World War 3...

[Darthphere]

I'm all about freedom of speech, but this guy's a ****ing *****ebag.

Thats in the Constitution. Freedom of Speech*


*Except if youre a *****ebag.

I think Franklin sneezed on it and wiped that part off.

 

[Outsiderzedge]

haha

Raise your hand if you deserve to die for the crimes of your countrymen.

*raises hand*

 

[ThunderPuss]

http://religiousfreaks.com/2006/03/02/muslim-protesters-working-up-their-appetite-at-danish-embassy/

Here's a crazy one.

Man, that site is sweet.

 

[M.E.H.Z.E.B]

Alright you beautiful people. I've been reading this thread for a while now, and I finally think its time I gave you my opinion about the matter. The fact is, that I, am a muslim, and I can take jokes. I have a good sense of humor too, as I'm told. But that bobble-head is still offensive to me. You know why? Coz, since my birth, I have been under the impression that any physical depiction of the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) is not permitted in Islam. This is a well-known notion in the muslim world. Knowing this, an ex-marine of a country currently criticized by the muslim world for "ultravires actions" decides to make a mockery of Islam's last prophet, by making a bobblehead depiction of him, and mass-producing them for sale. Wow. And all this in the name of "free speech"? If Christianity did not permit the depiction of Jesus Christ in any form, and this guy made a bunch of dolls of Christ out of mockery, would the posters in this thread still find it "funny" and ask others to have a "sense of humor"?

When something goes against what you believe in, and someone knows it, and still does it, its called provocation. And we all know and acknowledge that there are extremist groups everywhere, who in the name of Islam, are committing acts of terrorism. So, why give these terrorists more ammunition than they already do? It's like pouring gasolene into a live fire. The terrorists will be using this as an excuse to continue their acts further. So, this ex-marine, in his pathetic attempt at humor, has infact put the lives of millions of Americans in danger. It's waay beyond pitiable.

 

[AnimeJune]

Thats in the Constitution. Freedom of Speech*


*Except if youre a *****ebag.

I think Franklin sneezed on it and wiped that part off.

Yeah...I think the marine is abusing his freedom of speech, if you ask me.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Wow, I hate your post, M.E.H.Z.E.B., and it's taking all of my restraint to keep myself from calling it "stupid".

Here's why:

But that bobble-head is still offensive to me. You know why? Coz, since my birth, I have been under the impression that any physical depiction of the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) is not permitted in Islam.

You are correct, depictions of Muhammed are not permitted IN ISLAM.
You, do realize that we don't all share, or even respect your beliefs, right?
By all means, do NOT support this irreverent jerk by buying any of his Bobbleheads. Also, do not look at them, even look on the guy with pity, for being so mean-spirited. There you go.

You know what else...Muslims have a lot of demands made by their God that people (who don't believe in him) don't follow...so feel free to adhere to the rules IN ISLAM!
Some of us are not "In Islam". And other people's beliefs, including my own, are ridiculed daily, all over the world...only, apparently, I'm mature enough to realize that *gasp* not everyone around the world SHARES, or RESPECTS MY BELIEFS.
Boo-freaking-HOO.

If Christianity did not permit the depiction of Jesus Christ in any form, and this guy made a bunch of dolls of Christ out of mockery, would the posters in this thread still find it "funny" and ask others to have a "sense of humor"?

1) Christianity does forbid making likenesses of Jesus.
2) Christians here have already mentioned their tolerance and even affection for irreverent, mocking depictions of Jesus, so...a BIG Non-Point there^.

When something goes against what you believe in, and someone knows it, and still does it, its called provocation. And we all know and acknowledge that there are extremist groups everywhere, who in the name of Islam, are committing acts of terrorism. So, why give these terrorists more ammunition than they already do? It's like pouring gasolene into a live fire. The terrorists will be using this as an excuse to continue their acts further. So, this ex-marine, in his pathetic attempt at humor, has infact put the lives of millions of Americans in danger. It's waay beyond pitiable.

No, if terrorists are insane and savage enough to try to kill us all, for the actions of one jerk, then we're already in danger because of THEM, not the one jerk.

I would like to remind you, the Bible forbids homosexuality. The Bible forbids blasphemy and using the Lord's name in vain. The Bible forbids theft, murder, fornication, dishonesty, and failure to honor God's Sabbath.

I just described nearly every TV show and movie that's produced.
So, are the producers of these examples of art "Provoking" Christians?

 

[Maximum Carnage]

Damn. There's nothing you can say to that.. it's exactly true and perfect. I'm not even going to try..

 

[Killgore]

I belong to the cult of the Flashing Tiger, I have since birth, I have a great sense of humor but that avitar is offensive to me abd by using it, you're provoking me me Wilhelm. Be warned.

 

[M.E.H.Z.E.B]

Wow, I hate your post, M.E.H.Z.E.B., and it's taking all of my restraint to keep myself from calling it "stupid".

Atleast you're honest.

Here's why:

You are correct, depictions of Muhammed are not permitted IN ISLAM.
You, do realize that we don't all share, or even respect your beliefs, right?
By all means, do NOT support this irreverent jerk by buying any of his Bobbleheads. Also, do not look at them, even look on the guy with pity, for being so mean-spirited. There you go.

You know what else...Muslims have a lot of demands made by their God that people (who don't believe in him) don't follow...so feel free to adhere to the rules IN ISLAM!
Some of us are not "In Islam". And other people's beliefs, including my own, are ridiculed daily, all over the world...only, apparently, I'm mature enough to realize that *gasp* not everyone around the world SHARES, or RESPECTS MY BELIEFS.
Boo-freaking-HOO.

You know what Wilh? I judge people by a test which we in English law, call "The Reasonable Man Test". This usually pits a person's acts or ommissions with the hypothetical comparison with that of a reasonable prudent man's. To determine whether a reasonable person would do or say such as the defendant did. And in my view, a reasonable person, with sound mind, and morals, would actually respect another man's religion instead of mocking it. While people don't have to follow Islam, or Christianity, or Buddhism, or Hinduism, a certain amount of respect for your fellow man is expected from all of us. So, just because you don't share my beliefs, doesnt mean you'll bash them. There. Simple enough?

1) Christianity does forbid making likenesses of Jesus.
2) Christians here have already mentioned their tolerance and even affection for irreverent, mocking depictions of Jesus, so...a BIG Non-Point there^.

Conceded.

No, if terrorists are insane and savage enough to try to kill us all, for the actions of one jerk, then we're already in danger because of THEM, not the one jerk.

I would like to remind you, the Bible forbids homosexuality. The Bible forbids blasphemy and using the Lord's name in vain. The Bible forbids theft, murder, fornication, dishonesty, and failure to honor God's Sabbath.

I just described nearly every TV show and movie that's produced.
So, are the producers of these examples of art "Provoking" Christians?

The matters of theft, murder, fornication, dishonesty etc. are forbidded in almost EVERY single religion on God's green Earth. So, the producers of those shows are not just offending Christians, they are offending almost everyone who believes in religion. And you know why society has gradually become "okay" with stuff like this? Because, almost in all movies, tv shows, and such, the bad guys are the thieves, the murderers, the dishonest, and so on. Good always triumphs over evil. That's actually a positive message.

Oh, and about the terrorist argument... well... terrorists are to blame for their acts for sure. I agree totally, but the person who gave the terrorists a reason, and a false justification to attack innocent people who have no defense, is equally condemnable. If you think about it, mr. funny-guy-ex-marine, is actually helping the terrorists.

And well, since we're being honest, I'd just like to say, I'm never thrilled to see your posts either.

 

[Killgore]

Atleast you're honest.



You know what Wilh? I judge people by a test which we in English law, call "The Reasonable Man Test". This usually pits a person's acts or ommissions with the hypothetical comparison with that of a reasonable prudent man's. To determine whether a reasonable person would do or say such as the defendant did. And in my view, a reasonable person, with sound mind, and morals, would actually respect another man's religion instead of mocking it. While people don't have to follow Islam, or Christianity, or Buddhism, or Hinduism, a certain amount of respect for your fellow man is expected from all of us. So, just because you don't share my beliefs, doesnt mean you'll bash them. There. Simple enough?

If it is reasonable to respect and not mock another's view, is it not also reasonable to allow the "unreasonable" man his freedom to disrespect and mock you?

Wilhelm is not condoning or agreeing with booble head Muhammed, but defending another man's freedom to make that which he disagrees with. I don't understand why this reasonable concept is beyond you.

 

[Maximum Carnage]

If it is reasonable to respect and not mock another's view, is it not also reasonable to allow the "unreasonable" man his freedom to disrespect and mock you?

Wilhelm is not condoning or agreeing with booble head Muhammed, but defending another man's freedom to make that which he disagrees with. I don't understand why this reasonable concept is beyond you.

He's Muslim.

 

[M.E.H.Z.E.B]

If it is reasonable to respect and not mock another's view, is it not also reasonable to allow the "unreasonable" man his freedom to disrespect and mock you?

Wilhelm is not condoning or agreeing with booble head Muhammed, but defending another man's freedom to make that which he disagrees with. I don't understand why this reasonable concept is beyond you.

Fair enough. In legal terms, when a man is unreasonable, he is quite often oblivious to the law, because he is not judged in the light of reasonable law-abiding people. Therefore, if you allow this "unreasonable" man his freedom to express himself, you are actually encouraging him to break the law, because the unreasonable man does not share the morals and ideals of a reasonable prudent man. In light of that, the guy who made the bobble-heads if according to you he is "unreasonable" has no real morals or ideals whatsoever. He is simply a person who likes to disrespect his fellow man, and mock something he does not understand. I understand that perfectly. And I hope my explanation has helped you realize my position as well.

 

[M.E.H.Z.E.B]

He's Muslim.

That was a cheap shot.

 

[The Lizard]

here, i'll restupid it.

"Restupid" is my new favorite verb.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

You know what Wilh? I judge people by a test which we in English law, call "The Reasonable Man Test". This usually pits a person's acts or ommissions with the hypothetical comparison with that of a reasonable prudent man's. To determine whether a reasonable person would do or say such as the defendant did. And in my view, a reasonable person, with sound mind, and morals, would actually respect another man's religion instead of mocking it. While people don't have to follow Islam, or Christianity, or Buddhism, or Hinduism, a certain amount of respect for your fellow man is expected from all of us. So, just because you don't share my beliefs, doesnt mean you'll bash them. There. Simple enough?

No, and I totally disagree.
There is nothing reasonable about believing in a giant invisible friend, who has supposedly created this nightmare planet, whose supposedly perfect will and word are moth-eaten with contradictions and very base, human, vulgar attitudes, and there is nothing "reasonable" about respecting the idea.
If someone believes with all of their heart that the Earth is a big plate that rests on the back of a giant, Cosmic Turtle, sorry, I don't see how it's "reasonable" to respect that.
To me, a "reasonable" man would either ignore the fool, or do everything in his power to disprove the man's belief (if possible), or expose the man's beliefs to the world as absurd, before other weak-minded people were duped as well.

The matters of theft, murder, fornication, dishonesty etc. are forbidded in almost EVERY single religion on God's green Earth. So, the producers of those shows are not just offending Christians, they are offending almost everyone who believes in religion. And you know why society has gradually become "okay" with stuff like this? Because, almost in all movies, tv shows, and such, the bad guys are the thieves, the murderers, the dishonest, and so on. Good always triumphs over evil. That's actually a positive message.

You must not be very familiar with the current state of the media in America.

Oh, and about the terrorist argument... well... terrorists are to blame for their acts for sure. I agree totally,

Cool.

but the person who gave the terrorists a reason, and a false justification to attack innocent people who have no defense, is equally condemnable.

This is terrifyingly wrong.

If, A guy adheres to the Old Testament and believes that homosexuals should be put to death....and a Gay rights activist holds a rally to try and make Gay marriage legal.....so the extremist Christian is so angered and scared that these homosexuals could possibly change the law of the "God's America" into a legally sanctioned abomination, that he straps dynamite to himself, and goes to the rally, blowing up the whole room of activists......you are saying that the Gay rights activists should be condemned equally as the man who killed them all on account of the "FALSE JUSTIFICATION" the homosexuals provided him.

so, so very wrong you are there.

And well, since we're being honest, I'd just like to say, I'm never thrilled to see your posts either.

Hey! the reason I was able to refrain from calling your offensive post "stupid" was 'cause I like you.
You have good taste in music.

 

[Killgore]

Fair enough. In legal terms, when a man is unreasonable, he is quite often oblivious to the law, because he is not judged in the light of reasonable law-abiding people. Therefore, if you allow this "unreasonable" man his freedom to express himself, you are actually encouraging him to break the law, because the unreasonable man does not share the morals and ideals of a reasonable prudent man. In light of that, the guy who made the bobble-heads if according to you he is "unreasonable" has no real morals or ideals whatsoever. He is simply a person who likes to disrespect his fellow man, and mock something he does not understand. I understand that perfectly. And I hope my explanation has helped you realize my position as well.

What you speak of is theocratic fascism.

Freedom of speech extends to the irrational, stupid and incendiary. There's no need for a First Amendment for benign or popular points of view. The intention of the amendment is not to protect the innocuous poems of Robert Frost or the cutesy photographs of Anne Geddes, but the speech of the iconoclasts, the unpopular and minority.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

All the fascism, theocratic or otherwise, that I'm seeing in this thread is really freaking me out.
In fact, it's honestly offending me.
I'll have to hire Shadowboxing to help me have these posters put away for hate speech, and then go kill a few people on behalf of my strongly held belief system which these people are openly, intentionally mocking and defying.
And, of course, all of the deaths will be on THEIR heads as well as mine.

 

[Killgore]

And then I'll shoot you for that blinking tiger that mocks my belief system.

 

[The Lizard]

To me, a "reasonable" man would either ignore the fool, or do everything in his power to disprove the man's belief (if possible), or expose the man's beliefs to the world as absurd, before other weak-minded people were duped as well.

I disagree here, simply because there are plenty of unreasonable, abusive, rambling monomaniacs that make it their mission to debunk and mock any profession of religious belief they stumble across.

Disbelief, like belief, has both reasonable and unreasonable degrees to which it drives one's daily thought process and the ability to communicate with others.

 

[Killgore]

What Wilhelm is suggesting is that if you dub a man "unreasonable" you should attempt to debunk his and expose his unreasonableness, not censor him.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Well that's why I also put in "ignore it" as an option for the "reasonable man", not meaning "ignore" as a rude kind of lack of acknowledgement, but like a "Whatever, live and let live" kind of ignore.

Also, I don't like how this guy seems to be Earth's sole judge of what is "reasonable" and what is not.

 

[The Lizard]

Well that's why I also put in "ignore it" as an option for the "reasonable man", not meaning "ignore" as a rude kind of lack of acknowledgement, but like a "Whatever, live and let live" kind of ignore.

Agreed.

 

[Hobgoblin]

Anyone that makes a bobblehead of the bomb/turban wearing Muhammad is an idiot, and anyone that goes crazy and starts killing people to protest the bobblehead is an even bigger idiot.

 

[M.E.H.Z.E.B]

No, and I totally disagree.
There is nothing reasonable about believing in a giant invisible friend, who has supposedly created this nightmare planet, whose supposedly perfect will and word are moth-eaten with contradictions and very base, human, vulgar attitudes, and there is nothing "reasonable" about respecting the idea.

Religion is in the ambit of law. Without the morality provided to us by religion (whichever), law would cease to exist. Laws are made today according to soceity's requirements, as per the moral rights and wrongs of the citizens of a country. Therefore, the "reasonable man" test does apply here, because the test quite clearly takes religion with all its "absurdities" into context.

If someone believes with all of their heart that the Earth is a big plate that rests on the back of a giant, Cosmic Turtle, sorry, I don't see how it's "reasonable" to respect that.

I think you just contradicted killgore.

If it is reasonable to respect and not mock another's view, is it not also reasonable to allow the "unreasonable" man his freedom to disrespect and mock you?

In Killgore's view, it is reasonable to respect the unreasonable man's freedom to express himself.

To me, a "reasonable" man would either ignore the fool, or do everything in his power to disprove the man's belief (if possible), or expose the man's beliefs to the world as absurd, before other weak-minded people were duped as well.

Wilh, you missed the point completely. I'm comparing the ex-marine-bobble-head-seller-guy to a reasonable man to ascertain his ethics and morals. The reasonable man here is being compared to him, not the world at large.

You must not be very familiar with the current state of the media in America.

I find out what I can.

Cool.

This is terrifyingly wrong.

If, A guy adheres to the Old Testament and believes that homosexuals should be put to death....and a Gay rights activist holds a rally to try and make Gay marriage legal.....so the extremist Christian is so angered and scared that these homosexuals could possibly change the law of the "God's America" into a legally sanctioned abomination, that he straps dynamite to himself, and goes to the rally, blowing up the whole room of activists......you are saying that the Gay rights activists should be condemned equally as the man who killed them all on account of the "FALSE JUSTIFICATION" the homosexuals provided him.

so, so very wrong you are there.

As with most of our arguments, I'll just ask you to accept that we should agree to disagree. This can, and will probably go on forever. However--

In the situation of the bobble-head seller, according to UK law, if a secondary party has forseen that the principal offender would commit an offense, and the secondary party abets the principal in order to committ the offense, the secondary party will be liable for the crime, as will the principal. There has to be no causal link between the counselling, and the act. If someone intentionally strikes anger in another with the knowledge that doing so would result in the commission of an offense, he would infact be responsible for those acts. That's the law.

But you can counter this if you want to- although I hardly see the point. I'd much rather agree to disagree from hereon in.

Hey! the reason I was able to refrain from calling your offensive post "stupid" was 'cause I like you.
You have good taste in music

Hey. Just because I said that I'm not very thrilled about your posts in this thread, doesnt mean that I don't like you! I happen to think that you're one of the most knowledgable posters in the hype, as far as music is concerned.

 

[M.E.H.Z.E.B]

Anyone that makes a bobblehead of the bomb/turban wearing Muhammad is an idiot, and anyone that goes crazy and starts killing people to protest the bobblehead is an even bigger idiot.

Truer words have never been spoken!