[Mr. Vega]

Speaking of which, do you know that Comedy Central actually refused to allow them to show a picture of Muhammad on air?

[Luis Dias]

I remembered that as well. They substituted him for a bear or something, right?

relevant:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4nIfLGqd9s

[Mr. Vega]

That was from a later episode. They literally put up a blank screen the first time.

[karajorma]

The **** is that Karajorma. That's a strawman. A completely inane one. Hell, we all know that Charlie Hebdo mocked the entire religious scene so what the ****.

I was referring to Bobb when I was referring to the entire Draw Muhammed thing. I've not once commented on Charlie Hebdo directly. I'm commenting on the wider movement to make everyone draw Muhammed from people who haven't once posted anything satirical even though that will help the extremists. Now if you also draw Jesus you remove the ability to claim that this is an East vs West thing as it makes it much harder to spin the whole "This is an attack on Islam" thing.

[Bobboau]

The only issue with that is Islam has sort of singled it's self out by it's reactions. It's not that you shouldn't mock Taoists, but they are rather out of context, as are Buddhists and Christians.

On DMD the whole point of that was you were not supposed to so much as draw Mohamed, it wasn't even supposed to be a direct ridicule. It was an act of defiance against people who were trying to tell us what to do.

[karajorma]

Are you so unaware of how the Internet works that you think that would have been the end result?

[Phantom Hoover]

Now if you also draw Jesus you remove the ability to claim that this is an East vs West thing as it makes it much harder to spin the whole "This is an attack on Islam" thing.

People do draw Jesus quite a lot, even in satirical depictions, but nobody gets killed over it and so nobody sees the need to make it an organised effort to drive home that they will not be intimidated into silence.

[Luis Dias]

The **** is that Karajorma. That's a strawman. A completely inane one. Hell, we all know that Charlie Hebdo mocked the entire religious scene so what the ****.

I was referring to Bobb when I was referring to the entire Draw Muhammed thing. I've not once commented on Charlie Hebdo directly. I'm commenting on the wider movement to make everyone draw Muhammed from people who haven't once posted anything satirical even though that will help the extremists. Now if you also draw Jesus you remove the ability to claim that this is an East vs West thing as it makes it much harder to spin the whole "This is an attack on Islam" thing.

It's an attack on blasphemic censorship. And last I checked, buddhists or Jains were not exactly murdering cartoonists. The Draw Mohammed Day came as a response to the 2006 attacks. The day someone drawing the Monkey God gets killed guess what happens the next day in the internet.

Again, you are of the mind that given these terrorist attacks, that the society should adapt and stop offending these people. That this is somehow "our fault", we the liberal minded crazy "freedom" people that are too narrow minded to consider we are hurting someone else's feelings.

No. Categorically NO. That should NOT be the reaction of a sane civilization that has PRIDE in itself.


e: http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/8/7514251/charlie-hebdo-will-publish-one-million-copies-next-week-with-help

[Bobboau]

Are you so unaware of how the Internet works that you think that would have been the end result?

when people participate in that fashion I do not think they should be condemned. and even when they don't I don't think they should be censored.
If it turns into a mockery of a religion I don't find anything wrong with that, I don't like religion, I think all of them are mockable and the ones that we are not supposed to mock are the ones we need to the most. Christianity gets mocked every day of the year, Islam should too, it gets no pedestal. I mean, have you seen some of the **** that gets posted about atheists?

[Luis Dias]

I also don't think that Karajorma (or me or anyone else) truly understands "how the Internet works" in the real societal sense of a long term equation and all the huge variables involving whole societies and communities around the world. What I see instead is a kind of confirmation of Huntington's thesis about the Clash of Civlizations that was so laughed away back in the nineties.

[Bobboau]

well, we all understand that the internet is for trolls. lets not be obtuse.

[Luis Dias]

Are you trying to prove it to us?

[Bobboau]

come on you know he was responding to my comment about the idea behind DMD and that he was implying that it was obvious that people would do offensive things, and you know he is right about that. It doesn't mean he is right about the bigger point.

[Mr. Vega]

well, we all understand that the internet is for trolls. lets not be obtuse.

Imagine how awesome the internet could be if people stopped accepting "Welcome to the internet" as a response to everything?

[Luis Dias]

come on you know he was responding to my comment about the idea behind DMD and that he was implying that it was obvious that people would do offensive things, and you know he is right about that. It doesn't mean he is right about the bigger point.

I know nothing of the sort. Everyone understood the point of DMD, and yes, insulting "Mohammed" with "offensive" (according to whom anyway ****ing hell) portraits might seem just "trolling", but it's actually cathartic for a lot of people who live in fear of not only imaginary divine threats but also real life threats.

I find it not only not "trolling" but actually a duty of civilization to mock exactly what it is that is deemed as "unmockable" and "untouchable". The moment we let ourselves be censored (by self-censorship, the worst of them all for it is so subtle) like this is the start of the beggining of the end of our beloved morals and values.

[karajorma]

If you guys truly can't see why drawing Jesus next to Muhammed makes more sense than drawing Muhammed on his own, I give up.

[Luis Dias]

And if you can't see why it's not my place or your place to design by commitee what exactly should be the right cartoon to make, then I also give up.

You still don't understand that different people will judge differently. Cartoons with both Jesus and Mohammed are legion. Hell, let's even bite that bullet. It won't be as offensive right? Well, tell that to the Jesus and Mo (http://www.jesusandmo.net) people. Perhaps they didn't get the memo that their comics were Halal. Because of course they are not. Nothing is. A blank White Canvas is the only appropriate answer. And it's unnaceptable.

[Bobboau]

If you guys truly can't see why drawing Jesus next to Muhammed makes more sense than drawing Muhammed on his own, I give up.

I can see your argument, I just don't agree with your conclusion. I think we value different things slightly differently.

[Bobboau]

Imagine how awesome the internet could be if people stopped accepting "Welcome to the internet" as a response to everything?

how Orwellian...

[Flipside]

And demanding that people do live by those anarchic rules because 'it's the Intenet' is any less Orwellian in nature? It's still demanding people live to rulesets they don't want to.

Thing is, take something like 'The Modest Proposal', that got famous as free-speech because it flew in the face of what everyone believed was 'proper' behaviour. At no-point did there arise a group that actually agreed that poor people should be used as food, it was the universal disgust at the concept that caused the fame.

The problem with things like social extremism is that there is no unit of it., what is defined as 'normal' society would be considered extreme by a Victorian or a Puritan, it's all down to perception. There is, however, an attitude on the Internet that anything goes, and any voice that tries to get people to behave in a more tolerant manner towards each other is silenced as being 'against Free Speech', which is an irony that shouldn't be lost on anyone.