[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="MobilechicaneX"]
I'm ok with this. Like the other guy said, Islam should adjust to Europe. Not the other way around.
And why is it that Islam gets a free pass when it comes to things such as this compared to other religions?
DroidPhysX
Why should Muslims (or anyone) adjust to Europe when Europeans never cared about adjusting to the places they went?I'm seeing something wrong here.
Europeans is not a religion. Secondly, the European culture is common to say, the American culture. Much more than Islam is to Europe.
In the middle east, women (god forbid i offend people when i say this) still live in the stone age where they are treated like crap and are inferior in every way possible. I mean, a woman can get raped and she can be sentenced to death by stoning. You draw a picture of Mohammed, nope you can expect killings and violence very soon.
I can draw a flagrant picture of Jesus and not get hounded, but if i draw one about Mohammed, the middle east is going crazy. Whats up with that?
Couple of things here. One, the way women are treated in some middle eastern countries is horrid, I won't argue with that. However, there are some middle eastern countries that are becoming quite progressive, I think there's even one with a majority of women in the legislature (how many western countries can say that?). Two, European Christianity wen through similar phases. How recent was women's sufferage? Not so long ago it was legal to beat wives so long as you used a stick the size of your thumb. I won't argue that we have come a long way, but we have to remember that we actually had to take a path to get there, it wasn't just automatic. Three, when we're talking about burqas, that's not always something that's imposed on women, most women who wear them also support the practice. Personally I disagree with it and think that's it's still a form of oppression even if the women agree with it (the full-length coverings, not the hijab), but then again I could say that about the way the Catholic Church operates and Catholics would jump down my throat. Just because I don't see eye-to-eye with religious practices doesn't mean they should be banned.
Four, Christianity has also been through various phases of iconoclasm, it's not like Muslims were the first people who invented the idea. Lastly, I don't agree with killing people because of a drawing, but I also don't agree with the way a lot of westerners try to antagonize Mulsims in this regard. The Dutch cartoonist, I support that, it's him expressing himself artistically. Draw Muhammed day, on the other hand, while I do support their right to do so I feel that it wasn't a matter of expression, it was direct antagonism and I see no benefit to that. I think the problem is that there are plenty of Muslims who, while they don't agree with depictions of Muhammed, take such teachings only on a personal level and don't go around trying to impose that viewpoint on everyone else. To them DMD is an attack; perhaps it was prompted by extremist actions, but they probably feel that they have done all they can to reconcile their beliefs with societal norms, and in exchange for that westerners are completely disrespecting their beliefs not because they see some artistic merit in it, but simply in order to antagonize. I think that's what worlock was trying to say, there are so many Muslims who do adapt culturally and yet they're the ones who suffer because of western fixation on extremist beliefs.
Log in to comment