Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Doctor_Einstein)
    You don't think children should know whether or not it is ok to beat a wife?
    No.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    “whether wives should be beaten or not”

    Such a difficult questions they need a conference about it

    But as we know beating's OK it's just a matter of how hard

    But good on them for standing up to these idiots
    LMAO. Yea, in the 1960s big governments were thinking of how to put a man on the moon. But this is a much more important question.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by __el_0hssa)
    LMAO. Yea, in the 1960s big governments were thinking of how to put a man on the moon. But this is a much more important question.
    quite true

    but if they were involved it would be by asking questions like 'if an alien has no throat how do we kill them according to halal methods'
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Doctor_Einstein)
    You don't think children should know whether or not it is ok to beat a wife?
    Children should be brought up to understand that it is not OK to beat anyone, which leaves a separate debate about beating wives completely irrelevant. Will these Moslems hold a debate about whether physical violence to strangers or friends is acceptable?
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by Errm336)
    What I'm saying is that the "victims" are not entirely blameless.
    In other words you are tacitly condoning the murders as a consequence by deflecting full responsibility away from the terrorists.

    Charlie Hebdo publications are free speech and if a person is offended, there are ombudsmen who will take up a complaint and decide whether it contravened any laws with appropriate action.

    If one wishes to change the law, there is nothing to stop one becoming a politician and canvassing for change.

    The Islamic extremists decided they would circumvent the law by brutally murdering the writers and publishers to instill public fear and silence future lawful critique of Islam.

    The butchers chose to murder for no other reason than they were offended.

    Good job feminists do not pull out automatic machine guns and start mowing down people with views that offend them, eh? They could justify the killings by saying Muslims brought it on themselves.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    quite true

    but if they were involved it would be by asking questions like 'if an alien has no throat how do we kill them according to halal methods'
    The video made me laugh, it's nice to see some defiant women doing that in front of the prude anti-women Islamists.
    (I disagree with feminism in general, however this was just brilliant)

    Then I stopped laughing once I saw those pigs start kicking them on the floor. The guy who kicked those non-violent, peacefully protesting women? He should be shot.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LenaSim)
    Tbh I think that publication is vile. But no one deserved to die.
    People have things done to them that they are not deserving of, mainly it is an unintentional by-product and of no fault of their own.

    But I have no sympathy with a group of people that choose to deliberately antagonise another group of people, knowing and foreseeing the effects of their actions and indeed, one could say inciting such actions in the hope of gaining some material wealth.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Errm336)
    People have things done to them that they are not deserving of, mainly it is an unintentional by-product and of no fault of their own.

    But I have no sympathy with a group of people that choose to deliberately antagonise another group of people, knowing and foreseeing the effects of their actions and indeed, one could say inciting such actions in the hope of gaining some material wealth.
    Dont be stupid. No one would die for wealth. Its pointless to have all the money in the world with no chance to spend it.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Errm336)
    But I have no sympathy with a group of people that choose to deliberately antagonise another group of people, knowing and foreseeing the effects of their actions
    So adherents of the religion of peace can reasonably be expected to ignore the teachings of one of their prophets (about turning the other cheek), as well as the law of the country they are in, and kill people who criticise their religion?

    Doesn't that show that the satire is accurate?

    :toofunny:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by uberteknik)
    In other words you are tacitly condoning the murders as a consequence by deflecting full responsibility away from the terrorists.
    Except I didn't say that.

    Charlie Hebdo publications are free speech and if a person is offended, there are ombudsmen who will take up a complaint and decide whether it contravened any laws with appropriate action.
    After the fact.

    If one wishes to change the law, there is nothing to stop one becoming a politician and canvassing for change.
    You don't need to be a politician to initiate change.

    The Islamic extremists decided they would circumvent the law by brutally murdering the writers and publishers to instill public fear and silence future lawfull critique of Islam.
    Yes, they executed those whom they felt contravened their laws.

    The butchers chose to murder for no other reason than thry were offended
    Many people wish ill harm on those who offend them. Some simply have the guts and enough motivation to act on those feelings..

    Good job feminists do not pull out automatic machine guns and start mowing down people with views that offend them, eh?
    I don't think anyone actually offends feminists.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    I've never been banned from this site

    are you so sad trolling a student forum is the highlight of your day
    The preacher is unable to act on what he has preached.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Children should be brought up to understand that it is not OK to beat anyone, which leaves a separate debate about beating wives completely irrelevant. Will these Moslems hold a debate about whether physical violence to strangers or friends is acceptable?
    There is no one right way to bring up children mate.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Oh **** yes it is. you want to talk about consequences? Do you know what are the consequences of being in Europe? Its to accept our freedom of speech.
    Freedom of speech...so long as it is not directed against Europeans.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Errm336)
    The preacher is unable to act on what he has preached.
    I could draft a reply to you addressing your points but you'll be banned again soon so not worth my time
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Doctor_Einstein)
    There is no one right way to bring up children mate.
    Yes there is

    telling them it's not OK to beat women is the right way
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    I could draft a reply to you addressing your points but you'll be banned again soon so not worth my time
    The preacher persists in justifying his contrary behaviour to what he has preached.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Dont be stupid. No one would die for wealth. Its pointless to have all the money in the world with no chance to spend it.
    It is no secret that Charlie was in severe financial trouble and the executions, one might say were opportune, did go some way to rectifying that issue.

    Whether the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists thought it would simply be a mass peaceful protest, instead of an execution of their staff, is another matter altogether.

    Indeed, they squabbled over the huge amount of funds they received.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Doctor_Einstein)
    There is no one right way to bring up children mate.
    True, but are you saying that it can be right for any children to be brought up in the belief that beating people is reasonable behaviour?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    So adherents of the religion of peace can reasonably be expected to ignore the teachings of one of their prophets (about turning the other cheek), as well as the law of the country they are in, and kill people who criticise their religion?

    Doesn't that show that the satire is accurate?

    :toofunny:
    People should be held accountable for their actions, yes.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    True, but are you saying that it can be right for any children to be brought up in the belief that beating people is reasonable behaviour?
    And teaching them to go around intentionally provoking and offending people is your definition of "reasonable behaviour"?

    :facepalm:
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: September 17, 2015
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.