If you want to tick off Muslims, don't expect my sympathy.

how many pro-life supporters in America.... would America be best to avoid infuriating radicals by stopping abortions?

to make a living with humor..... just like Bill Mahre.... just like southpark writers, family guy writiers.....

 

In this day and age of selective outrage, I wouldn't count on it.

 

channe has consistently avoided addressing this point that I Have asked him directly (by quoting him) 5 times.


It's apparent, no matter how much the accusation that he's a Muslim apologist offends him.... he is, in fact, a muslim apologist.....

 

Ya, he's also tried equating outing a rape victim by a newspaper with satire, in his efforts to condone violent behavior by the hypersensitive.

At this point he is flailing all over the place.

 

It's not about blame. It's about recognizing a growing conflict with Islamic extremists, and recognizing that their support seems to be growing. This would be like a late 1920's or early 1930's (after that it was too late, the Nazis had the German people where they wanted them) French cartoonist repeatedly drawing offensive cartoons about the German people, or some symbol that was uniquely German. When they should have been drawing cartoons about Hitler (and surely some were) and the Nazis. It's not that I think that the law should have stopped the hypothetical French cartoonist from doing that, it's that I don't think it serves our interests. And if that hypothetical, 1930's, French cartoonist was murdered by the Nazis, one can clearly see that it wouldn't have been in the Allies' interests for their populations to hold up signs afterwards claiming they are that French cartoonist. Sure fire way to increase hostilities.

Focus on Bin Laden, Baghdaddy, or whatever in your cartoons. But poking fun at Mohammed is not the correct answer right now. And when our enemy kills those poking fun at Mohammed, it definitely doesn't serve our interests to say we are that group poking the fun. It's very foolish. Can't you see how it would have been in the Nazis' interest (because they hadn't yet convinced all Germans to follow them) for the French population to identify with the cartoonist that ridiculed the German people in general (as opposed to focusing on the bad actors)?

 

What point am I avoiding ?

I condemn the attacks in France.

 

Yes, I have already told my friends and family who are watching those shows of my views that those jokes are sourced in evil. That being said, I am not fearful of an upcoming global war against Christians. That fact motivates me to speak more about this than that. Choose your battles.

 

Can't say that I much disagree with the OP's sentiment, for this simple reason.

The people willing to kill for a picture of a prophet lack the intelligence to reason effectively... they're animals. Animals don't reason, they react. It's why I have little sympathy for people impaled or killed by bulls while running through the streets abroad. People accuse the OP of excusing their behavior (or condoning it) like the "people" in question are still capable of discerning right from wrong. We can't... they're well beyond that threshold, and deserve animalistic treatment in return (preferrably via some form of guided weapon system to their immediate dwellings... or special op "persuasion"). They're savages folks. Treat 'em as such. But hey, if you want to wear a meat suit in a cage with them, then have at it.

 

Thank you ! Finally someone gets what I'm saying.

I'm not condoning the attacks, but radicals are not a group that can be taught to be moral. It's best to avoid them and prevent them from growing bigger. What you don't do is poke them with a stick.

 

so I'll ask you the same question Channe refuses to answer

do you suggest that abortion clinics close up shop because it enfuriates radicals into bombing them?


Should Bill Mahrer stop making fun of Christians for the same reason the French magazine should stop making fun of Muhammad?

- - - Updated - - -

I don't htink you condone it... I think you believe we should give up freedoms in order to appease the radicals.....


Muslim making fun of is ok cuz they're crazy
but you make no such demands for Bill Mahrer to stop poking the Christian bear.

 

That's like the story about Elisha in 2 Kings 2:24 calling out the bears to kill the 42 kids who made fun of his bald head. Religious nutcases always want to kill people who reject their delusions.

 

If an abortion doctor had an image of him urinating on a cross, he would be intentionally provoking Christian outrage. But abortion on it's own is not a direct insult towards the Christian faith. Mocking the Prophet Muhammed is mocking Islam.

 

See, I think we should be poking the Islamic extremists with a stick. Their reaction is the best way to distinguish them from ordinary Muslims. But Charlie was not doing that. Charlie was poking all Muslims with a stick, and when the extremists reacted, the West is standing up saying we are the same as Charlie. I don't get how people don't see that as the best possible reaction the terrorists could have hoped for from the West. Win win for them.

 

Except some have brought that mentality into the world today. It's not ancient history in the Muslim world.

 

Great question, but I think there's an analogical flaw. Abortions aren't administered to (*)(*)(*)(*) off radicals. If radicals didn't exist, abortions still would. These illustrations exist solely because extremists find them very offensive.

Once more, I should state that I don't care what people do... just that I don't have much sympathy when people knowingly play with lunacy. I'm currently unaware of any meaningful Christian extremism that may follow criticism by Mr. Maher.

 

I love your margainalizing of what others believe..... to justify stopping something you actually agree with.


killing kids is offensive to Christians. You may not think it's killing kids, you may only view it as a clump of embryotic cells.... but you know good and well abortions offend Christians....

so you should be demanding that abortion clinics stop "poking the bear" because you know the radical ones will do things like bomb clinics...


but, as suspected... you apologize for Muslims and demand we change behavior to appease their radicals, but if it's Christians that are offended.... too bad, you aren't offended ENOUGH.

 

Lie. There is no justification for this attack. My issue is with magazines intentionally ticking off radicals.

 

Then why did you do just that?

 

fair point... even if it's just to avoid applying muslim apologies to Christians...

so why don't you tell Bill Mahrer to stop antagonizing Christians because he's definately doing it to (*)(*)(*)(*) them off. He only tells those jokes becuase they find it very offensive


just because Christians WON'T get extreme while muslims will is a reason we should allow Christian bashing to continue, but stop Muslim bashing?


Southpark writers have made fun of EVERY religion equally..... should we demand they stop making fun of just the Muslims because they are the craziest?


all that does is encourage all the crazies in all the other religions to start acting like Muslims until noone is allowed to say anything someone else deems offensive.

- - - Updated - - -

because he supports Muslims.....

 

What is the alternative when it comes to speech. I admit I do not know French law so what approach do you take for the citizen in this context?

Was it foolish? Maybe, but I am not quick to apply law over liberty.

 

"You apologize for rapists and demand women not get drunk and wear skimpy outfits as it could entice rapists."

You sound like a typical feminist on this. It's not victim blaming to ask magazines to not intentionally provoke radicals.

 

He didn't and he still isn't. If anything, you're entertaining the idea that extremists are still reasonable people that should know what they're doing is wrong. They don't; they fully believe in their actions, and would blow themselves up if it meant justifiable revenge for mockery. With that truth in mind, you treat them like the animals they are.

It's almost as if you people would walk into a CDC and start drinking the liquids from random vials, then getting pissed at the workers for calling you dumb for doing it.

- - - Updated - - -

It's a fair point, period. The analogy doesn't fit.

 

You're a religious baiter. You are like Al Sharpton and feminists. The second someone asks for more reasonable behavior from women/blacks/media you label them as being apologists and supporters. It's a very easy way to debate.

 

What was the purpose of bringing them in the first place?

Was it to make France better, or to make the Mulsim immigrants better?

Mollycoddling Islamics---especially fanatics isn't ever going to work.

Anyone offended by a free press and those very tame cartoons has no right to live in a free society.

Give intolerant Muslims tickets back to live among their intolerant Mulsim people.

 

Will Christians get a pass if they attack after being mocked?