rather everyone be respectful, but that will not happen. The more you tell people you cannot do x, as long as x is legal, they will want to do it more. I understand that you revere your prophet, but surely you know that no amount of bad words will tarnish his legacy that you so believe in.
Click to expand...

Rather you I believe want a violent response to further your Islamophobic views and then justify violence and oppression of Muslims. As I said legal action should be taken against those who insult any religious figures.

No, no! The ones who deliberately attack religious figures are the ones to be condemned here. Now don't move from one subject to another from insults towards the Prophet to his marriages and now on to the hijab! What about the Prophet's marriage to Aisha got out of hand? Again if you believe in hurting feelings then like like it or not there will be a response. I see so what secular India is doing is all good and well in your tolerant book! Well attacks of the Prophet have greatly reduced since the cartoons were published so I totally totally disagree that protesting against them will enhance the problem. Next you will say Muslim's should allow cartoons on the Prophet as well on national TV, never!

It is about non Muslim's mocking him not us questioning his brilliance.
 
Tubs said:
You won't admit it, but you're happy the attacks happened. Will you categorically say that you'd rather the cartoonists not have been physically harmed in any form? People like you always strawman your opposition and say they support the EDL and BNP. I am Pakistani, why would I support racists who think I am not British? I am against all forms of violence, unlike you who is happy that cartoonists died for 'blaspheming'. Yes, 'hate speech' if you mean inciting hatred is bad, and it is illegal for a reason. Direct calls for violence is not protected under speech. And no, insulting a holy figure is not tantamount to violence, you're just saying that to justify the irrationality that some Muslims portray when Muhammad is insulted. I am no lover of Christianity at all, but Jesus gets ridiculed all the time and no one (or far, far less so that it's not even a news story) dies for it. I'm not sure if that's true in regards to how much money they lost, but I don't care, I support the right to protest, as I support free speech and expression. Many places still hold 'Draw Muhammad' competitions. I don't necessarily like them as they're incredibly inflammatory and edgy for the sole purpose to offend, but it's their right to do it. The more you say you can't do it, the more they want to. The more violence happens because of it, the more it will happen. Muslims are better than this, they aren't thin-skinned babies, and it is such a disservice to the global Muslim community when everyone gets way too hung up on it. Sure, you can be offended, but when such an uproar is made over it (including violence) it looks very bad on Muslims. And my family aren't public figures, nor have they made inflammatory comments publicly (which can be said of Muhammad, depending on your side of an issue), so certain offensive comments made towards them could be classed as slander or harassment. There is nuance to this. However, if someone made some ugly comments, yes I would not be happy, but if they don't enter illegal areas (such as libel, slander, harassment, etc), it is free speech. Muhammad is not alive today, so he can't be harassed, slandered, etc, so any comments regarding him are allowed (though I will say historically incorrect statements should immediately be shot down and corrected as he is a historic figure, I'm not advocating censorship, but education).

We obviously won't agree on this, but just because you (and many other Muslims) love him more than your parents doesn't mean he gets special privileges in non-Islamic countries. Again, I don't necessarily want people to hate on him, but it's allowed. Your parents are real people (I am assuming they are alive, my sincerest apologies if not) and people have memories of them. They can be slandered, abused, harassed, etc. They have far more rights than Muhammad under non-Islamic law, so please don't act like the West is under Islamic theocracy. If you really don't want to hear negative things about Muhammad, stay off certain parts of the internet and don't live in the West, as it is free speech.
Click to expand...

Dang son. You nailed it.
 
PakLFC said:
Rather you I believe want a violent response to further your Islamophobic views and then justify violence and oppression of Muslims. As I said legal action should be taken against those who insult any religious figures.

No, no! The ones who deliberately attack religious figures are the ones to be condemned here. Now don't move from one subject to another from insults towards the Prophet to his marriages and now on to the hijab! What about the Prophet's marriage to Aisha got out of hand? Again if you believe in hurting feelings then like like it or not there will be a response. I see so what secular India is doing is all good and well in your tolerant book! Well attacks of the Prophet have greatly reduced since the cartoons were published so I totally totally disagree that protesting against them will enhance the problem. Next you will say Muslim's should allow cartoons on the Prophet as well on national TV, never!

It is about non Muslim's mocking him not us questioning his brilliance.
Click to expand...

'Islamaphobia' is a bogus term. It conflates criticism of Islam with hatred of Muslims. No, I am not anti-Muslim. I am critical of religions and other dogma. Legal action for insulting a religious figure? Don't be so ridiculous. Should we take legal action against every Christian, Muslim, and Jew because their scripture allow for lashing of gays (and in some cases, stoning), stoning adulterers, slavery, etc? No, we should not. You are so ridiculous. My family are Muslim. I have spoken out against the concentration camps in China and wish the coronavirus takes out ALL of the people who made the decision to imprison the Muslims, and no one else. I am critical of Trump helping Saudi devastate Yemen. I don't care what your beliefs are, everyone should be safe from violence and treated equally. So everyone has the same right to offend and be offended.

India is quickly becoming fascist. That is not freedom of speech. You have the right to say atheism leads to rapists, murderers, whatever, I can call Muhammad rude names if I so choose to (it's not in my nature to do so for no reason, however). Muhammad is depicted online quite a lot, especially anonymously. It would be very, very easy to start a 'draw Muhammad' competition online if someone so chose. The more you chest-thump, the more people will do it. You definitely do support people getting murdered for it , as you would rather it stop by any means necessary, don't even lie. Muslim media shouldn't allow cartoons no, because they follow their own guidelines, and that most certainly wouldn't be within their guidelines. Non-Muslim media outlets, can. This isn't limited to Muhammad. It can be any religion. Again, I don't advocate for it to be done, but it is certainly a right.

You keep mentioning a response. What about the EDL thugs who respond to Muslims demanding the West to fall in line with their demands not to depict the prophet? What if they go out and attack Muslims? Would you then say 'like it or not, there will be a response'? Of course not, and neither would I. You can say not to depict Muhammad, but the person depicting him has the right to refuse. The only society worth living in is one where freedom of speech and expression is paramount so everyone can be themselves. When you open the floodgates for censorship, then it's a very slippery slope. But you can't see that, can you.
 
Tubs said:
You would obviously prefer a violent reaction to scare people into not insulting Muhammad, than for the people who insult him to be free to do it. That much is evident. When you say something should 'never' be insulted, what happens if it is insulted? What do you think should happen?

Again, on about these 'possible' repercussions. The ones who will attack and murder because of hurt feelings are the problem, not the ones being (and I admit, most likely unnecessarily, but are allowed to do so because they live in a free society) inflammatory. I was just mentioning hijab because it was used as an example before, but I agree we should drop that subject, same with Muhammad's marriage to Aisha, it was used as an example but it got out of hand. It's good that you oppose blasphemy and murdering gays and non-Muslims. But you should realise that in a secular country, where freedom of speech is a tenant, that feelings will unfortunately be hurt. I would rather everyone be respectful, but that will not happen. The more you tell people you cannot do x, as long as x is legal, they will want to do it more. I understand that you revere your prophet, but surely you know that no amount of bad words will tarnish his legacy that you so believe in.
Click to expand...

That's not how Muslims think. The reasoning goes that would you tolerate insults to your mother or father? Or your brothers or sisters? If not, then why would you tolerate insults to your prophet whom you are supposed to hold in higher esteem than any other person dead or living?

This may seem like a primitive type of reasoning - but that's because it is. It calls to a very primal instinct, and this is why people lose reason over these incidents.
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
That's not how Muslims think. The reasoning goes that would you tolerate insults to your mother or father? Or your brothers or sisters? If not, then why would you tolerate insults to your prophet whom you are supposed to hold in higher esteem than any other person dead or living?

This may seem like a primitive type of reasoning - but that's because it is. It calls to a very primal instinct, and this is why people lose reason over these incidents.
Click to expand...

It depends by what you mean by 'not tolerate'. Sure, you can protest. But I'm on about censorship and killing people.

You seem sympathetic to people who 'lose reason' over this. Would you rather Charlie Hebdo have not been attacked, or do you prefer that they were attacked, which caused them to stop mocking Muhammad?
 
Tubs said:
'Islamaphobia' is a bogus term. It conflates criticism of Islam with hatred of Muslims. No, I am not anti-Muslim. I am critical of religions and other dogma. Legal action for insulting a religious figure? Don't be so ridiculous. Should we take legal action against every Christian, Muslim, and Jew because their scripture allow for lashing of gays (and in some cases, stoning), stoning adulterers, slavery, etc? No, we should not. You are so ridiculous. My family are Muslim. I have spoken out against the concentration camps in China and wish the coronavirus takes out ALL of the people who made the decision to imprison the Muslims, and no one else. I am critical of Trump helping Saudi devastate Yemen. I don't care what your beliefs are, everyone should be safe from violence and treated equally. So everyone has the same right to offend and be offended.

India is quickly becoming fascist. That is not freedom of speech. You have the right to say atheism leads to rapists, murderers, whatever, I can call Muhammad rude names if I so choose to (it's not in my nature to do so for no reason, however). Muhammad is depicted online quite a lot, especially anonymously. It would be very, very easy to start a 'draw Muhammad' competition online if someone so chose. The more you chest-thump, the more people will do it. You definitely do support people getting murdered for it , as you would rather it stop by any means necessary, don't even lie. Muslim media shouldn't allow cartoons no, because they follow their own guidelines, and that most certainly wouldn't be within their guidelines. Non-Muslim media outlets, can. This isn't limited to Muhammad. It can be any religion. Again, I don't advocate for it to be done, but it is certainly a right.

You keep mentioning a response. What about the EDL thugs who respond to Muslims demanding the West to fall in line with their demands not to depict the prophet? What if they go out and attack Muslims? Would you then say 'like it or not, there will be a response'? Of course not, and neither would I. You can say not to depict Muhammad, but the person depicting him has the right to refuse. The only society worth living in is one where freedom of speech and expression is paramount so everyone can be themselves. When you open the floodgates for censorship, then it's a very slippery slope. But you can't see that, can you.
Click to expand...

Whatever term you want to use insulting anyone's religious sensitives means a reaction from the other side which you have no control over. There is no such thing as deliberately offending anyone's belief whilst insisting to be peaceful, no! Nothing ridiculous about suggesting legal action against those inciting hatred towards any faith at all. It is perfectly normal which is why people of reason are quick to apologise when something like this happens. You are free to take legal action against those who indulge in killing gays and other things mentioned in your mail. Your belief that insulting religious figures figures should be tolerated in the name of freedom is absurd to say the least. It is childish and immature as well. You do not do us Muslim's any favours by criticising acts of cruelty or speaking in favour of the oppressed. I am not saying atheists should be killed or forcefully converted to any religion.

No you can not call the Prophet of Allah rude name neither will I insult non Muslim's just to get one up on them. Islam does tell believers not to insult other God's or Goddesses lest they want a similar reaction from non Muslim's. Your belief that I will insult your faith then you do so mines beggars belief and is far from rational thinking. If someone started any such blasphemous competition then there would be a massive response, Muslim countries would stop all business contact with western and non Muslim ones hitting them hard in the pocket this is why it does not openly occur. See once again people are not doing so openly anymore fearing what I mentioned above,it has been ages since such cartoons were published anywhere. I am saying that if someone kills a blasphemer then they only have themselves to blame. First you will say tolerate Muhammad's name on a shoe, then on toilet tissue followed it what not. Eventually when there is a violent reaction you'll start crying "terrorism". Some years back when a Hindu Goddess was drawn on shoes it faced massive condemnation so much that India threatened to stop trade with many countries who supported the act. It was immediately put to and end, the pictures removed and such a thing never happened again.

Yes the Muslim's telling EDL thugs to stop their blasphemy are correct. No one is forcing the EDL to become Muslim's neither do I support Shariah law in the west at all, just asking for all religions to be respected. The EDL were not attacking Muslim's coz of pictures or anything like that, they are a bunch of yob's who have no idea of why they were even marching or what they were protesting about. We hardly here about them anymore. No, never in a month of Sunday's! Next you will say let people swear at each other, let women be insulted and so forth all in the name of freedom. There has to be a line that can not be crossed otherwise we lose our humanity. What you are saying is against the human conscience and human values that should come naturally to us. There is no defence for offence.
 
Last edited:
PakLFC said:
Whatever term you want to use insulting anyone's religious sensitives means a reaction from the other side which you have no control over. There is no such thing as deliberately offending anyone's belief whilst insisting to be peaceful, no! Nothing ridiculous about suggesting legal action against those inciting hatred towards any faith at all. It is perfectly normal which is why people of reason are quick to apologise when something like this happens. You are free to take legal action against those who indulge in killing gays and other things mentioned in your mail. Your belief that insulting religious figures figures should be tolerated in the name of freedom is absurd to say the least. It is childish and immature as well. You do not do us Muslim's any favours by criticising acts of cruelty or speaking in favour of the oppressed. I am not saying atheists should be killed or forcefully converted to any religion.

No you can not call the Prophet of Allah rude name neither will I insult non Muslim's just to get one up on them. Islam does tell believers not to insult other God's or Goddesses lest they want a similar reaction from non Muslim's. Your belief that I will insult your faith then you do so mines beggars belief and is far from rational thinking. If someone started any such blasphemous competition then there would be a massive response, Muslim countries would stop all business contact with western and non Muslim ones hitting them hard in the pocket this is why it does not openly occur. See once again people are not doing so openly anymore fearing what I mentioned above,it has been ages since such cartoons were published anywhere. I am saying that if someone kills a blasphemer then they only have themselves to blame. First you will say tolerate Muhammad's name on a shoe, then on toilet tissue followed it what not. Eventually when there is a violent reaction you'll start crying "terrorism". Some years back when a Hindu Goddess was drawn on shoes it faced massive condemnation so much that India threatened to stop trade with many countries who supported the act. It was immediately put to and end, the pictures removed and such a thing never happened again.

Yes the Muslim's telling EDL thugs to stop their blasphemy are correct. No one is forcing the EDL to become Muslim's neither do I support Shariah law in the west at all, just asking for all religions to be respected. The EDL were not attacking Muslim's coz of pictures or anything like that, they are a bunch of yob's who have no idea of why they were even marching or what they were protesting about. We hardly here about them anymore. No, never in a month of Sunday's! Next you will say let people swear at each other, let women be insulted and so forth all in the name of freedom. There has to be a line that can not be crossed otherwise we lose our humanity. What you are saying is against the human conscience and human values that should come naturally to us. There is no defence for offence.
Click to expand...

You conflated hurt feelings with inciting hatred. This just shows the huge flaws in your argument. Yes, of course legal action should be taken against those who kill gays, what the hell are you on about? You cannot compare insulting Muhammad to killing gays. Which do you think is worse?

Yes I can insult Muhammad, I am free to do so. You really do overestimate the strength of boycotting. Regardless, check the Jesus and Mo cartoons if you want proof of freedom of speech. And see, you blame the 'blasphemer' for being murdered? Imagine if I said a Muslim is to blame for being murdered because they live in a country not governed by Shariah law? It's just as ridiculous as what you said. At least your true colours are showing. You don't have to 'tolerate' Muhammad being ridiculed, you just can't expect it to become illegal, nor should you be pro killing those who ridicule him (but that is your freedom to do so). Again with the 'inevitable violent reaction', it says a lot about your faith then, doesn't it? Same applies for the Hindu gods, I don't advocate ridicule for no reason, but they didn't kill anyone and protested, which is how it should be done.

See, it's always different when it's the other way around. A violent response is only okay, or to be expected, when it's your point of view? What I'm saying is that you're allowed to say anything which is not assault, harassment, slander or inciting hatred. So you can insult Muhammad. I also advocate for respect and decency, which is far from what the Charlie Hebdo attackers had. I would have fully condemned the Muhammad cartoons as being unnecessarily edgy, but now I'm glad it happened as it shows that Islamists can't have their own way. Everytime someone is killed for blasphemy, another blasphemous article will appear. It's how the world works. If you don't like it, tough. Until you learn that even your deepest feelings can be trodden upon, you will be a perpetual victim.
 
The problem with banning hate speech is that no one knows where to draw the line.

It’s going to start with banning racist comments, and will escalate into banning political dissent in the name of ’hate speech’ and ’causing public unrest’ in no time.
 
AdamM97 said:
The problem with banning hate speech is that no one knows where to draw the line.

It’s going to start with banning racist comments, and will escalate into banning political dissent in the name of ’hate speech’ and ’causing public unrest’ in no time.
Click to expand...

Yes. Since "insult" is itself relative term, different people will treat the same words or incident in different ways and there's may no right or wrong in most cases. There may arise grey area where one could be confused about which side it falls.
 
Interconnected world will eventually lead to less percentage of population seeing hate speach as being fine.
 
So a Muslim like me says to non Muslims and atheists you can convert to any religion happily...leave Islam if you want to. Textual criticism of the Qur'an is also okay as well, no problem. That Muslims like me do not want Shariah in non Muslim country's at all, we are happily willing to follow the law of the country providing you just show a bit of respect to our faith. We are not forcing halal food down anyone's throat at all so go ahead and poison yourselves. We are then told "No, no, no you must allow us to draw Muhammad(SAW) cartoons on whatever we want and swear at him openly so we can laugh at your helplessness. You must allow us to humiliate you completely but never question the holocaust" This is what makes me furious and this is exactly why it rarely happens nowadays. Then the cheap atheist attention seeking rebel wannabe intellectuals will say "I neither condemn nor condone such acts". When you don't condemn what is wrong in society then you condone it my default! They say that insulting someone's family is unacceptable but you cando holy figures. The hypocrisy is sickening.
 
Last edited:
Tubs said:
You conflated hurt feelings with inciting hatred. This just shows the huge flaws in your argument. Yes, of course legal action should be taken against those who kill gays, what the hell are you on about? You cannot compare insulting Muhammad to killing gays. Which do you think is worse?

Yes I can insult Muhammad, I am free to do so. You really do overestimate the strength of boycotting. Regardless, check the Jesus and Mo cartoons if you want proof of freedom of speech. And see, you blame the 'blasphemer' for being murdered? Imagine if I said a Muslim is to blame for being murdered because they live in a country not governed by Shariah law? It's just as ridiculous as what you said. At least your true colours are showing. You don't have to 'tolerate' Muhammad being ridiculed, you just can't expect it to become illegal, nor should you be pro killing those who ridicule him (but that is your freedom to do so). Again with the 'inevitable violent reaction', it says a lot about your faith then, doesn't it? Same applies for the Hindu gods, I don't advocate ridicule for no reason, but they didn't kill anyone and protested, which is how it should be done.

See, it's always different when it's the other way around. A violent response is only okay, or to be expected, when it's your point of view? What I'm saying is that you're allowed to say anything which is not assault, harassment, slander or inciting hatred. So you can insult Muhammad. I also advocate for respect and decency, which is far from what the Charlie Hebdo attackers had. I would have fully condemned the Muhammad cartoons as being unnecessarily edgy, but now I'm glad it happened as it shows that Islamists can't have their own way. Everytime someone is killed for blasphemy, another blasphemous article will appear. It's how the world works. If you don't like it, tough. Until you learn that even your deepest feelings can be trodden upon, you will be a perpetual victim.
Click to expand...

These flaws you are on about are much better then your hypocrisy and selective freedom of speech. So what are you saying that killing gays is okay or the other way around? Do you even read your mail before typing?? I am giving you the opportunity here to insult Muhammad so put your money where your moth is?? Anyone being murdered anywhere will be punished equally Shariah so you can relax. I don't want Shariah in the west, let Muslims first try and show us in the countries how great it is. Then why is Muhammad not being drawn today after the Charlie thing everything has calmed down. You see, the thing is that in every society there are some nutcases who will take it too far. Atheists sure have there ones as well as the Muslim's. Is is better to keep you mouth shut then take the risk of being killed by an extremists just coz he wanted some attention. It can become legal for sure, the law is always changing.

The Hindu's do not have a strong as voice as the Muslim's do in the west. There were violent incidents in India if my memory serves me correctly. As Hindu's themselves draw their God's they probably didn't see it as being very blasphemous. You fail the understand that Muslim's do not insult other Prophets or religious figures so I don't know what you are on about it being the other way around? Calling Muhammad(SAW) is indeed inciting which you fail to see, that is the problem here that what you see as not being hatred I do the exact opposite. So what exactly is your idea of "respect" when you allow drawing of cartoons? I don't want Shariah or anything, the cartoons from some years back also told the world that they were unacceptable to the Muslim community. I think your anger is why the publishing of cartoons have halted...why the Muslim's won and your side lost. I am afraid you are the one who is crying here about why the cartoons have ended, keep crying. Well until such cartoons are published again I am more then happy to be on the winning side.
 
It is almost impossible to control these things on social media. Since the company themselves will not have enough employees to go through each comment, not sure if our current AI is smart enough to block such comments, it is upto the content creator these days to block certain words from appearing in the comment section.

For example, I own two big social media pages (one over 200k another 80k) - I have the option of blocking certain words/filter out the words I don't want to show up on the comment section.

Also, if you come along a hateful video, YouTube's algorithm might not pick it up but if enough people like you and I report, their page/videos does get deleted.
 
Tubs said:
It depends by what you mean by 'not tolerate'. Sure, you can protest. But I'm on about censorship and killing people.

You seem sympathetic to people who 'lose reason' over this. Would you rather Charlie Hebdo have not been attacked, or do you prefer that they were attacked, which caused them to stop mocking Muhammad?
Click to expand...

How did you deduct that I am sympathetic to people who lose reason over this? You can highlight which part of what I said leads you to this conclusion and I will clarify.
 
Ronaldo7 said:
Chaiwala media strikes one again:
https://mobile.twitter.com/AfreenFatima136/status/1243120975249432577
Click to expand...
Fake news
march26cartoon-corona-revised-njpg
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Updated image and apology here.<br>Thanks <a href="https://twitter.com/the_hindu?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@the_hindu</a><a href="https://t.co/ZlbyDm0sBT">https://t.co/ZlbyDm0sBT</a> <a href="https://t.co/yKGvEUUVS7">pic.twitter.com/yKGvEUUVS7</a></p>— Bilal Asadi (@bilalpha) <a href="https://twitter.com/bilalpha/status/1243204473645867008?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 26, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

This is extremely distasteful from them
 
Indians as a society have been on the manipulating end of their government and hate-spreading media for so many years.

Even some Indians in this very forum lack morality to judge good and evil, seldom defending murderers and terrorists.

It is sad.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
WhenSultansBowled said:
Indians as a society have been on the manipulating end of their government and hate-spreading media for so many years.

Even some Indians in this very forum lack morality to judge good and evil, seldom defending murderers and terrorists.

It is sad.
Click to expand...

Don't remember it being this bad pre-2014.
Tbh I didn't pay much attention then.

The hate really spiked after the Chai wala got elected.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If anyone of the obove posters were regular readers they would have replied like me, if you are interested go through their reports, it's one of most hated media in India by hindutvas
 
At this juncture, we have hindu doctors treating muslim patients and Muslim doctors treating hindu patients.... Be it hindu, Muslim, Christian or any other community.... A common enemy is at the verge of becoming the greatest threat of the century regardless of religion.....

And here we have people here who is pointing which religion did what. I feel pretty sad that people could go this low and where priorities are even at moments like this.

You dont need to stop believing your agenda.

Just give it a pause till this phase passes. Can we regardless of religion expect that?
 
Hornbill said:
If anyone of the obove posters were regular readers they would have replied like me, if you are interested go through their reports, it's one of most hated media in India by hindutvas
Click to expand...
Well if they are posting blatant and senseless propaganda like that then wonder what the more right wing news papers are posting.
 
[MENTION=140104]Hornbill[/MENTION] My point was that if a credible news paper with a good reputation can post hateful cartoons like that and who knows what the tabloids do.
 
If you hate someone or group for anything at all you are the same as them, a hater.
 
I used to get offended if anyone said anything negative about Islam and used to stand up but nowadays I just ignore them as they are probably sad in life and everytime they wake up in the morning and see their ugly face in the mirror they take their hate on our beautiful muslim brothers and sisters :moyo
 
Poutine said:
[MENTION=140104]Hornbill[/MENTION] My point was that if a credible news paper with a good reputation can post hateful cartoons like that and who knows what the tabloids do.
Click to expand...
They shouldn't have done that if you go through the response of their subscribers you will understand that most of them are satisfied with the apology, Media generally don't post any thing inciting communal hatred but they provide big space for spreading propaganda.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The Bald Eagle
Top Indian fact-checker in court for post calling out hate speech
Replies
37
Views
2K
The Bald Eagle
The Bald Eagle
rickroll
Pakistani Biker in India
Replies
9
Views
644
rickroll
rickroll
The Bald Eagle
Punjab identifies over 58,000 'anti-state' social media pages
Replies
39
Views
816
Bewal Express
B
Bhaag Viru Bhaag
Muslim protestors march to Mumbai seeking action against BJP MLA and preacher for hate speech
Replies
53
Views
2K
uppercut
U
FearlessRoar
[VIDEOS] Foreign social media influencers and travelers believe Pakistan offers greater hospitality than India
Replies
1
Views
270
FearlessRoar
FearlessRoar
Back
Top