a question for the lovers of freedom of expression

[ImmortalTech]

Heres a scenerio, I was just wondering what peoples reaction would be to it:

A cartoonist in Sweden draws a cartoon for a local paper depicting Hitler in Hell, asking "why have you forsaken me lord?".. and in the next frame, theres a cartoon of Jesus Christ with a Nazi tattoo on his arm replying "because you left some behind". Now theres some commotion in Sweden y both Jewish and Christian groups because of the cartoon. As this cathes the European Unions attention, they decide to post it in every majour European Newpaper in the name of solidarity for freedom of expression.

please answer the following question...

1) Do you think this is a realistic scenerio?

2) Would you find this at all offensive or would you stick by your love of freedom of expression?

3) If Jewish and/or Christian groups reacted in the manner that some Muslim groups did, what would be your reaction (would some of you call them haters of freedom or barbarians etc)?

... i know this is just a stupid scenerio, but i was justinterested in what people would have to say about this & it may get some ppl thinking about the situation at hand today.

------
my answers:
1) no, i do not beleive this situation could arise, because i dont think europe would post this type of cartoon in the name of solidarity for freedom of expression.
2) Even being a Muslim I would find this offensive, therefore I wouldn't even wanna imagine how some Chistians and Jews would feel if they saw this cartoon.
3) I would love to see Christians and Jews react the same way Muslims did, because finally we would have everyone agreeing and ready to fight for whats wrong. ( i know certain people, especially us muslims would turn hypocritical and react the same way alot of christians and jews are today, when they see muslims rioting for the prophet (pbuh) and say look i knew they're crazy)

 

[Glockmatic]

1) Not a realistic scenario, drawing cartoons that are pro-nazi or even images of the swastika are illegal in some european countries, so an all EU publication wouldn't happen.

2) I'm not religious, so I wouldn't find it offensive, there is a LOT more offensive things in the world, not just a cartoon.

3) I would call them religious nuts

 

[Illuminattile]

2) Would you find this at all offensive or would you stick by your love of freedom of expression?

Both. I'm not religious or Jewish (or a Nazi) so I wouldn't find it personally offensive, but I'd still condemn it. That said, I wouldn't try to stop it being published.

3) If Jewish and/or Christian groups reacted in the manner that some Muslim groups did, what would be your reaction (would some of you call them haters of freedom or barbarians etc)?

Violent rioting and setting fire to buildings? I'd condemn them like I condemned the Muslims. It's not the way to protest against this kind of thing.

 

[Pittsey]

Heres a scenerio, I was just wondering what peoples reaction would be to it:

A cartoonist in Sweden draws a cartoon for a local paper depicting Hitler in Hell, asking "why have you forsaken me lord?".. and in the next frame, theres a cartoon of Jesus Christ with a Nazi tattoo on his arm replying "because you left some behind". Now theres some commotion in Sweden y both Jewish and Christian groups because of the cartoon. As this cathes the European Unions attention, they decide to post it in every majour European Newpaper in the name of solidarity for freedom of expression.

please answer the following question...

1) Do you think this is a realistic scenerio?

2) Would you find this at all offensive or would you stick by your love of freedom of expression?

3) If Jewish and/or Christian groups reacted in the manner that some Muslim groups did, what would be your reaction (would some of you call them haters of freedom or barbarians etc)?

... i know this is just a stupid scenerio, but i was justinterested in what people would have to say about this & it may get some ppl thinking about the situation at hand today.

------

1) Dunno. Never thought about it. It's just an opinion and a cartoon. People's beliefs differ. What people find humerous/sick differs.

2) I wouldn't find it offensive. I would think the artist was merely trying to get a reaction. Same thing I thought about the muhammed cartoon.

3) Again, I would think they were religious extremeists. ie. Nuts. If they care that much about a stupid picture then their lives are too good. If they have real problems, shit like this doesn't even register.

 

[hizzle?]

Well, Freedom of Speech stops when you are hurting some one.... So I think that answers the first 2 questions

3. I'd think that they are overreacting

 

[PuffnScruff]

1) Do you think this is a realistic scenerio?

2) Would you find this at all offensive or would you stick by your love of freedom of expression?

3) If Jewish and/or Christian groups reacted in the manner that some Muslim groups did, what would be your reaction (would some of you call them haters of freedom or barbarians etc)?

1) sure its realistic. just because they live in a country that is part of the E.U. doesnt mean it couldnt happen

2) i think its crazy to hold some much belief and faith in a religion, specially when they are out dated and dont always apply to modern times, so no i wouldnt find it offensive

3) if jewish, christian, hindu, or any religion group ted in the way that some muslims have acted over the cartoons i would still hold the same opinion. they are off their rocker and should be sterilized for the good of humanity

 

[Duke]

Both. I'm not religious or Jewish (or a Nazi) so I wouldn't find it personally offensive, but I'd still condemn it. That said, I wouldn't try to stop it being published.


Violent rioting and setting fire to buildings? I'd condemn them like I condemned the Muslims. It's not the way to protest against this kind of thing.

:thumb:

Well, Freedom of Speech stops when you are hurting some one.... So I think that answers the first 2 questions

Does it?

 

[Sebastian]

1) sure its realistic. just because they live in a country that is part of the E.U. doesnt mean it couldnt happen

nah, i dont think its realistic at all. maybe one newspaper would publish it (to seek attention or whatever), but there is no way it would be published in all european countries.

 

[PuffnScruff]

i over looked that part were he said "in every majour European Newpaper"

but yea maybe one or couple might print it but not all.

 

[Mr Matt]

1) Yes, it's realistic.

2) No, I wouldn't find it offensive. Im secured enough in my beliefs that it doesn't threaten my whole thinking.

3) If Christian or Jewish groups violently rioted, burned down embassies in countries on the other side of the world and publicly codoned brutal murders and bombings that were carried out by people of the same faith in countries that had nothing to do with any of this, then yes I would be very suprised.


I can think of several examples which were way more blasphemous to other faiths than those two cartoons and the backlash was nowhere near as severe;

Did you ever see the Monty Python movie "Life of Brian" from the 1970s? It depicts Christianity as a sheep-like faith whose origins came about by mis-interpretations by idiots.

Or, more recently, whatabout Kevin Smith's "Dogma"? Loads of blashemy througout the whole movie and it shows God as a woman.

And have you read "The Da Vinci Code"? It's threatens the very fundaments of Catholicism.

Both of these movies and that book were the subject of public protests by extreme religious groups but no violence, no fires, no bombings, no death-threats and no faqwa's. Please tell me what the difference was and why one group protests violently and another not, and you can't say it's a regional or cultural thing because Muslims reacted violently all over the world.

The point is, the artist who made those cartoons published them knowing what violence would follow only proving what the cartoons were showing in the first place. The Muslim's who apparently cared so much about the reputation of Islam played right into his hands by acting exactly how he expected.

 

[Jibster]

1. Not realistic but certainly possible.

2. I'd find it to be out of order but i'd know it's a bit of attention seeking, no need for it to deeply offend me as i don't believe it to be true.

3. As with any subject like this, there'd be a section of my religion (Roman Catholic) and i'd imagine some other Christian groups which would take offence and act like idiots, just cos they claim to represent my religion and beliefs doesn't mean they do though and i'd label them as extremists and equally as ignorant as the illustrator.

 

[XIAN]

-I don't think it would happen because not enough people would want to put it out, because so many would be offended.

-It does offend me, and it should probably offend all humans because of the praise of racism and genocide. And Christians for making it look like our brother is a Nazi.

-And I wouldn't be surprised if people rioted, although I don't think it would happen too much because people realize that it's just a cartoon written and drawn by some morons. I think what happened with The Prophet's cartoon was that a lot of Muslums were very sick and tired of Islam's negative image in the Western World. Not that what they did was right, but I think it's understandable.
~peace~

 

[Bhuddahhoodlum]

every person has the right to express how they feel in whatever way they chose. but common sense lets you know when your medium is crossing the line. you know when you're going too far with it. if a person feels that strongly about their beliefs, it being offensive or not, they also have the responsibility of it. freedom of speech isn't just a something you use whenever it benefits you. it's something you have to respect of everyone as well.

different cultures, different lifestyles, you can't predict who's gonna find what offensive these days. but you should also respect anothers way of life.

the artist is entitled to his opinion, but he's disrespecting of a people. the people are justly offended, but should know that not everyone see's greener grass on the same side. it's a double edge sword of a risk and it's just a responsibility of freedom of speech.

that's how i'm figurin it.