Why I'm not Charlie and never will be

Most posters on this site live in the UK, so they all dare very easily as British residents have fundamental rights to challenge religions. If you live in an Islamic country you may not have such tights as a lot of such states have not allowed their citizens to have the basic human rights set out by the United Nations.

It sounds as if you blindly follow Islam without critically analysing it, though.

I assume you are talking about someone who publishes a cartoon some people find offensive in order to make a political or religious point.

Trust? What would I be trusting? The complete stranger has made his decision and is living by it. It doesn't affect me other than to give me something to agree or disagree with and, possibly, to offend me.




Why immature? Is doing so a characteristic of the immature? Why not irritating, or offensive, or exasperating, or perverse?

You don't know much about Marx if you think he meant that to be a good thing.

there isn't anything critical about it though and btw... I am not one of those extremists and we are all against terrorism. I just can't take some charlie guy making carttons of our prophet (PBUH) it is offensive.

also... people brainwashing other people about 'i am charlie' thing IS OFFENSIVE coz I AINT CHARLIE AND I know he was wrong. okay

It was not very nice of you to try and evade the topic at hand. But i will be nice enough to explain it to you once more.

You have stated and i quote "I would defend the right of anyone to be offensive and obnoxious if they judge it to be profitable."


Pay attention to the words you have used. You would go out of your way to a) defend
This word, "defend" has a specific meaning and it is significant because you are likely to trust someone's judgement that you defend. It implies that you agree with their final judgement. I cannot phantom why you would defend someone's judgement that you do not trust. Hence, what i found worrying, and still do, is that you would defend anyone sane or not, to be offensive.

Further to this, as you have evidently stated that you would defend anyone to be offensive and obnoxious which i find immature. You are willing support people who's intentions are to divide and above all, spread hatred. Its playground level bullying. Its of child like nature. Why would i find it anything but immature?

Then don't buy the magazine. No one is forcing you to look at them.

I dont want others to read the magazine . its misconceptive.

Which is why we fortunately live in a society which is not structured around your rather warped moral compass, and attacking someone for saying something is illegal.



So you think murder for drawing a cartoon is proportionate and/or justified?

Pay attention to the words you have used. You would go out of your way to a) defend
This word, "defend" has a specific meaning and it is significant because you are likely to trust someone's judgement that you defend.

Further to this, as you have evidently stated that you would defend anyone to be offensive and obnoxious which i find immature. Its playground level bullying. Its of child like nature.

Why would i find it anything but immature?

You are willing support people who's intentions are to divide and above all, spread hatred.

Which is why we fortunately live in a society which is not structured around your rather warped moral compass, and attacking someone for saying something is illegal.



So you think murder for drawing a cartoon is proportionate and/or justified?

It is the truth. It is Gods words . no other man on earth can produce anything like it. It is the heart to OUR lives. How could you say that.

Stop it!

Who are you to say. Denying the truth.

Yes, because it isn't real. What you describe there is Pascal's Wager which is thoroughly flawed and has been debunked many times.

Do you seriously believe that there is justice happening to everyone in the world and everyone is in peace?

I don't think justice is happening, that's one reason why I believe that God will do the justice himself in the next world and the tiniest of deeds will be taken into account.

Its scary, isn't it?
Scary because we don't know what we have done wrong and every single of our right or wrong deeds and we don't know when we are going to die.

I am really not sure if this is a joke or not

You can't have it both ways.

You cannot tell me what to read and I cannot tell you what to read. I don't care if you think it is the truth.

In my opinion, punishing people to Hell isn't justice. You can believe that if you want, but not me.

Got no care in the world for them.

I do pay attention to the words I use. What you say is nonsense. I simply maintain that anyone, no matter whether I (or you) like what they say or not has a right to free speech within the law, even if what they say offends some people. I say this about anyone, without having seen what they write. Me trusting their judgement doesn't come into it. In fact, I may well feel they have made a wrong judgement in publishing what they have. That doesn't change the fact they have a right to publish it.

No one is denying the importance of free speech within the law. I believe free speech should come with responsibilities, Why should we care about the responsibilities that comes with free speech? Well, the charlie hebdo incident is proof of why we should care. Different cultures have different levels of tolerance. I dont see who sets the standard or calibrates what a reasonable response is to offensive drawings. Some muslim countries do not care about an ounce of these principles of free speech that we care about and that you speak of so highly, and as such, they respond accordingly. Thus, from a responsible point of view, with a bit of critical thinking applied to the real world, drawing offensive and distasteful cartoons of the their prophet, for the sake of causing offense is not very intelligent or responsible knowing the consequences.

If you cant read between the lines, i dont only think you are immature, but also, irresponsible.

If people take offence at something you say it doesn't mean you are bullying them.

Thats debatable. It bears connotations of negativity.

Perhaps because you would think it through and come to a more reasoned judgement?

But i have thought it through, and it is the most reasoned judgement.


I defend free speech within the law. Inciting people to hatred isn't covered by that statement. In the specific case of Charlie Hebdo, the magazine has been taken to court many times and never been found to be inciting hatred.

There is nothing wrong with trying to divide people. Normal politicians, trade union leaders and religious people do it as a matter of course. If you are an adherent of one of the Abrahamic religions, even your god is said to divide people.

Err no.

He said THE RIGHT OF ANYONE.

Not ANYONE.

Stop making **** up.

"HE SAID THE RIGHT OF ANYONE!!!"

Writing in capital, does not make your argument anymore credible.

He would defend the right of anyone, or anyone's right, to be offensive. I could rephrase it 1 million times, it does not change its meaning..

Yes. But I didn't say I would join in with being offensive, or that I would necessarily agree with what they publish or that I would not, myself, be offended.