Dr.Seussicide

Uhhh... just in case you were unsure of the hierarchy here... Religion > Law...uhhh yeah. And you basically typed about four lines of nothing, void of any substance.

Would you have me retort by using a youtube video as well? For someone who would believe that the two things do overlap? It seems expressing our own ideas is difficult these days...

__________________

lil-tank

That pastor is nuts!!! He's a pastor and he's teaching hatred.

Zaqarbal

How old are you, boy? 18? If you knew how pathetic your arrogance is!! I've got 100 times more knowledge (at a University level) on this and other subjects than you. I began to read about History, Religion and Political Science before you had your first wank. You make me laugh, kid.

Look, boy: that what I've shown you is called FACT. It is not about believing. There is a vehement (and frequently belligerent to atheists) Christian, and a vehement atheist (who recently made an incisive documentary on religion). And they're friends, as Maher himself says right at the beginning.

__________________

Dr.Seussicide

I'm almost done with my degree btw, just one more year. And it's Chemical engineering, because I just find the sciences to be more rewarding intellectually than Modern Studies. Well, it's that and any fool can pick up a book and regurgitate information. So maybe then we'll be on par and you can address you pedophilia issues about your concern with the first time I wanked. The seniority card doesn't stack up well over the internet, especially when I thought you were circa my age. I'm 19 in case your throbbing invalid ego must know.

And what you've shown me, is a 9minute long video, what I want you to show me is your own thoughts. Or maybe we should all just copy and paste articles and see who has the best research skills.

__________________

midnight rain

I'm with Zaqarbel on this one. Compromising freedom of speech now would just be the start and it could only get worse. Plenty of people saw the mosque being built near the 9/11 site as offensive, yet I see most MB members siding with the people building the mosque. Why? Do Muslims get pity solely because their a minority in this country, and just maybe misunderstood in where their beliefs are ground? Not to mention the whole bible burning point Zaqarbel brought up.

And Suessicide, quit with the childish insults. It's not doing you any favors.

Dr.Seussicide

Just btw canned food, I never initiated said childish insults.

And furthermore, all Freedom of Speech has become is simply a ball of yarn for Americans to play with, to keep them happy so that they can say, "We're the Land of the Free". Your freedom is slowly being encroached upon, it's only a matter of time before you start realizing that Big Brother will be watching you all the time.

__________________

midnight rain

Are you American?

By the way, I just want to say that caving in and silencing this fool would let the terrorists know that they got to us. The way our country is run shouldn't be compromised because of extremists.

Dr.Seussicide

Not American, but from the Caribbean, therefore we are heavily influenced by the American culture. It's not caving in, I'd call it, more like showing respect. Which you can do while speaking softly and carrying a big stick.

__________________

Consolator

This may be slightly jumbled, just going to try to get my thoughts out..

I think that it's important to remember that when the US' Constitution was written, we were not in war with several Muslim nations. Technology and international affairs are much, much different than they were back then. I've always felt that we could learn a thing or two from Canada's current system. They (and Canadians, please correct me if I'm wrong), have freedom of speech with the exception of hate speech. Yes, I know, then there's the whole semantics of arguing what is hate speech and what isn't, but I think it's fairly clear in most cases.

I agree that under our system in the US, he has every legal right to burn the Qurans. In most cases, I think it's pretty distasteful to burn religious scriptures. I'm agnostic (bordering on atheist), but the emotional connection that many have to religion is undeniable. By burning their texts, you're giving an easily-misconstrued message. I am sure there are many people around the world who are on the fence / who may not have a very clear picture on how we in the US view Islam and freedom of religion. By this pastor burning the Qurans and the media going as crazy as it is, it is extremely easy to twist this event into something much more twisted than it actually is. Do we really want other nations to hate us any more than they already do? Someone earlier in this thread said that if you know your actions are going to piss a whole lot of people off, and accomplish little (if anything), why would you do it? Speaking of which does the pastor want to accomplish? Does anybody know?

I disagree with Zaqarbal's arguement that abstractions are not people. People everywhere latch themselves onto various ideals, and things, constantly. I think it's a bit of a stretch to make such a claim. People take things like that as personal attacks, whether you want to admit it or not.

I think Dr. Suessicide and Zaqarbal (particularly you, Zaq) should tone down the language. You're not going to accomplish anything by insulting each other.

Finally, someone earlier in this thread said that by not allowing the pastor to burn the Qurans, we're letting the terrorists win. I encourage you to consider some of the different types of "Christians" we have here in America, and how much some of their actions appear to be "terrorist acts." I think you could argue that by letting him burn the Qurans, we're letting American pseudo-Christian terrorists win.

Zaqarbal

If the integrists bomb troops or civilians because of this quran-burning, THAT is the main problem. If you don't see this, you're like one of those sexists who make excuses for a rape when saying "she provoked him".

-----

Let's see the facts:

• In a country of 310 million people, ONE person wants to burn a Quran.
• If you burn a Quran, certain people will try to attack your WHOLE COUNTRY.

Now I ask you guys: Which one is the more morally important to you?

Why the f**k you focus all your attention and energy on the first one and forget the second? Do you have any moral judgement to do regarding the second fact? No? Does it cause any interest to you? No? Really? Nobody has said anything about the huge inmorality of that violence. No one. There only have been mentions to the "strategic inconvenience" of the burning, but no moral opinions about the integrist violence. And that's pretty disappointing, especially considering this third fact:

• The latent threat exists and it will continue existing, whether Jones burns a Quran or not.

Another key point has to do with access to information and democracy (or lack of it). Since some years ago, there are several videos on YouTube showing a Quran burning. Why haven't there been riots and demonstrations due to them? Because regarding access to information, there's a huge difference between developed and undeveloped countries. In Europe, America, Japan, South Korea, Australia, etc. our information sources are very diverse: TV, radio, written press and, especially, Internet. On the contrary, in countries like Pakistan, Iran or Sudan, people receive information "in the old way" and, in addition, there's a strong use of it by the political power.

Thus, in those countries, in the practice it's the rulers who decide what, when and how the socially-influential information is finally received by the population. So they make a selective political use of denunciations, protests and satires against Islam, by choosing a certain case, a certain moment and a certain way to present the information, in order to satisfy their political purposes of the moment.

Think about the last five or four years. Imagine a Pakistani, Iranian or Sudanese journalist strongly connected to the country's Establishment. Imagine that, in a certain moment, for some political reason, some Muslim rulers want to adopt a belligerent position against the West, and they wish to convey the impression of a strong popular anger, in order to put pressure on other/s country/ies. Imagine the journalist receiving a phone call from a high-ranking official: "Man, we need your help; search for some offensive Western stuff there and write about it". Imagine the journalist reviewing hundreds of Western publications, and finally choosing some Danish cartoons depicting Muhammad (although they were published 11 months before). Or, also, imagine the journalist surfing the web and watching YouTube videos, and finally choosing a few of them in which people burn a Quran.

It doesn't matter if Jones does his pyromaniac christo-freak show or not. If the Islamic rulers want to take advantage of this controversy, they will do it, either through Jones or through the existing abundant graphic and audiovisual material ralated to criticism of Islam. If not, this will be forgotten in a few weeks' time. The importance given to this is up to them.


Conclusion: don't torture yourself with self-hatred. Keep in mind what are the primeval causes of all this matter: Lack of liberty, democracy and freedom of the press, absence of media networks, and a poor and easily-manipulated population in the Muslim countries where the tumultuous protests happen.

Don't have a guilty conscience. Regarding how public opinion form its criterion about these events, compare our modern socities with those of the upset Islamic "hotspots". There, it is the result of an oligarchy's will. In ours, we the people are freely and continuously exchanging information and opinions in an international scope. From Japan to Australia, from Alaska to Chile, from Lisbon to Moscow... everybody can contribute. So we are those who are nearest to a true cosmopolitan and rational point of view.

__________________