Deadly gun attack in Paris: Global reactions & discussion
Scroll to see replies
Original post by L'Evil Fish
Is there a basis for your discontent? Did I have any pre existing knowledge my post would cause offence?
You know there's a difference
You know there's a difference
Lol. Well you just have considering you prefaced it with ... I am not condoning their behaviour.
Did you think everyone would agree?
Original post by missfats
If you can't see the difference between an ideology and its followers, then I pray for you.
Look at Nazi Germany, one of the most significant people within Hitler's rule was homosexual yet Hitler was against any form of homosexuality in Nazi Germany.
Look at feminism, a good concept which aims to "to define, establish, and defend equal political, economic, cultural, and social rights for women" however is misrepresented by extremists within the media.
Look at Christianity, a religion which teaches it's followers to abide to the laws of the theology, yet we see Christians having sex, drinking until drunkenness etc
And finally, look at Islam.
A religion which seeks to unite its followers through a set of laws ordained by God, however we see followers doing the exact opposite,
This is all proof that followers are often a facade, to what the truth is.
If you can't see the difference between an ideology and its followers, then I pray for you.
Look at Nazi Germany, one of the most significant people within Hitler's rule was homosexual yet Hitler was against any form of homosexuality in Nazi Germany.
Look at feminism, a good concept which aims to "to define, establish, and defend equal political, economic, cultural, and social rights for women" however is misrepresented by extremists within the media.
Look at Christianity, a religion which teaches it's followers to abide to the laws of the theology, yet we see Christians having sex, drinking until drunkenness etc
And finally, look at Islam.
A religion which seeks to unite its followers through a set of laws ordained by God, however we see followers doing the exact opposite,
This is all proof that followers are often a facade, to what the truth is.
That's a category error. If all the followers of an ideology don't support the ideology then they're not really followers of the ideology are they? They just pretend they are for external reasons, mainly political ones, or mainly because of the repercussions that they will suffer when forced to abandon a religion such as Islam which openly despises those who do so.
Original post by zedeneye1
sometimes he prayed, sometimes he killed....look deeper into books.
We are talking about in relation to this specific occurrence.
Please cite evidence, where Muhammad did other then pray “O my Lord, guide my people along the true path, as they are ignorant of the truth.” for his enemies, who ridiculed and tortured him.
If not, then pipe down and look inside a book for once.
Original post by generic_man
Lol, don't try to wriggle out of the fact that you did indeed attempt to justify the murder of innocent journalists you ****ing coward...
Wtf is wrong with you?
Action lead to consequences. That's what theirs was. I don't agree with it, but that's what happens when you provoke a group of loonies.
Original post by DorianGrayism
Lol. Well you just have considering you prefaced it with ... I am not condoning their behaviour.
Did you think everyone would agree?
Did you think everyone would agree?
Well I knew people would disagree, but don't believe they're right in doing so.
Original post by L'Evil Fish
Is there a basis for your discontent? Did I have any pre existing knowledge my post would cause offence?
You know there's a difference
You know there's a difference
Your logic was that being offended naturally makes someone want to punch back. You made no mention of intent. You offended me quite deeply by defending the murder of journalists and satirists, therefore should I be able to kill you?
And no there's really not a difference. That's what happens when you set such a dangerous, disgusting precedent.
Original post by Zander01
Have they been caught yet?
Nope, they have fled to the northeastern suburbs, where they will be hidden by the locals.
Original post by L'Evil Fish
Wtf is wrong with you?
Action lead to consequences. That's what theirs was. I don't agree with it, but that's what happens when you provoke a group of loonies.
Well I knew people would disagree, but don't believe they're right in doing so.
Action lead to consequences. That's what theirs was. I don't agree with it, but that's what happens when you provoke a group of loonies.
Well I knew people would disagree, but don't believe they're right in doing so.
No, you did say you agree with it. You said people who taunt deserve the punch they get in return. What is wrong with YOU, you literally attempted to justify a mass murder. I don't know how you're trying to wriggle out of this...
Original post by generic_man
Your logic was that being offended naturally makes someone want to punch back. You made no mention of intent. You offended me quite deeply by defending the murder of journalists and satirists, therefore should I be able to kill you?
And no there's really not a difference. That's what happens when you set such a dangerous, disgusting precedent.
And no there's really not a difference. That's what happens when you set such a dangerous, disgusting precedent.
I didn't defend them. I don't agree with what they've done.
Yes, the company should have faced some sort of backlash but not murder.
Original post by IceJJFish(II)
Why associate with such a company then?
Lol why not draw a picture of Mohhammed if you don't believe him to have been a person different to yourself or the landlady or the waiter or the queen?
Original post by TorpidPhil
That's a category error. If all the followers of an ideology don't support the ideology then they're not really followers of the ideology are they? They just pretend they are for external reasons, mainly political ones, or mainly because of the repercussions that they will suffer when forced to abandon a religion such as Islam which openly despises those who do so.
If a Person X follows an ideology yet does not support it, then they are not part of that group.
Your point being anything to do with my post? ... nah.
Original post by L'Evil Fish
I didn't defend them. I don't agree with what they've done.
Yes, the company should have faced some sort of backlash but not murder.
Yes, the company should have faced some sort of backlash but not murder.
You equated this attack to someone being punched in the face and said that such a punch would be justified. It's pretty clear. Just admit that what you said was disgusting instead of pretending that you meant something else, it's rather embarrassing now...
And what kind of "backlash" should they have faced? Should police have marched into their offices to shut them down? Should the journalists have been jailed? Should they have had acid thrown in their faces? What kind of "backlash" should these innocent people have faced for drawing goddamn CARTOONS??
Original post by missfats
If you can't see the difference between an ideology and its followers, then I pray for you.
Look at Nazi Germany, one of the most significant people within Hitler's rule was homosexual yet Hitler was against any form of homosexuality in Nazi Germany.
Look at feminism, a good concept which aims to "to define, establish, and defend equal political, economic, cultural, and social rights for women" however is misrepresented by extremists within the media.
Look at Christianity, a religion which teaches it's followers to abide to the laws of the theology, yet we see Christians having sex, drinking until drunkenness etc
And finally, look at Islam.
A religion which seeks to unite its followers through a set of laws ordained by God, however we see followers doing the exact opposite,
This is all proof that followers are often a facade, to what the truth is.
If you can't see the difference between an ideology and its followers, then I pray for you.
Look at Nazi Germany, one of the most significant people within Hitler's rule was homosexual yet Hitler was against any form of homosexuality in Nazi Germany.
Look at feminism, a good concept which aims to "to define, establish, and defend equal political, economic, cultural, and social rights for women" however is misrepresented by extremists within the media.
Look at Christianity, a religion which teaches it's followers to abide to the laws of the theology, yet we see Christians having sex, drinking until drunkenness etc
And finally, look at Islam.
A religion which seeks to unite its followers through a set of laws ordained by God, however we see followers doing the exact opposite,
This is all proof that followers are often a facade, to what the truth is.
1. Who was this gay Nazi you speak of?
2. Feminism has many different forms, radical feminists are included in that
3. Christianity never originally forbid alcohol and still doesn't. Sex outside marriage is straying from the religion yes, but I don't see sex outside marriage doing harm to anyone
4. Islam clearly states "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be killed" - 5:33
"`Wage war' mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief," - Ibn Kathir
Ergo, Islam is to blame. If Muslims acted against Islam you would have a point, but these terrorists are simply following the religion
Unfortunately you do not seem to understand much of what you have copied and pasted
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by generic_man
You equated this attack to someone being punched in the face and said that such a punch would be justified. It's pretty clear. Just admit that what you said was disgusting instead of pretending that you meant something else, it's rather embarrassing now...
And what kind of "backlash" should they have faced? Should police have marched into their offices to shut them down? Should the journalists have been jailed? Should they have had acid thrown in their faces? What kind of "backlash" should these innocent people have faced for drawing goddamn CARTOONS??
And what kind of "backlash" should they have faced? Should police have marched into their offices to shut them down? Should the journalists have been jailed? Should they have had acid thrown in their faces? What kind of "backlash" should these innocent people have faced for drawing goddamn CARTOONS??
Punch is justified.
Death is not.
A reaction is also justified, although I'd have preferred something like groups protesting.
So don't put words into my mouth.
Warning. If they continued to produce the stuff, shut down.
Original post by missfats
If a Person X follows an ideology yet does not support it, then they are not part of that group.
Your point being anything to do with my post? ... nah.
Your point being anything to do with my post? ... nah.
You were trying to point out the difference between ideologies and their followers. But what is an ideology that has no followers? Irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that there are followers of the ideology of Islam going around saying that they are killing people because of their ideology.
Therefore if you are another follower of Islam but disagree with them then either you or them are not followers of "Islam". Of course this is why there are many denominations of Islam because not all muslims believe the same things but as a non-radical muslim you need to point out how your ideology of Islam varies from theres and why yours is better. If you don't then you will be seen as the non-islamic person as you don't defend your interpretation of the islamic ideology and then you will be put down rightfully by the Islamic extremists and the "westerners" as you evidently disagree with both.
Original post by L'Evil Fish
I didn't defend them. I don't agree with what they've done.
Yes, the company should have faced some sort of backlash but not murder.
Yes, the company should have faced some sort of backlash but not murder.
How many people have to believe in something before it receives your vision of protection from satire / offence, and entitles the offended parties to some kind of retaliation (not necessarily a murderous one)?
Original post by Clip
How many people have to believe in something before it receives your vision of protection from satire / offence, and entitles the offended parties to some kind of retaliation (not necessarily a murderous one)?
Well that's something that can vary hugely... They know that a whole religion with a known bunch of nutters is a bad move.
Anything with a label. Religions, race and sexuality are ones that spring to mind.
Original post by L'Evil Fish
Punch is justified.
Death is not.
A reaction is also justified, although I'd have preferred something like groups protesting.
Death is not.
A reaction is also justified, although I'd have preferred something like groups protesting.
So in other words, the punch thing wasn't a metaphor, it was a pointless non-sequitur. Consider deleting it because it looks an awful lot like you're justifying mass murder.
Warning. If they continued to produce the stuff, shut down.
Wow. Nice and authoritarian. At least they get one warning, though eh?
So again, as I was deeply offended by your post, would you be OK if I reported you to the authorities and got them to warn you that if you offended me again, you would no longer be allowed to post anything on the Internet?
Original post by IceJJFish(II)
No sympathy.
Freedom of speech is a basic principle on which democracy is supported.
If it offends some people enough to commit murder or violence, then clearly those people do not belong to a liberal democracy or deserve any of the privileges it provides.
Starting with you.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Teenager given 2 year youth sentence for killing an 82 year old man.
- Units help
- Is travel worth it any more??
- SN1 and SN2 reactions (chemistry)
- Is Sciencespo Reims worth it?
- HEC MSc in Marketing vs LSE GMiM - confused which to choose
- HEC MSc in Marketing vs. LSE GMiM - confused which to choose
- AQA A-level English Literature & Language Paper 1 (7707/1) - 24 May 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Politics Examples
- Make it More Maths Exams-ey !!
- USA bombing Syria
- biology q?
- De Montfort vs Manchester metropolitan
- English language p1 q5
- What's your favourite theme song/tune for a show?
- Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 3B (9PL0 3B) -16th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Is Turkey safe to visit?
- Three ideas for my latest book. Which one should I go with
- EMF from cellphones causes high blood pressure: study
- AlCl3 reacting with benzene
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
