SEGAbits Forums

Off Topic => Everything Else => Topic started by: Sharky on January 07, 2015, 10:07:12 am

Title: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 07, 2015, 10:07:12 am
Scumbag extremists kill many of Frances most well known comic artists including Cabu, Wolinski, Charb and Tignousvery famous and symbolic artists. They charged into the office this morning with machine guns and apparently a rocket launcher! Shot up the office then escaped in a black car, they also shot a police officer. They apparently shouted 'The prophet has been avenged.'

More info:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15551998

Fuck these scumbags for so many reasons not least for murdering innocent people, but also for giving UKIP and other far right parties more ammunition... If you don't see yourself as European then stay the fuck out of Europe!

It's not the first time Charlie-Hebrdo has been attacked, in 2011 their previous office was firebombed after they reprinted the Danish cartoon of Mohammed. In response they posted this cartoon of a Muslim man kissing one of their artists.

Translation: 'Love is stronger than hate'
(http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/80117000/jpg/_80117972_charliekissing464.jpg)
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03156/police-paris_3156742c.jpg)

A comic from last week, drawn by one of the men who was killed today:
Translation (although my French is rusty)
Header: 'Still no attacks in France?"
Terrorist: "Wait, we have until after January to make our wishes."
(http://photos-c.ak.instagram.com/hphotos-ak-xaf1/t51.2885-15/10914636_536566006458634_608263392_n.jpg)

Other art on the subject matter:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B6weoO7CQAIWf3l.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B6wZOY8CMAA_b6v.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/WLVwaxa.jpg)

Finally, in all fairness they go after everyone. Here is the Pope Benedict resigning so he can finally be gay.
Translation: "Free at last!"
(http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/80117000/jpg/_80117968_charliepope464.jpg)
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: MadeManG74 on January 07, 2015, 10:20:38 am
This is really awful news, heart goes out to the victims and their family. Scary to think such a violent response was over something like a comic strip.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: CrazyT on January 07, 2015, 01:30:39 pm
Seems these guys were determined and focused towards the one person they felt needed to die.

I don't understand muslims like this. We live in a huge world with billions of people. Killing 1 guy will only confirm their portrayals and awaken more with the same thought to produce even more cartoons. I'm not a fan of offensive cartoons as i'm not a fan of offensiveness in general. I like it when people in general are just respectful and kind to each other and usually hang out with that sort of croud. But it is better to ignore if you disagree rather than attacking in any sort of way imo. Really awful news. The people behind this are retarted

Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: inthesky on January 07, 2015, 01:44:53 pm
#JeSuisCharlie

It seems like mostly people understand that it was a collection of assholes who managed to get away that did this and not something representative of all Muslims. Stuff like this will indeed only inflame nativism and racism and make those who sympathized with the murderers emboldened.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: max_cady on January 07, 2015, 03:43:03 pm
#JeSuisCharlie I don't care who they are / or who they worshiped. The people who did this are monsters. Plain and simple.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Aki-at on January 07, 2015, 04:33:50 pm
Terrible news, hopefully they catch the killers soon. Violence should never be the answer for anything, let alone some harmless cartoon drawings. Heart goes out to the friends and families effected by this tragedy
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 07, 2015, 11:07:09 pm
All this kind of thing does is stoke the coals of hate, racism and intolerance from both sides. When really there shouldn't be 'sides' at all.

Any time I see a group of racist, bigots like UKIP getting a foothold in the public mind or anti-Islamic demonstrations I feel a bit sad and embarrassed that it's still happening. That is not the Europe I believe in. I think we should be above that shit, tolerant, multicultural and progressive... and often I think we are!

However, objectively I can see exactly why these pricks like UKIP and the BNP and other European equivalents have gained some ground.... Shit like the attack today drives people too them. In the end it literally does nobody any good... Not even the cause of the terrorists because this will only make Charlie Hebdo a world wide name, unite Europe against them and create even more Mohammed satire.

Nobody wins today...

Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: max_cady on January 08, 2015, 08:35:59 am
This is where things get a little more complicated. The one thing that keeps bothering in the aftermath of an horrific attack like this is that yes, while this was horrible, there seems to be this impression from the media that retaliation is something that comes straight after an event like this.

It doesn't help the debate when as soon as something like this happens, there is speculation about what the average people or in this case,  the average person in France will somehow be driven by racist / xenophobic urges to attack a mosque or any Islamic community living in France in order to avenge those killings, ergo hate crimes.

It doesn't help because under the guise of equality you have to cast everyone (incidentally the victims as well) as being potentially hostile, racist, biased or xenophobe even if nothing actually happens.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: MadeManG74 on January 08, 2015, 08:41:20 am
This may not be connected:
http://www.france24.com/en/20150108-france-police-officer-wounded-shooting-southern-paris-montrouge/ (http://www.france24.com/en/20150108-france-police-officer-wounded-shooting-southern-paris-montrouge/)
Quote
A policewoman died of her injuries following a shootout in southern Paris on Thursday, according to a police source, heightening tensions a day after the deadly terrorist attack on satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo.

France’s Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said a manhunt was underway for the suspect in the shooting, which also left a city employee seriously injured.

The officer had stopped to investigate a traffic accident in the southern Paris suburb Montrouge early Thursday morning when she came under fire.

“There was an officer in front of a white car and a man running away who shot,” said witness Ahmed Sassi, who saw the shooting from his home nearby.

He said the shooter wore dark clothes but no mask. “It didn’t look like a big gun because he held it with one hand,” Sassi added.

Live French television showed around a dozen police dressed in protective wear and helmets massed outside a building near the scene of the crime.

The shootout comes in the wake of the murder of 12 people – including two police officers – in an assault on Charlie Hebdo’s offices in central Paris.

It was not immediately clear, however, whether the two incidents were connected, and Cazeneuve warned against drawing any conclusions about Thursday’s shooting.


Mosques attacked:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11332467/Paris-shootings-lead-to-firebomb-attacks-on-French-mosques.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11332467/Paris-shootings-lead-to-firebomb-attacks-on-French-mosques.html)



Quote
Muslim places of worship in two French towns were fired upon overnight, leaving no casualties, prosecutors said on Thursday.
Three blank grenades were thrown at a mosque shortly after midnight in the city of Le Mans, west of Paris. A bullet hole was also found in a window of the mosque.
In the Port-la-Nouvelle district near Narbonne in southern France, several shots were fired in the direction of a Muslim prayer hall shortly after evening prayers. The hall was empty, the local prosecutor said.
An explosion at a kebab shop near a mosque in the eastern French town of Villefranche-sur-Saone on Thursday morning also left no casualties. Local prosecutors have described it as a "criminal act"


I was hoping that when I checked this morning there would be reports that they had been caught, seems two are still at large? It's hard to keep track with so much happening:
http://globalnews.ca/news/1759527/1-journalist-dead-3-police-injured-in-shooting-at-french-newspaper/ (http://globalnews.ca/news/1759527/1-journalist-dead-3-police-injured-in-shooting-at-french-newspaper/)
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: inthesky on January 08, 2015, 01:10:06 pm
This is where things get a little more complicated. The one thing that keeps bothering in the aftermath of an horrific attack like this is that yes, while this was horrible, there seems to be this impression from the media that retaliation is something that comes straight after an event like this.

It doesn't help the debate when as soon as something like this happens, there is speculation about what the average people or in this case,  the average person in France will somehow be driven by racist / xenophobic urges to attack a mosque or any Islamic community living in France in order to avenge those killings, ergo hate crimes.

It doesn't help because under the guise of equality you have to cast everyone (incidentally the victims as well) as being potentially hostile, racist, biased or xenophobe even if nothing actually happens.

I regularly read a mainstream online American publication and they don't seem to report anything misleading at least, so far. Even in the interpretive stuff. Commentary would be interesting, anyway (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/01/08/charlie-hebdo-europe-muslim-tensions/21394923/).

On some level, yes, hand-wringing about these extremist attacks promoting more racist sentiment isn't directly productive, but there's truth to it. Throughout Europe parties identified as far right receive momentum anti-immigration sentiment and this has been observable for the past few years. For the uninformed, it could easily provoke a reactionary response. I generally think it's better that we at least highlight that this attack came from evil people and doesn't mean that Muslim people are the reason a country is falling off the rails etc.

As for the last paragraph, maybe? for all you know, I am super racist and support separatist or anti-immigration movements, and my initial response to this attack is to reflexively assume that Muslim people are violent and blah blah blah. But of course I think that's nonsense. This is why you get the message out there - it's impossible from the vantage point of a writer to know where everybody stands, but if you try to let people know that it was just a handful of idiots you can hopefully stop people who might be swayed by an anti-immigration message from getting swept up in that. I can understand how different kinds of people could feel alarmed in a situation like this

Fortunately we seem to have...some degree of success. mademan's second article is not so great news. this isn't so bad though. (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/01/08/french-terror-suspects-manhunt/21429427/)

Quote
Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgos called for residents to gather again Thursday  evening at Place de la Republique, the scene of a vast and mostly silent demonstration of solidarity on Wednesday. She also announced that the Eiffel Tower lights would be switched off to honor the victims of the chilling attack.

French citizens from a wide spectrum of age, ethnic and religious groups condemned the assault that has rocked the country.

"The tone has been very somber, " said Danite Airfane, 21, of Paris, an intern at the International Chamber of Commerce in Paris. "At the ICC we observed a moment of silence at noon."
...
"There were demonstrations in half of the city," Airfane said. "There were no Islamophobic currents in the demonstrations and solidarity for the families."
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: George on January 08, 2015, 05:03:30 pm
I love that we live in a corrupt world, where kids are starving, people die because they can't feed their families and these people put all their energy to kill people that write for a newspaper? Honestly, I get you dislike people's opinions, but holy shit, maybe if people like this put more time and effort in changing the world in ways that actually mattered.

It makes a bit sad, but we need to question why people would do this sort of stuff. Are they crazy? Are they just offended? I get offended and I don't muscle up and try to kill all the Nintendo fanboys.

 
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 08, 2015, 05:17:03 pm
The problem, as far as I understand it is that at the end of the day there are passages in the Quran that tell it's followers to kill anyone who insults Islam, Allah or Mohammad... And there are people crazy enough to do it. I think THAT has to do with the mind set of the place they come from. It's not as if the Bible is any less violent and ridiculous... It's just that in Europe, America, Australia and the rest of the developer world were like;
'Yeah the bible tells us to stop masturbating, not eat seafood and go kill people... But tbh, Jerkin' it feels good, red lobster is the shit and I don't want to be in jail for murder when Shenmue 3 comes out.

Also nobody believes in Christianity anymore... So there's that... Thank fuck.

Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: crackdude on January 08, 2015, 05:25:30 pm
The bible doesn't say any of those things.. It's doesn't incite people to kill eachother (although they do anyway).

Anyway, it's terrible that extremists (whatever their beliefs) do bullshit like this. But I also think it's bad idea to mock people known for being extremists.
These animals should be put down. But "freedom of speech" isn't a "I can say anything I want without consequences" card.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 08, 2015, 05:46:38 pm
Quote
These animals should be put down. But "freedom of speech" isn't a "I can say anything I want without consequences" card.
But that is exactly what freedom of speech is!

Sticks and stones (and crazy extremists) can break my bones, but words can never hurt me. Freedom of speech is exactly that, it's the freedom to say anything without punishment. Is some of it tasteless? Does it insult? Does it upset? Maybe, but what is freedom of speech if not protecting the right of those of those who offend you!

If we start telling people 'you can't say that it's offensive' then that is a slippery slope, the cut off point becomes blurry. When exactly does something go from offensive to, tooooo offensive?



And yeah, Old Testaments regarding shell fish:
Leviticus 11:12
 Anything living in the water that does not have fins and scales is to be detestable to you.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 08, 2015, 05:50:42 pm
Double post but, this guy gets it!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzO0Ob9lSzo
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Barry the Nomad on January 08, 2015, 09:49:23 pm
But "freedom of speech" isn't a "I can say anything I want without consequences" card.

Yup, that's pretty much the thing. They have every right to do and say the things they put in their magazine, but they were definitely playing with fire. crackdude is not saying that freedom of speech needs restrictions put on it, he means that there can be repercussions for things like this - as awful and as illegal as those repercussions are. This isn't the schoolyard, the "words can never hurt me" card can't be played as it has been very clearly established time and time again that words can lead to some pretty nasty things.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: MadeManG74 on January 09, 2015, 08:17:00 am
http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/01/09/paris-shooters-cornered-in-printing-plant-brothers-say-they-want-to-die-as-martyrs/

Two hostage situations as French authorities close the net on the shooters at Hebdo and the man who killed the police officer in a seperate attack. Apparently both have hostages.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 09, 2015, 10:14:49 am
Yup, that's pretty much the thing. They have every right to do and say the things they put in their magazine, but they were definitely playing with fire. crackdude is not saying that freedom of speech needs restrictions put on it, he means that there can be repercussions for things like this - as awful and as illegal as those repercussions are. This isn't the schoolyard, the "words can never hurt me" card can't be played as it has been very clearly established time and time again that words can lead to some pretty nasty things.

Which is exactly why the law of freedom of speech exists, and why everyone is so outraged. I'm personally not a fan of politically motivated satire cartoons, mainly because usually they're just kind of crap... But they shouldn't be 'playing with fire' just because they've upset some people.

It isn't as if Chalie Hebdo was going after Muslims! 95% of their stuff is simply political satire on various subjects, but they shouldn't fear mentioning Mohammad any more than a politician, the Queen, green piece or the Pope. As soon as you make something 'off limits' you are denying freedom of speech and expression.

Nobody in their right mind supports Neo-Nazi parades or that Mental guy on the street corner in his tinfoil hat shouting about the coming apocalypse.... But those are not crimes and should never be in a free society.



Anyway, as Mademan said the situation has got worse... two separate hostage situations, one in a Supermarket with apparently a lot of hostages.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: MadeManG74 on January 09, 2015, 01:10:31 pm
Seems that all three are now dead, but three hostages were also killed in the stand off. Very sad news, I truly hope this is the end of the ordeal in Paris.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/french-president-francois-hollande-speaks-as-hostage-crisis-ends-1.2894956

Quote
Brothers linked to the Charlie Hebdo attack, and another gunman with ties to the two, were killed following separate hostage-takings in Paris, that also left at least three hostages dead, police say.

Police confirmed the death of the two brothers, who had been cornered and holding at least one hostage in a printing house northeast of Paris, in the small industrial town of Dammartin-en-Goele. A hostage was freed safely.

A security official said the two brothers came out firing, prompting the assault on the building where they were holed up.

In the other hostage-taking, police raided a kosher market in eastern Paris where a gunman had taken at least five hostages. That gunman was killed in the raid, along with at least three hostages, police told the Associated Press. Reuters reported at least four hostages were dead.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: inthesky on January 09, 2015, 01:46:12 pm
The girlfriend of the hostage taker at the supermarket is apparently still at large. But, significant progress nonetheless.

Lots of hostages freed which is good, sad for those who died
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 09, 2015, 07:09:06 pm
I believe those hostages who died were killed before the raids. It's pretty incredible that none were killed in the raid and all terrorists were dispatched with no other deaths.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: CrazyT on January 11, 2015, 12:37:19 pm
This whole thing rubs me the wrong way. I find it strange how Arabs and muslims are free to be mocked and have to accept racism as satire. For example this racial stereotyping.( (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4d/Charliehebdo.jpg)

s no different to me than your typical racist black man stereotypical portrayal (http://mrthomasthedapperyogi.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/nigger-heaven.jpg).

And I just recently read that some guy making antisemetic jokes was fired by charlie hebdo himself http://www.worldbulletin.net/world/152585/charlie-hebdo-fired-cartoonist-for-anti-semitism-in-2009 (http://www.worldbulletin.net/world/152585/charlie-hebdo-fired-cartoonist-for-anti-semitism-in-2009)


The world is such a fucking mess right now. I just cant take anything at face value anymore. With all the stuff thats being held back in the mainstream media, stuff some of you likely dont even know that are happening right now, i cant take anything seriously. With such evil in the world, with such evil ruling everywhere, where is it all coming from? Why is it ok for israel to bomb a whole community and take away some land everyday, but some antisemetic satire gets 1 fired, palestine standing up to become part of UN Gets voted down by US. What a disgusting unfair world.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: crackdude on January 11, 2015, 01:38:07 pm
Quote
they shouldn't be 'playing with fire' just because they've upset some people.
But they are. People have to realize this very basic rule: if someone gets pissed enough they will wreck your shit even if they "can't".

It is my right to walk around with gold chains on my neck, but if I do so for long enough I WILL get robbed.

Bad things and people exist, even if people pretend they don't. Having rights doesn't shield you from getting killed by someone who doesn't give a fuck.

btw, Christ abolished the Israeli law in the Old Testament, so I can eat shellfish all I want! Thank you Jesus
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: inthesky on January 11, 2015, 01:46:25 pm
This whole thing rubs me the wrong way. I find it strange how Arabs and muslims are free to be mocked and have to accept racism as satire. For example this racial stereotyping.( (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4d/Charliehebdo.jpg)

s no different to me than your typical racist black man stereotypical portrayal (http://mrthomasthedapperyogi.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/nigger-heaven.jpg).

And I just recently read that some guy making antisemetic jokes was fired by charlie hebdo himself http://www.worldbulletin.net/world/152585/charlie-hebdo-fired-cartoonist-for-anti-semitism-in-2009 (http://www.worldbulletin.net/world/152585/charlie-hebdo-fired-cartoonist-for-anti-semitism-in-2009)


The world is such a fucking mess right now. I just cant take anything at face value anymore. With all the stuff thats being held back in the mainstream media, stuff some of you likely dont even know that are happening right now, i cant take anything seriously. With such evil in the world, with such evil ruling everywhere, where is it all coming from? Why is it ok for israel to bomb a whole community and take away some land everyday, but some antisemetic satire gets 1 fired, palestine standing up to become part of UN Gets voted down by US. What a disgusting unfair world.

That's actually an interesting angle. Let me first start by saying that I agree with you on your comments about Israel and Palestine and the U.S.'s treatment of the conflict (the U.S. has historically tried to maintain Israel as an ally.)

I'm interested in how you conceive the caricatures to be racist, genuinely, and speaking as someone with no religious affiliation. As it stands, among certain comics/publications evangelical Christians and positions associated with them are already heavily mocked (This Modern World immediately comes to mind.) I do think that among Western societies (I'm more confident at least in saying this about America) it's less of a point of contention amongst the general public to mock Muslims since the dominant religions include Christianity, maybe Judaism ( ??? but they get shit too) and beside that there are atheists and pagan groups. There are other reasons ofc; 9/11, instability/poor economic circumstances in parts of the region (I knew a person once who said the Middle East should be nuked because it's a mess), immigration concerns (more a Europe thing, apparently.)

While I agree somewhat on your comments on The Media, I chalk it mostly to two things - the commercialization of media (and with this, the desire to write to capture a particular audience) and the fact that it is in the geopolitical interests/of relevant cultural interest to the United States to maintain an ally in Israel's region. Sometimes the higher up you go, the more likely you are to assimilate yourself into what you perceive to be a "group" by adopting their traits - writing styles, beliefs. Personally, I think CNN anchors like Don Lemon and Wolf Blitzer represent very tepid, gray, middle-of-the-road reporting.

That being said, it's worth noting the stuff on USAToday that often attracts most interest/comments include celebrities, sports, items that fuel skepticism (vaccines, for example), hot button political issues (shootings, questioning a politician's character, Ebola in the US). Because a large audience is perceived as being not as present for an under-the-surface article, the fact that things "gotta get clicks/pageviews" for a commercial publication is more problematic - because the concept of economics is influencing what gets written. It's also why longform articles are often not as popular (even Polygon, make of them what you will, have explicitly announced they'll be doing less of them after some of their staff left recently) - shit's too long for some people. I think that, in part, a consequence commercialization of the media is the perceived need to make them more political institutions - besides just basic group/identity dynamics.

I do think it sucks that some of the shit I'm interested in (global warming for example) doesn't get much traction in mainstream publication. Not even the travel stories! I think it's cool to look at other places.

One thing I must add about USAToday is that there are too many freaking ads and it makes for a crappy viewing experience. I do view it though because some of the content is very interesting, and I wonder about the perspective of a mainstream publication.

But they are. People have to realize this very basic rule: if someone gets pissed enough they will wreck your shit even if they "can't".

It is my right to walk around with gold chains on my neck, but if I do so for long enough I WILL get robbed.

Bad things and people exist, even if people pretend they don't. Having rights doesn't shield you from getting killed by someone who doesn't give a fuck.

btw, Christ abolished the Israeli law in the Old Testament, so I can eat shellfish all I want! Thank you Jesus

Yeah that's actually really interesting. The people who killed the French cartoonists here didn't care about our concepts of free speech and the moral justifications or things of the sort behind it. If the problem of "how can we get people to care about things more or not fit into this definition of being a douchebag" were that easily solved we wouldn't deal with nearly as much crap. But it's 2015 and we're not there obv
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: CrazyT on January 11, 2015, 01:56:07 pm
My point really is that I cant care more about charlie hebdo's death more than the average deathtoll each day everywhere else when his death is not even about freedom of speech in the first place.  An antisemetic cartoon was condemned and caused someone to get fired by the same person.  (http://i59.tinypic.com/2j51bbk.jpg)

The way it has been caused by muslim terrorists is what should be the focus. And even there I cant take everything at face value. I am one of those who question 9/11's cause. Question the whole political state in the world as it seems to be run by some sort of devil imho. I know it sounds weird for non reilgious people, but I really feel like some evil entity is succeeding in getting the whole world messed up and letting the evil get away with murder
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: crackdude on January 11, 2015, 03:24:40 pm
My point really is that I cant care more about charlie hebdo's death more than the average deathtoll each day everywhere else when his death is not even about freedom of speech in the first place.  An antisemetic cartoon was condemned and caused someone to get fired by the same person.

The way it has been caused by muslim terrorists is what should be the focus. And even there I cant take everything at face value. I am one of those who question 9/11's cause. Question the whole political state in the world as it seems to be run by some sort of devil imho. I know it sounds weird for non reilgious people, but I really feel like some evil entity is succeeding in getting the whole world messed up and letting the evil get away with murder

We on the same page. Sometimes it does feel like there's a puppetmaster just toying with us. That's why I try to stay as neutral as possible in these issues. It's been pretty swell just concentrating my mind on what actually affects me and people around me and simply accepting the world as it is.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: CrazyT on January 11, 2015, 03:57:02 pm
I think "evil" as a concept is something really hard to understand from a human nature standpoint Where does it come from? I mean where do these sick people governing the world come from? Why are almost all of them so messed up. Why is evil such a huge part of politics? There's definitly a lot of stupidity going on from everyone's side, but I cant help but feel there's a controlling force, like you said, toying with us. Also if these guys are so prominent in politics, why is it so hard to find these chaps in everyday life? I just have a lot of suspicions about everything. Best to avoid the news most of the time.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: inthesky on January 11, 2015, 10:45:21 pm
My point really is that I cant care more about charlie hebdo's death more than the average deathtoll each day everywhere else when his death is not even about freedom of speech in the first place.  An antisemetic cartoon was condemned and caused someone to get fired by the same person.  (http://i59.tinypic.com/2j51bbk.jpg)

The way it has been caused by muslim terrorists is what should be the focus. And even there I cant take everything at face value. I am one of those who question 9/11's cause. Question the whole political state in the world as it seems to be run by some sort of devil imho. I know it sounds weird for non reilgious people, but I really feel like some evil entity is succeeding in getting the whole world messed up and letting the evil get away with murder

I don't really see how this ordeal wasn't in part related to how different kinds of people tolerate dissenting opinions, though I doubt most comics get into their trade out of a zeal for the concept of freedom of speech. It's worth noting that free speech isn't a fundamental human right but is mostly a legal concept - which hey, can still be important.

As for the terrorism thing, I feel like it's a bit straightforward. Disadvantaged populations or ideologically wayward people being led astray by terrorists scapegoating something like a cartoon as something that is an existential threat. When you get people hopped up on shit like that, and if you give them an explanation, sometimes they bite. Hysteria and fear change your ability to think. Terrorists are opportunists I feel.

Terrorism organizations probably inevitably develop into strong power hierarchies. You get leaders who tell people that their deaths/taking the lives of innocents is justified while the leaders are protected - and the leaders must be protected because they offer guidance or whatever. To go on your comment later in this topic about sick people governing the world - power can be very corrupting. Through a combination of existential hysteria, moral justifications (righting perceived wrongs) and whatever else, I think it makes radical terrorists lose a sense of humanity and empathy. It creates distance between yourself and people, the world around - you start not being able to function well as a human. You don't perceive how fucked up it is to take hostages and kill innocents. You feel like suicide bombings or laudable.

That "The West" is often perceived as an enemy (see Boko Haram, w/e other organization) is i think due to a couple of things
-West predominately is Christian or Jewish, while the ones we frequently hear about are Muslim. For some practitioners of religions, especially among the three Abrahamic religions, coexistence is not possible
-they justify it by talking about colonialism or imperialism history of Western countries (esp. in Africa.)

I don't really feel there's like a Dark Force (he-yo Phantasy Star) at work...humanity can't come up with an agreed upon really specific definition of good is anyway =P. What we understand as good and bad, sometimes the bad get away with shit and sometimes they don't. Did the gunmen get away with their killings because they managed to execute it or did they not get away because now they're dead...

As for evil people in general, that's a hard as hell question. they're everywhere, like good people, and sometimes evil people can be charismatic and good people are obnoxious or just innocuous shit like we don't like the same music so we don't talk to each other. I think our political systems are such that it is easy to reward predatory behavior, because there is a point in the practice of politics that we have now that being purely good amongst someone who is a liar will mean you can't accomplish what you want. and sometimes people will trade the performance of their job for favors. I think it's just simple stuff like some people like power, money, competition, winning at all costs. Then you have the other ways shit could go wrong - people getting stressed out at jobs, fear of getting fired/not having enough money so you get all cutthroat even if you're a decent fellow at heart, you think.

Seeing as we don't know a universal origin for stuff like evil, I can see how people feel like there's an evil force.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 12, 2015, 06:57:33 pm
The reason the most powerful people are usually pricks, is actually very simple. People who strive to, and also succeed to attain positions of power are often the kinds of people who will put those aspirations above all else, including friends, family and relationships. To put power above people often takes someone with a low sense of empathy. So an unfortunate side effect of that is that we have people power who lack empathy for other humans.

As for Evil... Evil is not a force in the universe like time, gravity, energy, light... It's just a word to describe particularly nasty acts.


And finally,  if you really think all those millions of people protested in support of the Charlie Hedbo comics you are missing the point. The comics usually run a print of 60k per month and of those only 30k are sold. The company was on the verge of bankruptcy because most people really don't care that much for satirical cartoons wither they feature Mohammad or the Pope or anyone else.

Millions of people across Europe took to the streets to protest the brutal slaying of men and woman, not in support of a satirical comic. But to protest against an 'evil' murderous rampage by people who do not believe in our freedom of expression. The saying 'Je Sous Chalie' is not a support of the comic, it's in support of the comics right to exist, right to say what they feel without fear. The right of everybody in Europe enjoys, they are saying 'I am no different.' It's not an attack on a comic, it's an attack on our way of life.

Does it rub you the wrong way? Does it insult you? So fucking what?! Sometimes things rub me the wrong way, or someone will say
 something truly idiotic and I will think; 'What a fucking idiot.' I might even argue with them and tell them what I think, but I'm not going to track them down and kill them. It is their right to their opinion even if it's not something I like or agree with.


As for that comic above being 'racist' of course it isn't, it's about Muslim extremists, that's what they usually look like! Turbans and scraggy beard are their hallmarks! How else would you depict them as a cartoon!? Do all Arabs look like that? Of course not!
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: MadeManG74 on January 13, 2015, 08:11:20 am
Figure this doesn't deserve a seperate thread- Semi-related.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/pegida-marches-25000-join-antiislamification-protests-in-germany-following-paris-attacks-9974036.html

Quote
Germany's growing anti-Islamic protest movement registered its largest attendance on Monday with 25,000 supporters turning out in what organisers described as a tribute to the victims of the terror attacks in Paris.

Pegida, which stands for "Patriotic Europeans against Islamisation of the West", asked supporters marching through Dresden to wear black ribbons in respect for the 17 people killed in the French capital last week. It was met with fervent counter-demonstrations of as many as 8,000 people and accusations that the group were “misusing” events in France to further their cause.

The German chancellor Angela Merkel has said she will attend a protest organised by Muslim groups in Berlin on Tuesday. "Islam is part of Germany," she told reporters during a break with meeting Turkey's Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu. "I am the chancellor of all Germans."

Pegida started out in mid-October with a demonstration in Dresden attended by about 200 supporters. In early December it attracted 15,000 supporters. On 22 December a record 17,500 attended the movement's weekly Monday protest in the city.

While continually met with counter-demonstrations, it surge in popularity has shocked established political parties and come at a time which concerns over immigration are polarising the country. But there are fears that last week’s attacks in Paris have, in some cases, crystallised the cause of the protest movement which on Monday registered its largest figures yet.

Some attendees wore black while others held up placards with the names of the French journalists killed. Others carried banners condemning the "lying press" that they claim misrepresents their cause

"The Islamists, who Pegida have been warning about for 12 weeks, showed France that they are not capable of democracy but rather look to violence and death as an answer," Pegida's leaders said on the group’s social networking site. "Our politicians want us to believe the opposite. Must such a tragedy happen here in Germany first?"

Justice Minister Heiko Maas was one of several leading politicians to urge the Pegida march organisers in Dresden not to "misuse" the deadly attacks on Charlie Hebdo magazine and a Jewish supermarket.

But tensions were further raised over the weekend when arsonists attacked a Hamburg newspaper office that republished cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad which had originally been printed by Charlie Hebdo in 2006. The magazine is set to release its first edition since the attacks on Wednesday.

In Berlin, where some 4,000 counter-protesters were kept apart from a few hundred Pegida supporters by police at the Brandenburg Gate on Monday night, one banner read "We are Charlie. We are not Pegida."

Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 13, 2015, 02:08:52 pm
This was bound to happen...
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: MadeManG74 on January 13, 2015, 02:31:27 pm
This was bound to happen...

It was growing significantly before the Charlie Hebdo attacks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegida#Development (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegida#Development)

From ~400 people in October to 25~40k people most recently. It's clear that there is growing support. It seems to be a real concern around Europe in general over the last couple of years, and I don't think it's just a case of 'racism'.

I do think most people in the protests are non-radical and are airing their concerns towards the government and immigration (Germany currently receives more Asylum seekers than any other country and there was a drastic increase between 2013 and 2014).


Reading their manifesto on the wiki, it doesn't sound like they want to halt all immigration, but rather increase social workers to immigrant ratio and change the policies to match that of other nations when it comes to accepting refugees and asylum seekers.

I just hope that it continues to be peaceful protests. It's better than throwing grenades at mosques.


EDIT: I should point out this doesn't mean I'm in support of them, but I'm trying to learn more about them and how they are growing so quickly.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: CrazyT on January 13, 2015, 09:41:31 pm
The reason the most powerful people are usually pricks, is actually very simple. People who strive to, and also succeed to attain positions of power are often the kinds of people who will put those aspirations above all else, including friends, family and relationships. To put power above people often takes someone with a low sense of empathy. So an unfortunate side effect of that is that we have people power who lack empathy for other humans.

As for Evil... Evil is not a force in the universe like time, gravity, energy, light... It's just a word to describe particularly nasty acts.
So its ego/selfishness then? I feel like "dark" emotions like greed, envy, anger and petty for example come from a real disturbing force. They can change and take over control a human being in such a way that its just scary sometimes. I've witnessed it a couple of times and it seems way too complex of an emotion to be part of our nature "just cause". When for example a human would create something that shows such reaction, we'd call it "programmed" because of how it is designed and works. It seems some people refrain and resist to give in to these emotions, cuz they feel and are selfaware that they are bad. Others are more easily convinced to give in and that's when things go wrong I think


Quote
And finally,  if you really think all those millions of people protested in support of the Charlie Hedbo comics you are missing the point. The comics usually run a print of 60k per month and of those only 30k are sold. The company was on the verge of bankruptcy because most people really don't care that much for satirical cartoons wither they feature Mohammad or the Pope or anyone else.

Millions of people across Europe took to the streets to protest the brutal slaying of men and woman, not in support of a satirical comic. But to protest against an 'evil' murderous rampage by people who do not believe in our freedom of expression. The saying 'Je Sous Chalie' is not a support of the comic, it's in support of the comics right to exist, right to say what they feel without fear. The right of everybody in Europe enjoys, they are saying 'I am no different.' It's not an attack on a comic, it's an attack on our way of life.

Does it rub you the wrong way? Does it insult you? So fucking what?! Sometimes things rub me the wrong way, or someone will say
 something truly idiotic and I will think; 'What a fucking idiot.' I might even argue with them and tell them what I think, but I'm not going to track them down and kill them. It is their right to their opinion even if it's not something I like or agree with.


As for that comic above being 'racist' of course it isn't, it's about Muslim extremists, that's what they usually look like! Turbans and scraggy beard are their hallmarks! How else would you depict them as a cartoon!? Do all Arabs look like that? Of course not!
I just dislike the double standards we have to deal with. I know its human nature to be biased and these people who probably take pride in being westerners (vs islam) only naturally twist it through their own glasses, but I hate it how any jewish joke is out of boundary but islam is freedom of expression.

My personal view is that its okay to redicule, and people who disagree should just develop thick skin. What I dont like is how there is a double standard in it and there's still a lot of things we wont be able to explore when doing so.

Honestly most of us would never purposefully try to offend a friend of ours or anyone close if something's sensetive. Yet offending a random croud seems to be okay without knowing any of them individually. Its just rude and like I said im okay with rude people existing, I just dont view it as something valuable and something we gotta view as something important in our society when its usually just used in a cowardly way, offending individuals whom they dont even know. That's why I say the terrorist attack and islam is where the focus should lie more than the guy who for some reason symbolizes freedom of speach now.

The reaction was dumb and those so called muslim terrorists deserved to pay for it. There's muslims who study the quran and learn to present themselves in a much better way, from what many assume a terroristic source.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QV2KvWoIo40 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QV2KvWoIo40)

The actual way the quran encourages muslims to react to these kind of situations.
-Dont be silent and reason your "thoughts".
-Engage in intellectual discourse
-dispel misconceptions

Very different from the idiots we keep seeing getting representation status by the media. I myself cant understand how it keeps happening. And honestly sometimes I cant believe it...


Anyway I apreciate reading all your views. Thanks
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 14, 2015, 12:03:45 pm
I don't think Jews escape satire anymore than anyone else. For example Mort, a reappearing Jewish character in the Family Guy cartoon is a pretty hilarious example of stereotypical Jewish Americans. Go check it out.


Also:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRZWN2lqDAc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lORtw7GhKag

and:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFeNLEnV8r4
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: CrazyT on January 14, 2015, 02:18:36 pm
Yeah you're right. I actually watch a lot of those shows so weird how I overlooked that. Southpark is even worse.

I guess its particulur cases in which i think hebdo may have had some allegience to the faith or the country which represents it.

When do cartoons go too far though? Would a holocaust cartoon go too far?
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Aki-at on January 14, 2015, 02:26:42 pm
David Cameron wants to shutdown WhatsApp in the UK and Theresa May wants to increase powers for our security services to be able to check emails and telephone calls.

As much as I do like being safe, I like having my civil liberties upheld more.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: MadeManG74 on January 14, 2015, 03:04:32 pm
David Cameron wants to shutdown WhatsApp in the UK and Theresa May wants to increase powers for our security services to be able to check emails and telephone calls.

As much as I do like being safe, I like having my civil liberties upheld more.

Why is WhatsApp targeted in particular?
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 14, 2015, 03:10:31 pm

When do cartoons go too far though? Would a holocaust cartoon go too far?

I think it depends which country and how it is presented. There is a line between hate speeches and satire for example. The Charlie Hedbo comics are not really racist, they aren't promoting race hate, or violence against a certain type of people. The opposite, they're against it. Again, like Family guy, they have made fun of everybody equally, in fact really far, far less so than Family guy. When they draw a terrorist, they draw a stereotypical terrorist, not a stereotypical Arab.

When they pick on something like religion, which they do often... Well religion is just a concept, you believe in it or you don't and you're free to criticize or worship all you like. Or at least you should be. I'm not offended by people going to church every Sunday or the Jehovahs who come to my door once a month and give me propaganda leaflets. (which are always a good laugh for someone like me, hell I look forward to them.)
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: MadeManG74 on January 14, 2015, 03:57:41 pm
I think it depends which country and how it is presented. There is a line between hate speeches and satire for example. The Charlie Hedbo comics are not really racist, they aren't promoting race hate, or violence against a certain type of people. The opposite, they're against it. Again, like Family guy, they have made fun of everybody equally, in fact really far, far less so than Family guy. When they draw a terrorist, they draw a stereotypical terrorist, not a stereotypical Arab.

When they pick on something like religion, which they do often... Well religion is just a concept, you believe in it or you don't and you're free to criticize or worship all you like. Or at least you should be. I'm not offended by people going to church every Sunday or the Jehovahs who come to my door once a month and give me propaganda leaflets. (which are always a good laugh for someone like me, hell I look forward to them.)

So you believe it's okay to insult somebody based on their beliefs, but not on their race?

Genuine question, not trolling.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Aki-at on January 14, 2015, 07:19:12 pm
Why is WhatsApp targeted in particular?

Because it's a service that provides a secure channel.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 14, 2015, 08:41:35 pm
So you believe it's okay to insult somebody based on their beliefs, but not on their race?

Genuine question, not trolling.

The line gets blurry at times but I see it like this.

Yes, I believe racially motivated insults are far worse than religious ones. Here's why, to attack a persons race is to attack their core being, their appearance, their family, their entire ethnicity and most importantly something they cannot change or have any control over. At least that rings true if we're talking about... 'true racism.' (A term I literally just coined to separate racism into two types from this point on. True and Stereotypical, allow me to explain...)

'True racism' is an insult on somebodies skin colour or features; nose, lips, hair, eye colour etc. Things people cannot change, real attributes of their race. Black face for example is 'True racism.'

'Stereotypical racism' is not really about race at all... It's misattributed to 'race' when really it a social issue, a product of their environment. Like upbringing and social background. For example, is it inherent that all white people can't dance? No, plenty of white people can dance. Is it inherent that all black people like rap music? Nope... Tons can't stand it! But there's no smoke without fire, right? We grow up in a certain environment and we act a certain way because of it. We're simply a product of our environment. Are black people more likely to be criminals? No, but they ARE more likely to grow up in poverty for many social reasons I wont get into and poverty breeds criminals, race is irrelevant. White people in poverty act exactly the same.


Now stereotypical 'racism' is open to satire. That is the kind you'll see on Family guy and such, in reality it's the same thing as national stereotyping... Like how we stereotype French people as lover of cheese and bread, or British people tea drinkers... I fucking love tea, got a cup as I write this! Or how if cats were from Australia they'd probably be called Wallarongadingobongas. It's environmental, it's not racism because we're multicultural but it's basically the exact same thing and again it's open to satire.


As for religion, well religion is a concept... It's an idea. I can't 'insult' an idea or a concept. It is wrong to say to someone 'you're an idiot for believing this.' I wouldn't do that, because calling someone an idiot IS an insult. But I think it's fair game for me to say 'I believe religion is idiotic, and here is why.' If someone feels insulted by that well tough shit, that's their choice.

Religion is at it's heart a theory, like any scientific theory. The only difference between religion as a theory and scientific theories is that science invites criticism-- After all, every hard fact is simply a theory that has never been proven wrong! It's a fact that paper is made from trees, but only because there is absolutely no reasonable theory that could prove that wrong. We all know that... That said, theoretically if a new theory was published tomorrow that disproved paper was made from trees, without a shadow of a doubt, science would accept that as the new truth with open arms. The sciences books would be rewritten and we'd all be like, WELL SHIT!

Religion is the opposite of that, religion is fixed. Religion is belief in a single idea that is unchanging. "Here is the holy book, everything in it is fact, no there is no room for debate, no there is no room for questions." Can't prove something? "That's why you have to have FAITH!" Something happens that doesn't seem in accordance with the scripture? "God works in mysterious ways!" Religion is blind faith in something that cannot be proven.... Or unproved, because; 'faith.'

In the past, and even today in some parts of the world, religion has such a strong strangle hold on society that questioning it leads to punishment; Prison, attack, execution and so on. In these societies there is no room for debate. Here in the West religion has faded and that's BECAUSE we're free to think for ourselves, to ask those important questions about religion which don't add up... We're also free to be any faith we choose, if we choose. And that is seen as a threat to those oppressive nations, they see directly what freedom does and they enjoy their absolute power!

You will notice a correlation between those places where religion is absolute and oppression. Oppression of women, gays, of the freedoms we have in the West and a reluctance to move forward. And it is those places that breed the terrorists. NOT because they are Muslim's... (You'll always see Muslims after any attack saying 'this is wrong Islam is a religion of peace.' And they firmly believe that.) No yet again it's a social and environmental issue. Terrorism isn't a Muslim issue it's a religious-environment problem, for lack of a better term. Without the freedom to think and speak and question their Religion, the environment is toxic. It breeds extremism, people brain washed where anything other than their religion is unfathomable. People who believe that in a society like ours where we ARE free to challenge religion we are the highest sinners and we should be killed for it. They are told this by their oppressive leaders.

And that is why I wouldn't just say it's okay for Charlie Hebdo, or Family Guy or ANYONE to Lampoon religion but it's damn well important!

And I am sorry that I just wrote a novel, haha. But I don't think it can be explained in anything less. I spent so long on this I might save it and post it on facebook lol.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: crackdude on January 15, 2015, 05:08:43 am
I agree with Sharky.
I have faith and a religion, so I'll just comment that not every religion is completely shut down from reality. Sometimes when some interpretation turns out to be wrong..well, it's just some theory that didn't turn out to be true. Some reason this way, and I think it's healthy.

Other religions, as you said, strangle the people into believing some interpretations of holy texts regardless of how non-sensical they are (even to OTHER people that believe in the same texts). It's very easy to point that out in the contrast between some Islamists, but that happens in Christian religions as well. Catholicism is a perfect example, although it has lost most of it's power, it sticks to this single ancient and (mostly) disprooven interpretation of the Bible and just rolls with it. It generates extremism as well.

All very fascinating, and scary.

PS:
I strongly believe that religion SHOULD be challenged!
Like any other theory, if it holds up by itself (i.e. without relying on the "you have to have faith" card) it's a credible and respectable belief. If not, well, then you're just waisting your time.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: MadeManG74 on January 15, 2015, 01:03:17 pm
NOTE: This post probably comes off as argumentative or something but it's not my intention. I do refer to another post in another thread that got my goat, but I try to explain all my points without getting butthurt.

So yeah, not attacking anyone
-------------

Catholicism is a perfect example, although it has lost most of it's power, it sticks to this single ancient and (mostly) disprooven interpretation of the Bible and just rolls with it. It generates extremism as well.

I have to disagree, Catholocism is probably one of the more progressive branches of Christianity, especially after Vatican II. The Catholic Church believes in evolution for example, and have an Academy of Science (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontifical_Academy_of_Sciences (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontifical_Academy_of_Sciences)).

Don't forget that the go-to 'Christian Extremists' that everyone points to, the KKK, actually hate the Catholic Church. I don't think it's fair to say that Catholicism is what breeds extremism.

Quote from: sharky
Now stereotypical 'racism' is open to satire. That is the kind you'll see on Family guy and such, in reality it's the same thing as national stereotyping... Like how we stereotype French people as lover of cheese and bread, or British people tea drinkers... I fucking love tea, got a cup as I write this! Or how if cats were from Australia they'd probably be called Wallarongadingobongas. It's environmental, it's not racism because we're multicultural but it's basically the exact same thing and again it's open to satire.

But what if I said that British people were genocidal, because of things like the Irish Famine and their invention of concentration camps? Is that stereotypical racism for example? As you said I think it's a blurry line. It's easier to see a distinction when it's something light like music preference, but doesn't this also count as not 'True Racism'?

Quote
As for religion, well religion is a concept... It's an idea. I can't 'insult' an idea or a concept. It is wrong to say to someone 'you're an idiot for believing this.' I wouldn't do that, because calling someone an idiot IS an insult. But I think it's fair game for me to say 'I believe religion is idiotic, and here is why.' If someone feels insulted by that well tough shit, that's their choice.

That's fine, but if you want to say 'religion is idiotic and here is why' and then just make up something insulting, isn't that a direct insult to the followers?

I'm going to call out again the other thread, where you basically said that Muslims can't eat pork due to 'Mohammed spinning in a circle and doing a dance'. While you didn't directly say "Muslims are all idiots", by suggesting that their chosen belief is so asinine aren't you just calling them idiots?

By comparison if you were proud of British Culture, and I said "Just a shame that British Culture mandates to kill black people and have horrible teeth!", I'm not insulting YOU, but aren't I just doing it by proxy by insulting your culture/belief with some fictional reasons I made up?

(Fun Fact: British People actually have amongst the best dental Hygiene in Europe.)

Quote
Religion is at it's heart a theory, like any scientific theory. The only difference between religion as a theory and scientific theories is that science invites criticism-- After all, every hard fact is simply a theory that has never been proven wrong! It's a fact that paper is made from trees, but only because there is absolutely no reasonable theory that could prove that wrong. We all know that... That said, theoretically if a new theory was published tomorrow that disproved paper was made from trees, without a shadow of a doubt, science would accept that as the new truth with open arms. The sciences books would be rewritten and we'd all be like, WELL SHIT!

Religion is the opposite of that, religion is fixed. Religion is belief in a single idea that is unchanging. "Here is the holy book, everything in it is fact, no there is no room for debate, no there is no room for questions." Can't prove something? "That's why you have to have FAITH!" Something happens that doesn't seem in accordance with the scripture? "God works in mysterious ways!" Religion is blind faith in something that cannot be proven.... Or unproved, because; 'faith.'

As I said above, this simply isn't true.

First of all, not all religions are the same.

Some religions are fundamentalist and refuse to deviate from their written word to the letter. Others challenge that and interpret it differently. Again, the Catholic Church believes in evolution, they don't believe that 'the world was made in exactly 7 days and dinosaur bones are the devil's tricks'. Catholic Schools teach their students evolution.

Quote
Religion is at it's heart a theory, like any scientific theory. The only difference between religion as a theory and scientific theories is that science invites criticism-- After all, every hard fact is simply a theory that has never been proven wrong! It's a fact that paper is made from trees, but only because there is absolutely no reasonable theory that could prove that wrong. We all know that... That said, theoretically if a new theory was published tomorrow that disproved paper was made from trees, without a shadow of a doubt, science would accept that as the new truth with open arms. The sciences books would be rewritten and we'd all be like, WELL SHIT!

Small point, but I think you have this the other way around. I think the burden is to prove a theory rather than not be able to dis-prove it. Otherwise you get into the flying spaghetti monster nonsense, where you can say it's fact that the Spaghetti monster exists because it can't be disproven.

As I said above, most religions will accept scientific discoveries, I don't know where this idea comes from that they all ignore science.

Quote
In the past, and even today in some parts of the world, religion has such a strong strangle hold on society that questioning it leads to punishment; Prison, attack, execution and so on. In these societies there is no room for debate. Here in the West religion has faded and that's BECAUSE we're free to think for ourselves, to ask those important questions about religion which don't add up... We're also free to be any faith we choose, if we choose. And that is seen as a threat to those oppressive nations, they see directly what freedom does and they enjoy their absolute power!

A big part of this is down to a Christian/Western belief that Church and State should be seperate (EG: "Render unto Caesar that which belongs to Caesar..."). In Europe the sciences were relatively unimpeded compared to other cultures, for example, the Ottoman Empire, that believed that Religion and the State were inseparable.

Having said that, it's also worth noting that the Church in Europe was one of the only bastions of learning and eduction during the Dark Ages. Without it, much knowledge would have been lost. It was the church who were making records, translations of texts, preserving literature and setting up universities around Europe (University of Paris and Cambridge for example).

Religion can be used to oppress people, no doubt, but it's not accurate to say that about all religions impede progress or shun learning in favour of blind faith.

Quote
You will notice a correlation between those places where religion is absolute and oppression. Oppression of women, gays, of the freedoms we have in the West and a reluctance to move forward. And it is those places that breed the terrorists.

Considering that the shooters were both French born nationals, and even looking at the 2005 London Bombings, three of the bombers were born in the UK, one born in Jamaica (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_July_2005_London_bombings#Bombers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_July_2005_London_bombings#Bombers)), I don't think that's accurate.

I think it's this particular brand of religion that's causing it. Not all of Islam, but this particular type of fundamentalist/radical teaching is what's causing it.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: MadeManG74 on January 15, 2015, 01:59:12 pm
More relevant:

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/01/15/two-reported-dead-in-belgian-counter-terrorism-raid
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: crackdude on January 15, 2015, 06:06:07 pm
"The Catholic Church believes in evolution for example"
And you assume that's progressive because evolution is a fact....? It's not factual, it is used as interpretation. Personally I think it's a shit interpretation, but it's in their right and there's nothing wrong with that.

But when it comes to the basic beliefs like soul's immortality, the holy trinity, the saints, etc. It clearly contradicts the bible itself. It's an extremist religion because (knowingly) lies about the contents of holy texts for it's own benefit (the concept of hell worked wonders for hundreds of years and millions of dollarz, even though the bible states multiple times that the dead are just...dead ).

Not only that, the Catholic Church was deeply involved in the roots of Nazism and countless wars and "holy crusades" throughout the last almost two thousand years
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 15, 2015, 06:31:01 pm
Quote
But what if I said that British people were genocidal, because of things like the Irish Famine and their invention of concentration camps? Is that stereotypical racism for example? As you said I think it's a blurry line. It's easier to see a distinction when it's something light like music preference, but doesn't this also count as not 'True Racism'?
It would fall into stereotypical, because clearly not all British people are genocidal. I think when you delve into the past you can dredge up all sorts of terrible acts from any nation. But is that even really racism? It’s more hate towards a nation than a race. I’m personally not offended if someone says that to me. I don’t attribute that to myself, it isn’t my sin.



Quote
That's fine, but if you want to say 'religion is idiotic and here is why' and then just make up something insulting, isn't that a direct insult to the followers?

I'm going to call out again the other thread, where you basically said that Muslims can't eat pork due to 'Mohammed spinning in a circle and doing a dance'. While you didn't directly say "Muslims are all idiots", by suggesting that their chosen belief is so asinine aren't you just calling them idiots?
I can’t really help what I believe though... Deep down I am not religious and I DO find all religion asinine and ridiculous. I find it little more than a relic of the past and often it causes a lot of problems in the world. Perhaps that comment was a little insensitive, but I’m no saint. Some times I absent-mindedly upset people. Most of the time I try to not be a cunt about it and that’s all I can do.


Quote
By comparison if you were proud of British Culture, and I said "Just a shame that British Culture mandates to kill black people and have horrible teeth!", I'm not insulting YOU, but aren't I just doing it by proxy by insulting your culture/belief with some fictional reasons I made up?

(Fun Fact: British People actually have amongst the best dental Hygiene in Europe.)
Those are the kind of comments I find the most easy to laugh off, because again it’s just a stereotype. I feel no connection to what you’re saying, like the words don’t ring true or touch any nerves. I’d say well there’s no smoke without fire but I’d feel more that you were misinformed than anything.


Quote
As I said above, this simply isn't true.

First of all, not all religions are the same.

Some religions are fundamentalist and refuse to deviate from their written word to the letter. Others challenge that and interpret it differently. Again, the Catholic Church believes in evolution, they don't believe that 'the world was made in exactly 7 days and dinosaur bones are the devil's tricks'. Catholic Schools teach their students evolution.

Sure, some are open to change more than others but it all boils down to absolute faith that there is a god. No matter how much give there is, eventually you hit the unmovable god wall.


Quote
Small point, but I think you have this the other way around. I think the burden is to prove a theory rather than not be able to dis-prove it. Otherwise you get into the flying spaghetti monster nonsense, where you can say it's fact that the Spaghetti monster exists because it can't be disproven.

As I said above, most religions will accept scientific discoveries, I don't know where this idea comes from that they all ignore science.

No I have it the right way around, and there are thousands of weird silly theories flying around about all sorts of things as you say. But they need evidence, they need to show absolutely and undisputed evidence that it’s real for it to be taken seriously.

Quote
A big part of this is down to a Christian/Western belief that Church and State should be seperate (EG: "Render unto Caesar that which belongs to Caesar..."). In Europe the sciences were relatively unimpeded compared to other cultures, for example, the Ottoman Empire, that believed that Religion and the State were inseparable.

Having said that, it's also worth noting that the Church in Europe was one of the only bastions of learning and eduction during the Dark Ages. Without it, much knowledge would have been lost. It was the church who were making records, translations of texts, preserving literature and setting up universities around Europe (University of Paris and Cambridge for example).

Religion can be used to oppress people, no doubt, but it's not accurate to say that about all religions impede progress or shun learning in favour of blind faith.

Valid point, but today in 2015 things are different. There was a time when religion was absolutely necessaries the fear of god and punishment was a brilliant way to scare morals into people too. It helped found society in a way... But now? We can do without I think.

Quote
Considering that the shooters were both French born nationals, and even looking at the 2005 London Bombings, three of the bombers were born in the UK, one born in Jamaica (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_July_2005_London_bombings#Bombers), I don't think that's accurate.

I think it's this particular brand of religion that's causing it. Not all of Islam, but this particular type of fundamentalist/radical teaching is what's causing it.
You can bet your arse they were radicalised by teachings from those countries though! Ideas spread.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 15, 2015, 06:56:42 pm
"The Catholic Church believes in evolution for example"
And you assume that's progressive because evolution is a fact....? It's not factual, it is used as interpretation. Personally I think it's a shit interpretation, but it's in their right and there's nothing wrong with that.

Out of pure interest what do you think is a more likely explanation to lifes beginning?
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: crackdude on January 15, 2015, 07:40:42 pm
Out of pure interest what do you think is a more likely explanation to lifes beginning?
Firstly, God. Since I believe in a superior being, it's easy to believe he created life.

And while I can understand why someone wouldn't believe in God, I can't understand why people believe in (macro)evolution.
I'm finishing my Physics degree this year, and after 5 years of really digging into what makes things function like they do in the Universe and any sort of matter at all I can only conclude that it's impossible that life just came to existence as a fruit of the perfect conditions. It's a statistical impossibility that everything happened by cosmic chance.

That being said, evolution itself is a very flawed theory. It's like searching for star wars images, picking the first 5 or 6 pictures and trying to deduce the whole story. You can't.
Evolution can't explain the upbringing of the first living cell without entering the domain of the one in a 10^40 (that's 100000...at least 40 zeros) chance of basic molecules combining into something complex and interacting with another complex system with the same odds of existence, and repeating this several times. It's impossible.

Then it can't explain the sudden (one era's lenght) "evolution" of some simple basic life forms into complex sea creatures, nor the amazing diversity that supposedly evolved from those creatures into basic birds, dinossaurs or early felines, even faster!
And when it tries to explain human evolution, it presents a weak variety of samples (for a species that covered the whole of earth) that can't link itself to the homo sapiens anyway.

All in all, I believe, with research and deep thought about it, that evolution as an hypothesis is valid, but as a theory fails. Completely. And I understand it's heavily pushed anyway because it is the only explanation that doesn't involve god or aliens or some sort of PROJECT.

So in resume (I could talk about this for hours, but it would be boring for everyone :c):
I'm certain that life is part of a project. I would have to disregard a lot of my own field if I was to think it's all just a game of cosmic chance.
Personally, I believe in god. If I didn't, then I would simply accept that maybe the convincing explanation is yet to be thought up. And theres nothing wrong with not knowing the answer to everything.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 16, 2015, 10:11:44 am
Firstly, God. Since I believe in a superior being, it's easy to believe he created life.

And while I can understand why someone wouldn't believe in God, I can't understand why people believe in (macro)evolution.
I'm finishing my Physics degree this year, and after 5 years of really digging into what makes things function like they do in the Universe and any sort of matter at all I can only conclude that it's impossible that life just came to existence as a fruit of the perfect conditions. It's a statistical impossibility that everything happened by cosmic chance.

That being said, evolution itself is a very flawed theory. It's like searching for star wars images, picking the first 5 or 6 pictures and trying to deduce the whole story. You can't.
Evolution can't explain the upbringing of the first living cell without entering the domain of the one in a 10^40 (that's 100000...at least 40 zeros) chance of basic molecules combining into something complex and interacting with another complex system with the same odds of existence, and repeating this several times. It's impossible.

Then it can't explain the sudden (one era's lenght) "evolution" of some simple basic life forms into complex sea creatures, nor the amazing diversity that supposedly evolved from those creatures into basic birds, dinossaurs or early felines, even faster!
And when it tries to explain human evolution, it presents a weak variety of samples (for a species that covered the whole of earth) that can't link itself to the homo sapiens anyway.

All in all, I believe, with research and deep thought about it, that evolution as an hypothesis is valid, but as a theory fails. Completely. And I understand it's heavily pushed anyway because it is the only explanation that doesn't involve god or aliens or some sort of PROJECT.

So in resume (I could talk about this for hours, but it would be boring for everyone :c):
I'm certain that life is part of a project. I would have to disregard a lot of my own field if I was to think it's all just a game of cosmic chance.
Personally, I believe in god. If I didn't, then I would simply accept that maybe the convincing explanation is yet to be thought up. And theres nothing wrong with not knowing the answer to everything.

Of course there are holes in the theory of evolution, plenty of things we can't explain yet. It's one of the hardest things to study since it takes so long that we can never directly observe it. But we can observe macro evolution as you mentioned, and you accept. It shows that over time things evolved by tiny incremental changes and mutations. Over many thousands of years surely you accept this is a good possibility?

I should mention that, as much as I don't believe it I have not ruled out the possibility of an intelligent designer of some kind, even the 'aliens did it' theory has a slim possibility but that only further pushes back the question of who made them. But if there is an intelligent designer, and it's a supreme being of some kind, I still look at every holy text from every religion and go 'lol no.' It's not going to be something we know about, it wont have such black and white rules and regulations... A theory of god can exist without any religion and it would need scientific evidence for me to believe it. I have no 'blind faith' in anything.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: max_cady on January 16, 2015, 10:44:10 am
One major misconception about the Theory of Evolution: It's not about the origin of life itself, it's main focus is on how species might have adapted / changed behaviours  / went extinct based on certain conditions be it enviromental / social / chemical /etc.

If there is a First Cause / Primum Movens , it's outside of evolution's scope or field of research.


We are indeed in 2015, but I think misinformation on variety of topics is still an ongoing thing, be it religion /science / sociology,etc.


You guys can read a whole more on what exactly evolution is:


http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/misconceptions_faq.php#a1
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: crackdude on January 16, 2015, 10:57:05 am
"It shows that over time things evolved by tiny incremental changes and mutations. Over many thousands of years surely you accept this is a good possibility?"
It is a widely used argument, but although we can indeed observe these changes and mutations within the same species or genus, it does not work that way in the grand scheme of things. Animals don't lose their basic characteristics over time (a certain kind of wolf may adapt, and generate a new kind of wolf, but it's still a wolf)
So much that biologists have moved away from that possibility. I'm just scratching the surface of course, and some people will have other arguments, but hey, that's science and why I love it :)

Also about holy texts I could go more in depth but I rather not do so in a public forum. I'll just say that I think the bible makes sense as long as you believe in a superior being that made us. The only one true dogma of the bible: God is real.
From that standpoint everything fits together neatly.

By now you must have noticed how much I like talking about this sort of thing lol

EDIT:
Thanks max.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 16, 2015, 05:23:20 pm
I get it, but there was no one time where a horse was a dog for example... But instead they were both the same creature at one point and took different evolutionary paths that over time separated them so much they were completely different.

If the only true and important dogma of the bible is that 'god exists' why not go with any given (one god) religion?
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: crackdude on January 16, 2015, 06:18:11 pm
I get it, but there was no one time where a horse was a dog for example... But instead they were both the same creature at one point and took different evolutionary paths that over time separated them so much they were completely different.

If the only true and important dogma of the bible is that 'god exists' why not go with any given (one god) religion?
That's what was idealized at first, yes. But it simply turns out that it doesn't quite work that way..
Again, it's the best idea humans have come up with other than "superior aliens/god", but as it stands you need quite a lot of "faith" to fully believe in it..

Because not all religions follow the bible. Catholicism, picking up what I had said, teaches that all people can go to heaven when they die. Well, that goes completely against what the book says (Ecclesiastes 3:19,20 for example).
It wouldn't make sense to believe in god and the bible and then follow a religion that doesn't comply with what it says.
As you probably know, Jesus himself said that not everyone claiming to be following him actually did.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: inthesky on January 16, 2015, 11:19:19 pm
Well...tangents. hehehe.

"It shows that over time things evolved by tiny incremental changes and mutations. Over many thousands of years surely you accept this is a good possibility?"
It is a widely used argument, but although we can indeed observe these changes and mutations within the same species or genus, it does not work that way in the grand scheme of things. Animals don't lose their basic characteristics over time (a certain kind of wolf may adapt, and generate a new kind of wolf, but it's still a wolf)
So much that biologists have moved away from that possibility. I'm just scratching the surface of course, and some people will have other arguments, but hey, that's science and why I love it :)

Also about holy texts I could go more in depth but I rather not do so in a public forum. I'll just say that I think the bible makes sense as long as you believe in a superior being that made us. The only one true dogma of the bible: God is real.
From that standpoint everything fits together neatly.


By now you must have noticed how much I like talking about this sort of thing lol

EDIT:
Thanks max.

The biology stuff I'm a lot less versed in. That being said, what you're saying doesn't really prove anything - what possibility, exactly? A genus is such because it has a variety of species that share similar characteristics, some of which if not gone extinct often adapt due to changes in the environment. It's just classification. The Cro-magnon were the ancestors of humans and then after a bunch of changes we have the humans we are today. In the distant future if we live long enough we'll probably look different.

as for the bolded, that is a not-insignificant leap and underscores the tautological nature of belief in God - it is the word of Christ, it makes sense if you believe in Christ, etc. that's one of my personal problems with religions - meaning, why I am not religious. I don't begrudge anybody the practicing of a religion. But, I see no reason to presuppose the existence of an afterlife or anything supernatural. In the most inoffensive way possible, the most prominent religions I can think of have their historical origin during times when knowledge of the natural world was severely limited compared to what we've got. If it's about moral compasses, I've never found a group that suits my own, and I don't think I need a religion to have a functioning moral compass.

Also I'm skeptical of viewing the religious institutions as fundamentally progressive. Yes, things like missionary projects have been instrumental in things like developing English literacy/developing cultural connections and the missions are crafted with a service aspect in mind. But cultural coexistence has in the past not been the goal. Look at Hawaii and its missionaries, the native Hawaiians worshiped pagan deities, and Manifest Destiny was most definitely a goal in the mission projects alongside "civilizing" them. Christian missionaries also have a tortured history with India.

While I respect that for example, the current Catholic Pope has taken some reform-oriented strides towards how the orthodoxy should operate ("spiritual alzheimer's" and such) I have a hard time viewing as progressive institutions that propagate values/social mores that are not progressive. Some of the moral ideas are good of course, but when I was a Christian as I grew up I had to put so many qualifiers to my belief in God that I ultimately decided not to bother.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 17, 2015, 09:23:11 am
That's what was idealized at first, yes. But it simply turns out that it doesn't quite work that way..
Again, it's the best idea humans have come up with other than "superior aliens/god", but as it stands you need quite a lot of "faith" to fully believe in it..

Because not all religions follow the bible. Catholicism, picking up what I had said, teaches that all people can go to heaven when they die. Well, that goes completely against what the book says (Ecclesiastes 3:19,20 for example).
It wouldn't make sense to believe in god and the bible and then follow a religion that doesn't comply with what it says.
As you probably know, Jesus himself said that not everyone claiming to be following him actually did.

Yeah but I mean why the Bible? Of all the religions why did you personally choose Christianity, and the Bibles. I mean the logical scientific debate breaks down once you think deeply about why this potential intelligent designer would give us these rule books and guides that all seem really outdated in our current society. Why do they seem as though they were written for the time they were written in and have such little baring on todays lifestyle? Surely he would instruct a book to be written that was perfect for any time. Or show himself to write a sequel! He's got a lot to say about sleeping with other peoples wives or stealing their cattle, but nothing to say about internet/phone hacking and identity theft or off shore tax havens!

I'm willing to admit the possibility of an intelligent designer, with enough proof. But organised religion? Na...

EDIT: I hope this doesn't feel like we're grilling you and trying to knock your faith or whatever. Not trying to, just giving my side.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: crackdude on January 17, 2015, 06:51:37 pm
"I hope this doesn't feel like we're grilling you and trying to knock your faith or whatever. Not trying to, just giving my side."
Not at all! It's nice to have a pleasant conversation on these matters :)

Sharky and inthesky: Why the bible, why believe in Christ.
Well, pretty much most historians will point out that Jesus was an actual person, regardless if you believe his miracles or not. In fact, there's "more chance" of Jesus existing than Socrates, and the second one is almost irrefutable.
Now, why believe he is the son of god? Well, for the same reason israelites thought so back in the first century: the prophecies. Many of the things that happened to Jesus were predicted several hundreds of years before.
Which leads to "why the bible". The bible's predictions weren't just about Jesus. For example, the book of Daniel predicts the progression of empires that would rule the "biblical" lands. Empires were predicted to fall centuries before they even rose.
Only someone a step above human intelligence could predict such things.

As for
"why this potential intelligent designer would give us these rule books and guides that all seem really outdated in our current society"
Because most of the rules (almost every one of the old testament) were for the Israelites before Christ, they do not apply for christians. Jesus abolished the Law, and laid down the groundwork for a righteous worship of god that could include anyone, regardless of nation (as opposed to before where the Israelites were god's only supported nation).

"identity theft or off shore tax havens!"
Pslam 26:4 ; Romans 13:7   be creative :p

But seriously, as you said before, the bible has excellent advice and guidance even for today. Otherwise it wouldn't have lasted such a long ass time. And with careful examination, you'll come to the conclusion that the bible has very little rules to be applied today, rather gives guidelines to have a joyful life, regardless of the century we're on.

Of course I would say my religion is the right one. But rather I'll just give this food for thought:
There are only 2 religions: the right one and the wrong one. If the right one follows the bible, then you just have to hear what the bible has to say.

(I do hope I'm not sounding preachy. Totally not my objective..)
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 19, 2015, 01:23:25 pm
Sorry for the late reply, had a weekend of sin... ;)

Thanks for the reply, I can see your point. I especially like your one right and one wrong analogy of religions.
But on that same note, I could say there have been hundreds of Gods throughout history, you only believe in one. I only believe in one less! ;D

Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: crackdude on January 19, 2015, 07:55:19 pm
I would like to apologize for completely derailing the thread, but I did enjoy it.

Maybe aliens did make you, Sharky!
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 20, 2015, 10:43:36 am
Na its all good. You didn't derail it this is just the path it took.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: CrazyT on January 20, 2015, 12:13:26 pm
It was an interesting read plus the whole part about a religion causing such things is very much related. Questioning religion is only natural and logical imo.

Im actually impressed with crackdude's explenation myself. Couldnt have said it better. Its funny how essentially all abrahamic religions kind of believe the same thing when a little bit of common sense comes in to play. I believe most of the extremists are simply uneducated morons, very backwardthinking. And its sad that these people get support from the average uneducated person.

I feel like islam is in a huge conflict right now. Not just towards the outside but also from within. There's no definite or fixed thing everyone agrees about for some strange reason.

I dont think in history the islamic world has been in conflict like this with each other. Partially I blame the west a little bit with wanting to force their influence. They are the ones that have kept encouraging uneducated nutjob leaders. As long as they were submissive and easily corrupted/bribed. Basically people with no selfworth and no principles. I mean its just a small part.

The biggest part is we muslims ourselves. We need a reform in representation and overall mentality. A lot of people say that the newer generation is turning out more extreme than the previous. There's little questioning among the community and only actions based on emotion. Usually the idea of "west interference in middle east" is enough to rile up a croud and convince without any rationality challenging that sentiment
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on January 22, 2015, 06:00:24 pm
It's worrying, and it's sad. I'm sad that in a few hundred years from now in the history books of the future we're still going to be seen as quite a barbaric time in human history.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: MadeManG74 on January 23, 2015, 08:17:32 am
What do you guys think about PEGIDA?


Looks like their leader landed himself in hot water:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/11360138/Pegida-leader-pictured-posing-as-Adolf-Hitler.html
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Sharky on February 05, 2015, 09:10:22 am
What do you guys think about PEGIDA?


Looks like their leader landed himself in hot water:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/11360138/Pegida-leader-pictured-posing-as-Adolf-Hitler.html

If I was him, I would have said I was being Charlie Chaplin and accused everybody else of being racists! Man missed a trick.

But seriously ANY hate group can get fucked.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: MadeManG74 on February 05, 2015, 09:21:47 am
Are they really a hate group though?
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: Aki-at on February 05, 2015, 09:42:13 am
Are they really a hate group though?

What is hate?

The opposite of love.

What is love? Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more.

Clearly baby is hate. Since it hurts love, just like opposites do.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: MadeManG74 on February 05, 2015, 09:51:02 am
What is hate?

The opposite of love.

What is love?

What is love?
What is free love?
What is love?
Love is free

Understand, understand the concept of love,
Understand, understand the concept of love,
Understand, understand,
Understand, understand,
Understand, understand the concept,
The concept of love.
The concept of love.
Title: Re: Terror attack on Paris satire comic 'Charlie-Hebdo' (for drawing Mohammed)
Post by: crackdude on February 05, 2015, 10:02:12 am
Shut up and eat!
Too bad, no bon appetit!
Shut up and eat!
You know my love is sweet!