Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad • Hacker News Board

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

#401

Post by snowwrestler » Tue, Jan 13, 2015, 4:31 PM UTC

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…

Before we all jump on our high horses about Islam, remember than many doctors and clinics who perform abortion in the U.S. have regularly and repeatedly been subjected to harassment, intimidation, threats of physical violence, actual violence, and in a few cases, death, by self-professed Christians.

Abortion is obviously not the same thing as a cartoon, but it is a safe, routine, and legal elective medical procedure in the U.S.

Also realize that the vast (i.e. many orders of magnitude) majority of Muslims, while offended by satirical depictions of Muhammed, do NOT resort to violence.

It is the violence, and threats of violence--not the offense--that is the problem. Plenty of people take strong offense at things that seem silly to other people; for example, over software libraries to initialize Linux-based operating systems (init.d vs systemd). Or mobile device app store rules.

And finally before we all jump on our high horse about religion, remember that there are plenty of examples of violent threats within our own industry--say, for tweeting about a sex joke at a software conference, or complaining about videogame reviews.

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

#402

Post by jackbravo » Tue, Jan 13, 2015, 4:33 PM UTC

austenallred wrote: post #398

jackbravo wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mormons don't live with the same fear for their lives as muslims. I guess if mormonism had originated in a more violent country it would be encouraging a little more violence. So I don't think the difference is just the ideology but also the cultural background. And western civilization has some blame (some, not all) for the instability and violence lived in middle east.

They don't anymore, but they certainly used to. The reason Salt Lake City is the home of the LDS church today is because they were forced out of Missouri and Illinois, and their extermination was officially authorized by the government. [1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missouri_Executive_Order_44

Wow, didn't know about that =). Although, it does say that:

> no one is known to have been killed by the militia or anyone else specifically because of it. There were, however, other associated deaths: the militia and other state authorities used Boggs' Executive Order as a pretext to expel the Mormons from their lands in the state, and force them to migrate to Illinois.

I'm pretty sure many muslims countries suffer much worse violence than that, over many more years.

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

#403

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, Jan 13, 2015, 4:34 PM UTC

tim333 wrote: post #333

briandear wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>However, conditions of extreme unemployment... Islam isn't the cause of terrorism I think underestimates the influence of the founders. Jesus mostly preached to turn the other cheek and didn't kill anyone. Here is a list of people killed by Muhammed http://wikiislam.net/wiki/List_of_Killings_Ordered_or_Suppor... It goes on a bit and the sources vary in their authority but overall impression is pretty pro violence. M…

> Jesus mostly preached to turn the other cheek and didn't kill anyone.

And yet from the time it achieved the kind of power in any society from which to exert substantial influence well into the modern period, Christians were killing people -- in other countries, in their own countries, etc. -- in the name of Christ all the time. The Crusades (and not just the ones in the "Holy Land" and/or targeting Muslims) were a thing. The Inquisition was a thing. Europe's Wars of Religion were a thing. There is a reason the word "pogrom" exists.

The modern Western concept of freedom of religion isn't a direct product of some religious parallel to the Ruby's community's maxim "Matz Is Nice And So We Are Nice", its a product of the exhaustion of Western European Christians after more than a millenium of killings -- not least of all of Western European Christians by Western European Christians -- in the name of Christ.

The idea that Christianity is somehow inherently more peaceful than Islam requires ignoring pretty much the entirety of the history of Christianity.

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

#404

Post by tim333 » Tue, Jan 13, 2015, 4:37 PM UTC

btilly wrote: post #350

tim333 wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>However, conditions of extreme unemployment... Islam isn't the cause of terrorism I think underestimates the influence of the founders. Jesus mostly preached to turn the other cheek and didn't kill anyone. Here is a list of people killed by Muhammed http://wikiislam.net/wiki/List_of_Killings_Ordered_or_Suppor... It goes on a bit and the sources vary in their authority but overall impression is pretty pro violence. M…

That list is worth looking at in light of recent events. Not only because of how many are ordered killed, but because of how many are ordered killed because of poetry mocking Muhammed. Any muslim who kills a satirist who mocked islam has pretty good grounds to be saying that their actions are in line with what Mohammed would have done!

Yeah, I think you'll find most people who get called terrorists think they are on the side of good and in the case of Islamists, doing the work of Allah. Not that Christians and atheists are immune to killing people for what they think is a good cause. Indeed probably majority of the killings in the last century have been of that nature.

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

#405

Post by jacquesm » Tue, Jan 13, 2015, 4:39 PM UTC

rikacomet wrote: post #394

jacquesm wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In your opinion it is not possible for Muslims to have sensitivity about certain topics, that they would not like to be toyed around with. You can have all the sensitivity you want but that stops at the point where you export your sensitivities to others in the form of either bodily harm or threats to do so. > Cause that is against the concept of liberty perhaps? Exactly so. The liberty to express ones opinion even…

And you think that Islam promotes this "bodily harm/threats" ? You sure are a delusional one. I leave you at that, I should have known that you are not here to listen to opinions, or engage in a fair debate.

> And you think that Islam promotes this "bodily harm/threats" ?

Classic strawman.

> You sure are a delusional one.

Of course I am, since, obviously I think that Islam promotes 'bodily harm/threats'.

In case you did not understand that paragraph, it was directed at the people who perpetrate those acts, not towards Islam.

Note how you changed what I said by adding your own interpretation and then took issue with the modified version.

That said, just like there are plenty of passages in the bible that call for violence and the most heinous acts to be perpetrated against others so there are such passages in the Qu'ran.

Note that I'm equally upset with those that would use either book (or any other book for that matter) to impose their view of what the world should look like on others. Religious fanatics - fanatics of any kind, really - will use such texts or any other that they can lay their hands on to try to find excuses to act in whatever way they think will further their cause, including threats and violence.

I'm just one shade less upset with those that are apologists for such fanatics.

Islam is definitely not the only religion that has been hijacked in this way, every other religion has its own share of problematic characters. But it is up to those that subscribe to those religions to deal with that and to condemn it in the strongest words possible - without caveats like you have done - to make sure that the would-be fanatics hear loud and clear that they are no longer part of the religion or group they profess to serve.

As long as we have a process of so called radicalization where creepy old men acting in the name of religions to try to brainwash impressionable kids into committing acts of violence we will see more of this.

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

#406

Post by Killah911 » Tue, Jan 13, 2015, 4:41 PM UTC

btilly wrote: post #393

Killah911 wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously jacquesm? I'm truly shocked at this coming from you. I have a lot of respect you & love reading your stuff, but really? "Christianity experienced enlightenment and Islam did not"? Surely you're not so ignorant as to dismiss the thousand years where the Islamic world was the abode of knowledge, science and civilization while Europe was in the dark ages. Yes, shit sucks for them now. But to say they never exp…

No, he's right that Islam never experienced the Enlightenment. Nor was it in any way directly responsible for that. Credit belongs to the Islamic world for keeping classical knowledge alive and reintroducing it to Europe at the beginning of the Renaissance. However the Enlightenment refers to a later period in European history where people came to terms with the result of decades of very nasty civil wars over Protest…

You're right (I appreciate the thoughtful response). I see what you're saying. And I agree with you on the principles of being tolerance being a good thing. I'm reminded of the Hindu-Muslim riots in India or the more recent events in Burma. I think the enlightenment and the dark ages and lessons form them are parts of western history, not shared by other cultures. (Although the Serbian conflict doesn't reconcile with this view if they're to be considered western beneficiaries of the enlightenment). What they have experienced is western imperialism.

What I would argue is the viewpoint that the Muslim world or any other region that isn't us, needing to inherit or adhere to our viewpoint, as being short sighted.

I think I'm finally starting to see jacquesm was saying (I feel like a dumbass now). I just reread his original comment on the world not moving in lockstep. It will take time, hopefully some economic development, infrastructure & some super connected smart people who are part of the local & global community. I interpreted his comment to be a slight against an entire culture, which, thanks your comment I am able to see past now.

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

#407

Post by fafner » Tue, Jan 13, 2015, 4:41 PM UTC

olavk wrote: post #284

fafner wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Breivik isn't a Christian terrorist. He described himself as not being overly religious. He is also very critical of modern (I think that's what's meant by Western here) Christianity, both in the Church of Norway and Catholicism.

Muslim terrorists in general are also in opposition to mainstream Islam. They are extremists, just as Breivik is an extremist.

Wahhabism and other extremist versions of Islam have a significant following. Polls regularly indicate support or acceptance towards extremist views within Muslim communities. It's therefore not as simple.

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

#408

Post by cottonseed » Tue, Jan 13, 2015, 4:43 PM UTC

thret wrote: post #227

fafner wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think neals meant "modern" Christianity, as in what has become of Christianity thanks to the age of reason. This excludes some Western (especially US) branches of Christianity.

Christianity was pacifist from the beginning. Jesus was all about non-violence: “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. - Matthew 5:38-39 ESV

I'm not sure why you're being downvoted. This was also my understanding. I highly recommend Mark Kurlansky's Nonviolence: History of a Dangerous Idea, which discusses non-violence in the history of early Christianity:

http://www.amazon.com/Nonviolence-History-Dangerous-Mark-Kur...

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

#409

Post by austenallred » Tue, Jan 13, 2015, 4:45 PM UTC

jackbravo wrote: post #402

austenallred wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't anymore, but they certainly used to. The reason Salt Lake City is the home of the LDS church today is because they were forced out of Missouri and Illinois, and their extermination was officially authorized by the government. [1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missouri_Executive_Order_44

Wow, didn't know about that =). Although, it does say that: > no one is known to have been killed by the militia or anyone else specifically because of it. There were, however, other associated deaths: the militia and other state authorities used Boggs' Executive Order as a pretext to expel the Mormons from their lands in the state, and force them to migrate to Illinois. I'm pretty sure many muslims countries suffer…

No one is known to have been killed as a direct result of that order; that was the last straw after a lot of other stuff had gone down.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haun's_Mill_massacre#Massacre

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Joseph_Smith

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Crooked_River

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

#410

Post by tim333 » Tue, Jan 13, 2015, 4:52 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #403

tim333 wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>However, conditions of extreme unemployment... Islam isn't the cause of terrorism I think underestimates the influence of the founders. Jesus mostly preached to turn the other cheek and didn't kill anyone. Here is a list of people killed by Muhammed http://wikiislam.net/wiki/List_of_Killings_Ordered_or_Suppor... It goes on a bit and the sources vary in their authority but overall impression is pretty pro violence. M…

> Jesus mostly preached to turn the other cheek and didn't kill anyone. And yet from the time it achieved the kind of power in any society from which to exert substantial influence well into the modern period, Christians were killing people -- in other countries, in their own countries, etc. -- in the name of Christ all the time. The Crusades (and not just the ones in the "Holy Land" and/or targeting Muslims) were a…

I agree basically. Christians have killed plenty of people as have atheists. Though with slightly different rationals oftentimes.