Death threats against Mohammed cartoonists

[RFTP]

That, however, is not freedom of speech, my dear friend.

You misunderstood. People are allowed for "freedom of speech" as long as they don't say/do stuff that = persecution of a sorts people. In these cases, things that are/were historically accociated to the word "persecution" is banned. So far noone has argued about why the swastika isn't allowed in sweden.

 

[Illuminattile]

Where I live we have a strong islamic community. We have some real fanatics here. Among them we have the more neutral ones like me, who do almost anything (drinking, sex and other). They condamn what I do but it's not their business to come up to me and say; The devil is tricking you, you're an evil sinner. That's not how it works. They mind their own business.

That's nice, I'm glad you're not constantly harassed by Muslims. Nothing to do with what I was saying, but I'm happy for you. Homosexuals are targeted by religious people, though. Just because it hasn't happen to you doesn't mean it doesn't happen at all.

Because the books don't see them as inferior lifeforms. They see them as humans doing evil deeds while the nazis don't think of them at all they only want to eliminate them. Quite the difference there

I'm not claiming that Nazis and the religious view them the same way, I'm saying they view them in different but (in my opinion) equally negative ways. Why is it OK to say someone is biologically inferior, but not that someone is evil?

That's not entirely true. I haven't heard one statement to say that gays are beeing hunted by religious people more then by "normal" people. In fact, recent tv show in sweden showed that one of the most dangerous place for a gay is in the clubs. If he hits on a heterosexual by mistake he is more likely to get really beaten up. A guy got his throat cut cause he tried to make a move on a guy.

In the U.S. in 2000 a heterosexual man with the unfortunate surname of Gay walked into a gay club and killed one patron, injuring six more. He did so (in his words) as a "Christian Soldier working for my Lord". It happens.

Homophobia is very strong regardless of faith. For some, or for most it's still a new phenomena.

Would you allow someone to wear a symbol display their affiliation with a group which promotes intolerance of homosexuality?

Yes you can, cause the world can't be seen just in 2 layers. Swastika have been more famous for the genocide then beeing an hindu sign for sun and peace. It's about recognition. If you show 10 people the swastika about 8 of them would connect it to the WW.

I wasn't saying that the Swastika should be allowed because it's a traditional, non-Nazi symbol. That's not my argument.

 

[RFTP]

That's nice, I'm glad you're not constantly harassed by Muslims. Nothing to do with what I was saying, but I'm happy for you. Homosexuals are targeted by religious people, though. Just because it hasn't happen to you doesn't mean it doesn't happen at all.

what the fuck? I'm not gay or did I misunderstand what you said?

Of course they are, but they're not bothered to make a whole campaign out of it. There is more likely that "normal" people beat up a gay guy then a religious one. A real one, cause he doesn't attend things that aren't allowed or not liked. School would be the only place but muslims (strongly religious ones) have already one problem there; to avoid looking at girls who walk around halfnaked. They wouldn't be bothered by a gay person.

I'm not claiming that Nazis and the religious view them the same way, I'm saying they view them in different but (in my opinion) equally negative ways. Why is it OK to say someone is biologically inferior, but not that someone is evil?

Religious people doesn't deny their human in them. While nazis don't even think they should breathe. To me it's a different stand. Like I said previously, they may think gays are evil sinners and whatelse but so far the abuse on gay-marriage (in sweden) has been from the "normal" people.

In the U.S. in 2000 a heterosexual man with the unfortunate surname of Gay walked into a gay club and killed one patron, injuring six more. He did so (in his words) as a "Christian Soldier working for my Lord". It happens.

One odd example doesn't cut it. The reason I "showed" you the example is to make you understand that gaypeople have problems when it comes to hanging around places like bars and stuff. Religious people don't go to bars. I fail to see how they would feel threatened in school (we've drifted away from the topic but meh) where the most noticeable discrimination happens to them in other places.

Would you allow someone to wear a symbol display their affiliation with a group which promotes intolerance of homosexuality?

In my previous post I said that freedom of speach only applys IF one type of folks don't feel that they are presectued by another. For me to answer that question in-depth I need a better word for intolerance.

I wasn't saying that the Swastika should be allowed because it's a traditional, non-Nazi symbol. That's not my argument.

You were asking whether the swastika should be allowed ( if a person choses to have it in school) and I told you why they shouldn't be allowed. It's more accosiated to the nazis then non-nazis even.

 

[jimmyk88]

update:
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/B91FD4FC-0D75-417D-BAC5-085D8679EC3D.htm
This is getting out of hand.

 

[Minardi]

Sorry for not being able to perticipate that much in my own topic.

Ill answer back on most of the relevant stuff when i get the time!