Charlie Hebdo faces 'imminent' attack after publishing front page image of naked Muslims

[Emn1ty]

36 minutes ago, FloatingFatMan said:

Score! \o/

 

Fastest way to lose an argument it to stick your head in the sand, buddy, so well done there.

As is generalizing that an entire group of people are idiots by virtue of a single trait they share. Instead of trying to win your arguments you should be more focused on discussing them objectively.

 

3 hours ago, Fahim S. said:

But by that I can say anything offensive I want about any group of people if I position it carefully and make satirical.  That just isn't right to me.

Maybe it's just upbringing, but I was always taught not to offend anyone - whether I agreed with their beliefs and actions, or not.  It's not censorship to me, just good manners.

Yes you can, that's the whole point of freedom of speech. If you make it satire, then it is satire... I don't really see why you think it's as simple as applying a label to it to dodge social consequence.

[+Raphaël G. MVC]

1 hour ago, mip said:

 

Sadly, that says a whole lot more about your intelligence level than I'm betting you'd like it to. You wouldn't call Ben Carson intelligent? Isaac Newton? That's a special level of stupid. I think that it's ridiculous to believe in evolution. But I don't call people who do "unintelligent"; some of them are very intelligent. We just disagree.

 

Anyway, don't bother replying. Or do. I don't care. You're going on the ignore list... I don't have time to read such ridiculously biased and baseless comments.

I won't comment about the supernatural stuff. But, calling someone intelligent, just because that said someone is good in 1 or some areas, is kind of a stretch. They could show a serious lack of sense in other areas or even be complete lunatics.

 

As for Charlie Hebdo: killing someone over satire, is lunacy.

[FloatingFatMan]

57 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

As is generalizing that an entire group of people are idiots by virtue of a single trait they share. Instead of trying to win your arguments you should be more focused on discussing them objectively.

Oh I do, but in the thread dedicated to that purpose.

[fintechfooty]

6 hours ago, J. X. Maxwell said:

Islam is not a race therefore criticizing it can't lead to "racial hatred"

 

Their staff probably have balls and value freedom over Islamic oppression.

 

Funny I get offended by comics insulting Trump supporters, articles insulting gamers, and so on - but I never sent death threats about it.

Are people afraid of calling Catholic priests pederasts? Are people afraid of calling Atheists immoral?

 

If the majority of European Islamists are peaceful, people wouldn't fear making fun of them.

They actual do need to "loosen up"

.............

Ah, I see now.

 

[Q: What did I see ]

 

[Don't 2nd Ammendment me brotha!]

[Open Minded]

7 hours ago, Yazoo said:

What is wrong with them?  You don't put your hand into a lions cage and expected not to get bitten or worse. 

Some say the same thing when a woman is sexually assaulted because of how she's dressed.  "Don't dress like a slut and this wouldn't happen!"

[Yazoo]

9 hours ago, Open Minded said:

Some say the same thing when a woman is sexually assaulted because of how she's dressed.  "Don't dress like a slut and this wouldn't happen!"

You mean dress like a slut and then parade through an area known to harbour rapists etc.  Wonder what will happen then?

[Athernar]

8 minutes ago, Yazoo said:

You mean dress like a slut and then parade through an area known to harbour rapists etc.  Wonder what will happen then?

So if a Muslim walks through an area and it just so happens to have a violent far-right supremacist in it, and the Muslim gets stabbed to death, that's perfectly fine?

[Santiago Matamoros]

16 hours ago, Mando said:

nonsense, its called incitement to racial hatred, they know things like this offend the faith yet they do it.....sorry but satire or not, thats just plain stupid, have they no consideration for their own staff, who are put in danger by their actions? 

 

Im not saying its right, but come on, insulting an entire religion to have a pop at the extremist end of their spectrum, thats like calling all Americans loony fundamental christians.....due the group who protest at soldiers funerals....when the vast majority of the faith and populace are not.

Islam is a belief system and not a "race," and though individual orthodox Muslims might be nonviolent now, that doesn't guarantee that they don't or won't support jihad and the imposition of shari'a.

 

You can't define a religion by the behavior of an individual; you have to look at the religion's founder and core teachings.

 

Islam kills:

 

"the Messenger of Allah [...] would say: 'Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war. [...] When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. [...] Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them. [...] If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them [...]'" (Muslim Book 19, Number 4294).

[Brys]

1 hour ago, Santiago Matamoros said:

though individual orthodox Muslims might be nonviolent now, that doesn't guarantee that they don't or won't support jihad and the imposition of shari'a.

Good point, we should kill everyone in the world because sure, they might be nonviolent now, but that doesn't guarantee that they won't turn into murderous psychopaths out of boredom tomorrow.

 

brb, gonna see if my boss is ok with me leaving the office for 5 minutes to go kill a bunch of random strangers on the street

[Athernar]

4 minutes ago, brpsycho said:

Good point, we should kill everyone in the world because sure, they might be nonviolent now, but that doesn't guarantee that they won't turn into murderous psychopaths out of boredom tomorrow.

 

brb, gonna see if my boss is ok with me leaving the office for 5 minutes to go kill a bunch of random strangers on the street

So you're saying that everyone should be forced to convert to Islam or be beheaded?

 

P.S. Do you have any matches perchance? I need some to ignite this human-shaped collection of dried plant matter.

[Skiver Veteran]

14 hours ago, FloatingFatMan said:

IS are not the only islamic terrorists in the world, you know. They're just one particular gang of them, and only the newest.  You're forgetting all their buddies like Al Queda, The Taliban, Boko Haram and the hundreds of other groups all intent of slaughtering anyone who doesn't do fit their twisted view of the universe.

If your dad started talking to someone who wasn't there, and telling you this invisible someone was telling him to do things that he wouldn't normally do, would you accept that happily, or call a doctor?

 

I'm betting the doctor, personally.

I know they aren't but lets face it this is pretty much aimed at them.

 

Sure, but then that isn't really the same scenario, I'm not religious, I don't believe in any god but if others do I don't call that lunacy. People are free to believe in whatever they want and belief systems that go back thousands of years count on that so no matter how much I'll never agree with them on, lunacy is not a word I'll choose to use against them.

 

 

15 hours ago, Active. said:

Is your life realistically on the line? I mean, have you actually witnessed a number of your colleagues being killed over saying/drawing certain things?

No but I'm not sure that matters with my point here.

[Brys]

2 hours ago, Athernar said:

So you're saying that everyone should be forced to convert to Islam or be beheaded?

where the ######## did I say that ?

 

I just reacted to that other comment because I couldn't make sense of it. "All muslims aren't violent but they could be in the future" sure and we could genetically engineer unicorns that poop rainbows in the future, but we don't. What point can you make from a sentence like that ?

 

I didn't mean to take one of your simplistic, imaginary sides and defend the "evil muslim religion from satan". I just meant to convey how that sentence made no sense to me.

[Setnom]

How weak is their faith and convictions, that they have to resort to violence just because someone drew two naked people on a beach.

Edited August 16, 2016 by Setnom

[ichi]

This kinda sums it up:

 

 

[Morisato]

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words or imagery will never hurt nor offend me. Those that do commit these atrocious attacks are like extreme sjw's. You know your mind is in the gutter if you have to defend a dead pedo prophet with your life over his supposed looks for your supposed 72 virgins. It's safe to say the men ruling in the ME, most prominently over women, on what they can do or wear.

 

[Open Minded]

8 hours ago, Yazoo said:

You mean dress like a slut and then parade through an area known to harbour rapists etc.  Wonder what will happen then?

Blaming the victim isn't something I like to do.

[Yazoo]

38 minutes ago, Open Minded said:

Blaming the victim isn't something I like to do.

Nothing to do with blame, its all about the inevitable outcome.  If you have to deal with who is to blame then its already happened.  Maybe I'm a coward and value my life and will always walk away from potential danger.  

[Rippleman]

4 minutes ago, Yazoo said:

 walk away from potential danger.  

Rarely, but sometimes, walking away is the worst thing to do. This is one of those times. The only way to break the stupidity of violence over a drawings is for everyone to simply draw and for Muslims to simply accept they have to live with it. If they don't like it, they are free to move to a country that restricts this. If they do not, then they choose to abide by the laws of said country. 

[PaulATMOS]

Behead those who insult Islam!

slay those who slander the prophet!

yada yada yada

[Athernar]

11 hours ago, brpsycho said:

where the ######## did I say that ?

 

I just reacted to that other comment because I couldn't make sense of it. "All muslims aren't violent but they could be in the future" sure and we could genetically engineer unicorns that poop rainbows in the future, but we don't. What point can you make from a sentence like that ?

 

I didn't mean to take one of your simplistic, imaginary sides and defend the "evil muslim religion from satan". I just meant to convey how that sentence made no sense to me.

Oh, you don't like being strawmanned?

 

Maybe don't do it to other people next time then?

[Brys]

11 hours ago, Athernar said:

Oh, you don't like being strawmanned?

 

Maybe don't do it to other people next time then?

Lol, had to look up "strawmanned". Still not sure I know what it means but I guess I get the idea. Next time I won't try to be funny I'll just say what I mean clearly.

[Anonymous3]

On ‎8‎/‎15‎/‎2016 at 3:38 PM, Raphaël G. said:

I won't comment about the supernatural stuff. But, calling someone intelligent, just because that said someone is good in 1 or some areas, is kind of a stretch. They could show a serious lack of sense in other areas or even be complete lunatics.

 

As for Charlie Hebdo: killing someone over satire, is lunacy.

 

I agree with your last statement. As for the first...

Of course they can. But if you're going to go all relative on "intelligent", who's to say how many areas you have to be good in to be considered intelligent? No one can, which makes his original post not only ignorant but conceited as well.

[Santiago Matamoros]

On 8/16/2016 at 0:43 AM, brpsycho said:

Good point, we should kill everyone in the world because sure, they might be nonviolent now, but that doesn't guarantee that they won't turn into murderous psychopaths out of boredom tomorrow.

 

brb, gonna see if my boss is ok with me leaving the office for 5 minutes to go kill a bunch of random strangers on the street

So, logic isn't your strong suit. At least, you're living up to your name.

 

If you were a little more honest and a little less perverse, then you'd know that the genocidal pedophile Muhammad preached and practiced the rape, enslavement, and slaughter of all who refuse the "invitation" to convert. That means that every orthodox Muslim is required to support jihad and shari'a. Those Muslims who reject such depravity -- like the Ahmadiyya, Egyptian president el-Sisi, and Dr. Zuhdi Jasser -- are all targets for persecution by their coreligionists.

 

You're entitled to your own opinion, but you're not entitled to your own facts.

 

 

[Brys]

1 hour ago, Santiago Matamoros said:

So, logic isn't your strong suit. At least, you're living up to your name.

 

If you were a little more honest and a little less perverse, then you'd know that the genocidal pedophile Muhammad preached and practiced the rape, enslavement, and slaughter of all who refuse the "invitation" to convert. That means that every orthodox Muslim is required to support jihad and shari'a. Those Muslims who reject such depravity -- like the Ahmadiyya, Egyptian president el-Sisi, and Dr. Zuhdi Jasser -- are all targets for persecution by their coreligionists.

 

You're entitled to your own opinion, but you're not entitled to your own facts.

 

 

the guy essentially said

"some fact isn't true now but that doesn't guarantee it won't be true in the future". This was an empty argument. The argument you're making is not the same, you're saying there's a reason this fact could become true. I wasn't arguing about either opinion or facts, I was complaining about that abstract logic. Granted, as discussed before, I should have just said that instead of trying to mock the original comment