Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 489 posts

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#351

Post by jacquesm »

rikacomet wrote: post #281
mathetic wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a an atheist, who spent nearly all of his life in a country with 99% Muslim population, I do not understand how people who live in such society and got an education defend the religion. >> First of all.. certainly as a Muslim, I condemn the attack on Charlie Hebdo. This is not Islam. First of all, this is a "no true Scotsman" fallacy. Islam, after Christianity, has the bloodiest history we know. The only reason it…

First of all, this is a "no true Scotsman" fallacy. Islam, after Christianity, has the bloodiest history we know. The only reason it is the second biggest religion is because it expanded by violent conquers. Even in the off chance that the host is being decent, they imposed so much regulations on non-Muslims that they would end up converting. So this is exactly what Islam is. >> Let me put it this way. There are only…

Your way of quoting the parent here in reverse is highly confusing, it is as if you are now contradicting yourself.

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#352

Post by theorique »

flexie wrote: post #82
chroma wrote: post #32

The Charlie Hebdo attacks show that these days, real satire of Islam can't be done without significant risk of violent reprisal. If you doubt that statement, remember The Book of Mormon. (The play, not the actual book.) Could you imagine Trey Parker and Matt Stone making an equivalent Broadway play about Islam? Could you imagine them calling it The Qur'an to Google-bomb the original? Even if they disregarded their ow…

Editors all over the western world exercise more caution when it comes to satire about islam than about christianity and in my opinion it borders a form of racism of low expectations. Then again, who wants to be the next Salman Rushdie, Theo van Gogh, Jyllands-Posten, or Charlie Hebdo. It's not like they stand to gain much from running the risk.

in my opinion it borders a form of racism of low expectations.

Agreed, but sadly those expectations are met often enough, and dramatically enough (as in the cases you mentioned) that many people are not willing to take the risk.

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#353

Post by tim333 »

neals wrote: post #7

I used to think society would, at some point, grow up and leave religion behind. But lately, it just feels like a far 'lower' form of religion is just taking over. I think that western christianity has made some big strides. For example, by leaving all the violence behind. Now the violent ones are winning. This makes me sad for the future of Europe.

>Now the violent ones are winning.

Not so much in Europe. In the middle east the extremists have been winning though. The guys doing the Hedbo killings were largely inspired by Al-Qaeda in Yemen. Salman Rushdie was arguing that the goings on are not really about the west but power struggles in the Islamic world, somewhat plausibly I think. I dare say the west may have played a significant role in destabilising the middle east with the various wars we've sponsored there.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvgdPAEu8vA&feature=youtu.be...

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#354

Post by wrongc0ntinent »

rikacomet wrote: post #248
thewarrior wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my personal understanding of the issue , the law forbidding depictions of Mohammed applies ONLY TO MUSLIMS. The purpose was that Islam is dead against the idea of idol worship as that was one of the chief causes of disunity and warring among the various tribal factions of Mecca. So if somebody else makes a cartoon depiction of Mohammed , Islam doesn't have anything to say about that. Every other religion has bee…

Islam starts at Tauheed, which is to believe in "One God". As a Muslim I have only 2 things to say to you: Do you condemn the attacks? I do. Do you condemn over-the-top caricatures of our Prophet? I do.

>Do you condemn over-the-top caricatures of our Prophet? I do.

I don't. I like the ones of Jesus a little more though.

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#355

Post by [deleted] »

briandear wrote: post #196
flexie wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Editors all over the western world exercise more caution when it comes to satire about islam than about christianity and in my opinion it borders a form of racism of low expectations. Then again, who wants to be the next Salman Rushdie, Theo van Gogh, Jyllands-Posten, or Charlie Hebdo. It's not like they stand to gain much from running the risk.

Exactly this. The folks in places such as the White House are very quick to condemn some silly anti-Islam YouTube video, yet when the Palestinians make suicide bomber anti-Jew Seasame Street clones, the White House says nothing about the potential for such productions to be "irresponsible." It's like Muslims are little retarded kids and we aren't allowed to make fun of because the power to control themselves is not e…

[deleted]

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#356

Post by vpeters25 »

jpgvm wrote: post #40

It takes a great deal to stand up against the advance of political correctness on free speech. Other countries haven't nearly done as well as France. At the end of the day the situation was tragic but the defence of free speech against prevailing winds is incredibly important. As for religious extremism... I don't think we will see an end until enlightenment spreads and religion fades into historic irrelevancy. This…

> This is happening faster than people think, especially religious people as they can't see out of their bubble.

I'm no psychologist but I think it might be pretty hard to break yourself out of a religion that makes you perform a ritual 5 times a day where you take yourself to a self-hypnotic state and repeat affirmations.

Islam seems to be the only remaining major religion were you can convince people to override their sense of self-preservation. That's some crazy powerful vudu there.

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#357

Post by icebraining »

geographomics wrote: post #341
icebraining wrote: post #3

Speaking on Today, [Omer el-Hamdoon, president of the Muslim Association of Britain] said causing offence “just for the purpose of offending” was not freedom of speech. Distancing yourself from the extremists [FAIL]

This isn't a 'fail'. Being repulsed by Charlie Hebdo's offensive depictions of religious icons does not imply being in favour of the assassination of its editorial staff. You can stand squarely against both, without contradiction.

I didn't quote someone saying he was repulsed; I quoted someone saying it wasn't free speech. The two are very different statements. And I didn't say he's in favor of the assassination, either - just that he failed to distance himself from them.

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#358

Post by kaybe »

jordanpg wrote: post #117
neals wrote: post #7

I used to think society would, at some point, grow up and leave religion behind. But lately, it just feels like a far 'lower' form of religion is just taking over. I think that western christianity has made some big strides. For example, by leaving all the violence behind. Now the violent ones are winning. This makes me sad for the future of Europe.

Coverage of these events, with or without anti-Muslim sentiment, almost never takes the point of view that it is the fact that people are brought up to really believe that there are invisible, magic beings in the ether who care about the state of affairs on earth that is at least in part the root cause here. And that is a terrible shame because not drawing attention to that fact is a tacit endorsement of extremist be…

If you go deeper, most of culture is made up. There are no states, and there are no companies, not without people making them up. It is what makes us cooperate and ultimatively function as a society. Some beliefs are (to some people at least) more obviously, hm, hard to falsify, but they're all beliefs in something.

I'm not trying to make a real point for the argument here, just pointing out that things might be deeper and more complicated than obvious on the first layer. It's up to us to decide which ideas we want to use, or it should be, but they're all ideas.

(I might have read idea on lesswrong or similar some time ago and am still digesting. Thus, I'm very open for arguments and ideas here.)

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#359

Post by unclebucknasty »

corin_ wrote: post #337
unclebucknasty wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And bringing in the concept of "groupthink".. Surely showing us the up vote has the exact same affect in that regard? It's not the same. Firstly, and most obviously, upvotes cannot lead to a comment being grayed out or barely legible and, thus, overlooked. Secondly, for those who do actually care about Magic Karma Beans for some reason, venturing from the herd runs the risk of earning downvotes, since they are used…

Fair point, but I'd suggest if you dislike the system it would be better to change how downvoted comments are formatted rather than prevent downvoting. The minimum karma requirement already slightly limits downvoting, perhaps it should more? To users worried about losing karma I say... grow up. I might be worried about people thinking me stupid, or something else about me, but not the number at the top right. And ove…

>To users worried about losing karma I say... grow up.

So, you agree with me, in part, that downvoting is childish. Because downvotes are obviously a big part of that number at the top right, and the very notion that commenters would be "punished" and lose a gold-star sticker over a comment (vs. just submerging the comment) is what I find most childish.

So, perhaps I should be more nuanced: Downvotes are childish primarily when it comes to the karma score; whereas they are more ineffectual and promote groupthink when it comes to actual discussion.

So, actually, it looks like we are somewhat in agrement on both fronts.

But, like you, I don't think I actually care enough to send an email, nor do I thik it would matter if I did.

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#360

Post by sarciszewski »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #247
sarciszewski wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A handful of HN users with >= 500 karma didn't like either: - The fact that I don't embrace the concept of trigger warnings. - The fact that I responded in agreement to another comment. - The fact that I suggested the warning could have been placed in response to a fear of retaliation. - Me. Just, in general. - All of the above. But since none of the downvoters had enough gumption to actually say what they didn't lik…

You should have put a trigger warning - "Point of view disagreeing with the majority media narrative - could cause compulsive downvoting behaviour". ;).

Heh. I don't really think I'm even disagreeing with the majority media narrative here. I do think trigger warnings can be taken to ridiculous extremes (e.g. imagine a trigger warning every 30 seconds of a horror film) and, as a result, am not fond of them as an idea.
Post reply on HN