Pope Francis says do not insult other faiths in response to Charlie Hebdo attack
70 replies, posted
Why still attack religion as the primary cause? Al-Qaeda has thrown the Qur'an into the garbage, and so have countless religious armies over the past few millennia. If you look into the true causes of most of these wars you'll find poverty, land ownership, or titles to be the driving cause.
It's just as ignorant to be religious as it is to think removal of religion would solve anything. Solve poverty and you will solve war. In the mean time find something more rational to complain about.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46941035]And no where did I do that so what on earth are you getting at[/QUOTE] I never even read any of your posts, it wasn't in response to you
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46941035]He IS saying offense over rules freedom of speech. My guess is you agree?[/QUOTE] Sure? That's his right, I've said much the same thing, as have thousands of other people. Asking someone not to be a dick isn't trying to remove the freedom of speech.
[QUOTE=ImperialGuard;46941179]I never even read any of your posts, it wasn't in response to you
Sure? That's his right, I've said much the same thing, as have thousands of other people. Asking someone not to be a dick isn't trying to remove the freedom of speech.[/QUOTE]
saying that your offense is more important than someones right to offend you is precisely that especially when it becomes something you push as a political view point.
you may not think it is, or have even thought about this, but that's precisely what it is.
[QUOTE=fp_sucks;46941157]Why still attack religion as the primary cause? Al-Qaeda has thrown the Qur'an into the garbage, and so have countless religious armies over the past few millennia. If you look into the true causes of most of these wars you'll find poverty, land ownership, or titles to be the driving cause.
It's just as ignorant to be religious as it is to think removal of religion would solve anything. Solve poverty and you will solve war. In the mean time find something more rational to complain about.[/QUOTE]
Basically getting rid of religion won't solve anything, people will still come up with reasons to make war and other bullshit.
[QUOTE=Deathtrooper2;46941379]Basically getting rid of religion won't solve anything, people will still come up with reasons to make war and other bullshit.[/QUOTE]
Not to mention the fact that it's pretty much an impossible feat.
[QUOTE=Kljunas;46940631]Yeah no. It's time we stop treating religions like special things that can't be made fun of or criticised.[/QUOTE]
You can't honestly expect a religious leader to share that view, however.
bean creme
edit: PleEASE do not ban me. i am so sorry. holy shit. oh my fucking god please dont ban me holy fuck im so sorry
The whole getting offended by insulting my mother never made much sense to me but some cultures are super sensitive to it. Here nobody cares, you don't know her so why would I be mad? When people insult my mom online I just laugh and it confuses people like they can't believe I wouldn't just become a blathering rage monster.
That said you know, I didn't expect the Pope to be cool with insulting religion as "moderate" as people say he is. He is still the fucking Pope.
[QUOTE=ImperialGuard;46941179]I never even read any of your posts, it wasn't in response to you
[B]Sure? That's his right, I've said much the same thing, as have thousands of other people. Asking someone not to be a dick isn't trying to remove the freedom of speech.[/B][/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure you both agree?
HumanAbyss believes people have a right to be assholes without being murdered/physically assaulted for it, because freedom of speech. I'm sure that you do too? You both agree that assholes are still being assholes.
Look you guys, you all shouldn't be surprised when he said this. He's the goddamn pope, obviously he's gonna come out defending it, and same something like this.
He's the head of a religion! And if he said otherwise, he's gonna lose a shitload of support.
I will insult every faith that has existed, still exists and will exist as long as I am alive.
Once again catholicism proves it's maturity and how far advanced it is compared to other religions.
[QUOTE=Ahyred Ghun;46947082]Once again [B]the Pope[/B] proves [B]his[/B] maturity and how far advanced [B]he[/B] is compared to [B]everyone else[/B].[/QUOTE]
Here, fixed that for you.
In any case, the right to free speech doesn't mean you should go around offending everyone in sight just because. You have every right to do so, and you shouldn't be punished for it, but it doesn't make it any more of a noble thing to do.
[QUOTE=Kybalt;46946362]HumanAbyss believes people have a right to be assholes without being murdered/physically assaulted for it, because freedom of speech. I'm sure that you do too? You both agree that assholes are still being assholes.[/QUOTE]
Politely asking for someone not to insult something I get offended by is one thing, murdering people is another.
Everyone can and should simply ask for people not to offend. If they accept, good job! If not, big deal, simply avoid him when he starts saying the offensive stuff. It's not that hard.
[QUOTE=Deathtrooper2;46940391]Its more of him saying, you can judge religions if you want, but you can't just flat-out say...
ISLAMISTS ARE INSANE KILLERS
or
ALL CHRISTIANS ARE PEDOS
or
ALL JEWISH PEOPLE ARE RICH BASTARDS[/QUOTE]
Actually, Islamists ARE generally assholes. 'Islamist' refers to Muslims who have an expansionist mentality and believe that everyone who is not a Muslim is a heretic and deserves punishment. They also believe that every government should be theocratic. To say "Muslims are insane killers" would be wrong. To say the same of Islamists is also wrong, but to imagine their sympathies lie with those who do kill for the religion is much less of a stretch.
I wanna like him but he's still really homophobic
[QUOTE=deltasquid;46940684]Nice victim blaming, mate. Free speech should be free of consequences ideally (at least bodily harm). To think that a person should be punched because they say stuff you disagree with is pretty fucked up.[/QUOTE]
Free speech means that the law wont persecute you for stating your opinion, not that the rest of the population will take your shit. I'm not saying that I believe people should be harmed for what they say, but if you go all Die Hard 2 and wear a sign that says "I HATE NIGGERS" in the middle of Harlem you can't expect to have people go "That's okay, I respect your opinion. :)"
Though, at that point you're [I]really[/I] just asking for it.
[editline]16th January 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Impact1986;46946868]I will insult every faith that has existed, still exists and will exist as long as I am alive.[/QUOTE]
Then you're just an asshole and being one completely on purpose knowing that you're upsetting people?
There's a difference between "I don't follow a religion" and "You believe in a made-up mythical being and when you die there will be nothing and all these things you do in the name of God are ridiculous and you're dumb."
[editline]16th January 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=ImpSnob;46949297]I wanna like him but he's still really homophobic[/QUOTE]
Still a big step in the right direction for a pope.
I mean even in America we have states complaining about the government trying to force them to allow homosexuals to marry.
[QUOTE=deltasquid;46940684]Nice victim blaming, mate. Free speech should be free of consequences ideally (at least bodily harm). To think that a person should be punched because they say stuff you disagree with is pretty fucked up.[/QUOTE]
it is an important legal precedent for governments and courts to protect the right of a person to say what they want, and by all means you [I]should[/I] be able to. and there are few if any ways to justify the slaughter of another human being, let alone in an act that violates those protected rights.
but 12 people's children would still be alive today if they made the conscious personal decision, not as a legal requirement, but as a choice in the name of simple safety, to not publish the material. they received the threats, and the danger was brought to their attention. to say that they deserved it is awful, but to say they could have avoided it is simple fact.
here's a [URL="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/charlie-hebdo-founder-says-murdered-editor-dragged-staff-to-death-with-provocative-cartoons-9979104.html"]quote[/URL] from one of the original founders of charlie hebdo, read it and form your own opinion:
[QUOTE]I believe that we are fools who took an unnecessary risk. That’s it. We think we are invulnerable. For years, decades even, it was a provocation and then one day the provocation turns against us.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Ahyred Ghun;46947082]Once again catholicism proves it's maturity and how far advanced it is compared to other religions.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, so mature that its leader says he would punch someone in the face for an insult.
[QUOTE=joes33431;46950211]
but 12 people's children would still be alive today if they made the conscious personal decision, not as a legal requirement, but as a choice in the name of simple safety, to not publish the material.[/QUOTE]
12 people's children would be alive today if it weren't for fundamentalists with assault rifles. Fuck off with this victim blaming bullshit. People shouldn't expect to be gunned down because they made fun of someones shitty god.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;46950466]12 people's children would be alive today if it weren't for fundamentalists with assault rifles. Fuck off with this victim blaming bullshit. People shouldn't expect to be gunned down because they made fun of someones shitty god.[/QUOTE]
how is it victim blaming bullshit when charlie hebdo quite literally had it coming
i don't even think it was avoidable after they got firebombed
[QUOTE=OutspokenGolf;46950540]how is it victim blaming bullshit when charlie hebdo quite literally had it coming
i don't even think it was avoidable after they got firebombed[/QUOTE]
It's all well and good to say it was avoidable, just like getting raped cause you're too drunk to say no, right?
Wait no both of those things are terrible and the onus of those actions is on the perpetrators not the fucking victims.
Both are true or neither is true. I'm pretty sure both are true
[QUOTE=OutspokenGolf;46950540]how is it victim blaming bullshit when charlie hebdo quite literally had it coming
i don't even think it was avoidable after they got firebombed[/QUOTE]
"had it coming" is victim blaming
look, free speech is great, yeah? it's a cornerstone of civilization to be able to say what you wanna say, but for fuck's sake please be responsible.
It's okay to not like things. But caricatures solely for the purpose of mockery is schoolyard shit
[QUOTE=OutspokenGolf;46950575]look, free speech is great, yeah? it's a cornerstone of civilization to be able to say what you wanna say, but for fuck's sake please be responsible.
It's okay to not like things. But caricatures solely for the purpose of mockery is schoolyard shit[/QUOTE]
And we all know how to deal with schoolyard shit
Bring a gun!
Wait that's for psychopaths.
no, you guys don't understand
charlie hebdo's thing was to be politically and socially defiant and it works great, they sold a lot of copies as a result of this whole affair
but there are entire countries of people that are white knuckle pissed right now because of the way that they just blatantly disrespect their way of life and their religious ideals. it's different to how you or I may see it, if i was to get called a prick or that something i did was stupid, hey, shit, maybe you're right. they honestly believe that this is a direct attack on their way of life. they're nuts, maybe. The attack on the paper's headquarters is an overreaction, sure, but you can say this shit about so many other things, the troubles, self immolating monks, it goes on.
When you are making fun of people who can't or won't laugh along with you, why the fuck are you making fun of them in the first place? it's only funny for you and your dumb buddies and then they get mad enough to do something really stupid that only gives you more material so the cycle can continue.
[QUOTE=deltasquid;46940367]I have trouble with this because it's so damn hard to know where the limit is. I don't want to sound like a reddit atheist but it's sincerely difficult to know where cults or superstitions end and where religion begins. Is Wicca a religion I can't mock? How about Scientology? Satanism or Luciferanism? What about people who sincerely believe illuminati rule the world? All of these could legitimately be people who believe in good faith.[/QUOTE]
Actually, I kind of like Wiccans. At least the ones that I've met. Really, there isn't a difference and the word "cult" shouldn't really have any more of a negative connotation than the term "religion." If a cult is a small religion, then all religions have been cults at one point. When we think of cults, however, we generally just think of either Jones Town or secretive guys in monk robes doing sinister things.
I think the pope thinks that it's morally wrong because someone's faith is very personal, and in some ways, unique to that person. I think he's also trying to enforce the idea that Christianity is not at conflict with Islam.
I think he's advocating his belief or respect and civility. I understand and respect him, but I disagree. I (probably because I'm a young man from the West) believe that nothing should be sacred because it allows anything to be challenged. I do think that there are far more clever approaches that Charlie Hebdo could take (or perhaps I just don't understand his humor yet). But part of having it a social norm for people to say whatever they want is that some people will say something distasteful. But it's hard to define what is and isn't distasteful and I don't think people should cover their mouths in fear of it. Many things such as George Carlin's humor and South Park could be considered distasteful, but are considered brilliant by others.
[QUOTE=The Saiko;46940420]Imagine getting punched in the face by the [U]pope[/U]! What a weird thing for him to say, seriously.
Jesus would turn the other cheek, but the pope is gonna punch you right in the face[/QUOTE]
fits the description of 'facepunch', wouldn't ya say
i'm so sorry.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.