flamy Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 Right then, there are degrees of psychological damage. And much of such cases would stem from a chronic feeding of the verbal abuse. So, verbal sexual/racial abuse is legal? I'm not being coy, I really don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texy Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnterTheVoid Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 LOL, too many jokers on the net thesedays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamy Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 Right then, there are degrees of psychological damage. And much of such cases would stem from a chronic feeding of the verbal abuse. So, verbal sexual/racial abuse is legal? I'm not being coy, I really don't know. There is no such thing as absolute free speech in the society. Laws are usually framed to reflect a general consensus in the society. For example a case of physical/verbal abuse against a child is more likely to draw a conviction in the US than in India on similar evidence, because the society in the US is extremely strict on such transgressions. If a Muslim group were to take Facebook to the court, I would guess Facebook would have a pretty easy time defending itself by pointing to instances where other religions have been similarly portrayed and the judge/jury would be of the opinion that giving in to the demands of the Muslim group would tantamount to curtail the general level of criticism of religion accepted in the society. The key question to answer would be whether these cartoons impinged on the fundamental rights of any individual or group - certainly does not appear to be the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: :haha::haha::haha::haha::hysterical: The image plus your response made me lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamy Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 There is no such thing as absolute free speech in the society. Laws are usually framed to reflect a general consensus in the society. For example a case of physical/verbal abuse against a child is more likely to draw a conviction in the US than in India on similar evidence, because the society in the US is extremely strict on such transgressions. If a Muslim group were to take Facebook to the court, I would guess Facebook would have a pretty easy time defending itself by pointing to instances where other religions have been similarly portrayed and the judge/jury would be of the opinion that giving in to the demands of the Muslim group would tantamount to curtail the general level of criticism of religion accepted in the society. The key question to answer would be whether these cartoons impinged on the fundamental rights of any individual or group - certainly does not appear to be the case. Thanks for explaining! :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 Those flames look like something out of Pokemon...damn they mean business Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamy Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 lal, I didnt notice that. Pokemon :hehe: :cantstop: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desi Cartman Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 Wiki ? Why would someone want to ban Wikipedia :wall: I am telling u , this is all saajish to ban ICF in the end and then they will lift bans on these websites like youtube and Facebook etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mamu Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 One more time -- Can somebody explain to me -- what is wrong in drawing a picture of Muhammed ? I never knew drawing a picture of god is blasphemous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desi Cartman Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 One more time -- Can somebody explain to me -- what is wrong in drawing a picture of Muhammed ? I never knew drawing a picture of god is blasphemous From what I know : He was a messenger not a God , secondly he especially mentioned that NO one should try to paint his image as he wanted people to follow the way to god not him and he forbade idol worship and didnt want ppl to bow down to him Although the only reason muslims keep beard and wear pajamas above ankle is cuz Mohammed did that .. but never mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seedhi Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 I am astounded at the hypocrisy of the Muslim world. It is okay for them to spew venom against Jews, Christians, Hindus, USA etc - just look at what they teach to their kids about Hindus in pakistan, and what their holy book writes about Jews - its disgusting. On the other hand, no one should criticize, satirize or even draw pictures of their holy figures. Just like their insistence on building mosques in non-muslim countries while denying the same rights to non-muslims in their countries. Basically it all boils down to the following mentality of the followers of Islam: "What is ours is ours, what is yours is negotiable" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 One more time -- Can somebody explain to me -- what is wrong in drawing a picture of Muhammed ? I never knew drawing a picture of god is blasphemous Not sure whether it's part of the Quran or it is a Hadith, but the reason for not allowing it has to do with the notion that drawings and pictures of Muhammad or for that matter God or any other prophets can lead to their distribution as sources of idol worship, which is a strict no in the religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jadoo Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 One more time -- Can somebody explain to me -- what is wrong in drawing a picture of Muhammed ? I never knew drawing a picture of god is blasphemous By the way their not drawing their god, as their belief says that god doesn't have a any form, or something along those lines. Which is probably just as well, could you imagine what would happen if someone tried to draw allah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texy Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 Lars Vilks was assaulted by educated muslim students @ Uppsala university in sweden during a lecture He's the cartoonist His house was burned by assailants few days ago 4oLvwMxwHFs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desi Cartman Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 Not sure whether it's part of the Quran or it is a Hadith' date=' but the reason for not allowing it has to do with the notion that drawings and pictures of Muhammad or for that matter God or any other prophets can lead to their distribution as sources of idol worship, which is a strict no in the religion.[/quote'] But all religious muslims want to look like him .. :dontknow: .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 I am astounded at the hypocrisy of the Muslim world. It is okay for them to spew venom against Jews, Christians, Hindus, USA etc - just look at what they teach to their kids about Hindus in pakistan, and what their holy book writes about Jews - its disgusting. On the other hand, no one should criticize, satirize or even draw pictures of their holy figures. Just like their insistence on building mosques in non-muslim countries while denying the same rights to non-muslims in their countries. Basically it all boils down to the following mentality of the followers of Islam: "What is ours is ours, what is yours is negotiable" And what about your hypocrisy when you were hyperventilating against MF Hussain's paintings, not just the notion that it was a Muslim who drew them, but saying you would be equally offended if a Hindu had drawn them. You also said that protests as long as they were not violent and the court's decision should be accepted. Well Pakistanis are protesting in a non violent way, their legal system has handed out the bans. You should be championing their cause if you are not a hypocrite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seedhi Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 And what about your hypocrisy when you were hyperventilating against MF Hussain's paintings' date=' not just the notion that it was a Muslim who drew them, but saying you would be equally offended if a Hindu had drawn them. You also said that protests as long as they were not violent and the court's decision should be accepted. Well Pakistanis are protesting in a non violent way, their legal system has handed out the bans. You should be championing their cause if you are not a hypocrite.[/quote']I am talking of the hypocrisy of the whole thing. Do you see in India, Hindu people teaching hate about Muslims in schools. Do you see Hindu scriptures condemning Muslims or Jews and people supporting it. No! How many pakistanis have protested against the hate spewed against Hindus, Jews etc in their own schoolbooks? As far as laws go - how many times have we seen cartoonists, artists etc attacked in Europe etc where it is legal to draw satirical pictures. Answer me : What motivates them to act as violent thugs in Sweden? Even the educated ones? The whole question is about laws. Why do they refuse to follow the law in Europe when it comes to the cartoons of Mohammad? Why do people who have done nothing wrong legally be forced to live in fear? Why should their homes be burnt down? The law needs to be followed in India - where it is illegal to insult, and in Europe where it is legal. Unfortunately Muslims want their law everywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 I am talking of the hypocrisy of the whole thing. Do you see in India, Hindu people teaching hate about Muslims in schools. Do you see Hindu scriptures condemning Muslims or Jews and people supporting it. No! How many pakistanis have protested against the hate spewed against Hindus, Jews etc in their own schoolbooks? As far as laws go - how many times have we seen cartoonists, artists etc attacked in Europe etc where it is legal to draw satirical pictures. Answer me : What motivates them to act as violent thugs in Sweden? Even the educated ones? I don't support any of that and agree that large chunks of Pakistani society are hypocritical, but then so are you for condemning the paintings of Hindu Gods and supporting the drawings of Muhammad. The whole question is about laws. Why do they refuse to follow the law in Europe when it comes to the cartoons of Mohammad? Why do people who have done nothing wrong legally be forced to live in fear? Why should their homes be burnt down? The law needs to be followed in India - where it is illegal to insult, and in Europe where it is legal. Unfortunately Muslims want their law everywhere. These protests are being held in Pakistan primarily and they have banned these websites in accordance with their own law, something which you don't seem to like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts