South Park is on...they are censoring the word Muhammad altogether

How childish is that? Where does the American people come into play? Congress? You really think if it was feasible for us to go down a war path nuking as we pleased? Russia secretly hates us and would jump at the chance to join the chance to take us on if there was a chance at victory(i.e. the entire Islamic world wars with us). The Chinese would much rather conquer us then and take our money then wait to get it aid back. Pakistan doesn't like us that much either, and Israel has its own problems to deal with. The rest of the nuclear powers would just watch us burn rather than help us.jeremiah06

Ever heard of MAD? Mutually Assurred Destruction. That ensures that Russia will never fight the US and that the US will never fight Russia. It also works on China. Besides that, however, do you have any idea how much Russia would stand to gain as a bystander? Russia has some of the world's largest oil reserves. A disruption in the middleastern oil supply would be a boon to their economy. Free money! Everyone likes money.

China? China can't conquer Taiwan, much less the United States. China's fatal weakness is the fact that it possesses absolutely no oil reserves of its own. There are no pipelines to pipe oil into China and all of their oil imports rely on oil tankers travelling the sea lanes. Those are sea lanes which the US can shut down at will. The Chinese navy is practically nonexistant. For decades, strategists have pondered the outcome of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Chinese naval transport capacity is so weak, and Taiwan's naval defense is so strong, that there is no way that the Chinese could pull off a conventional invasion of Taiwan. If China could invade Taiwan, they already would have. If the Chinese can't invade a small island 100 miles from their own coast, then what makes you think that they could mount in invasion of another continent an ocean away?

The only thing that China could do is use its nukes, but then that whole, Mutually Assurred Destruction, mechanism nullifies that. The same principle that keeps the Russians from using their nukes on the US keeps the Chinese from using theirs on the US.

Do you really think that any of the nuclear powers would sacrifice their own existance in defense of a middleastern country of questionable allegiance? Do you really think that the Chinese premier would say, "by golly, I know that this will end up killing us all, but we just have to sacrifice all of our lives to defend Libya!"?

The concept of Mutually Assurred Destruction keeps the nuclear powers from annihilating each other, but that concept doesn't stop a nuclear power from annihilating a nonnuclear power.

As a reference, I shall point to the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

EDIT: Why do so many people seriously overestimate Chinese military capacity? Is it that big army that they have? Is it the big mass of poorly equipped infantry that they have? What's so imposing? I just don't see it.

[QUOTE="BiancaDK"][QUOTE="dkrustyklown"]I guarantee you that the rest of the world would shut the fudge up if the US actually reacted this way.dkrustyklown

Oh, puh-lease. If the US nuked one of the middleastern countries, especially after being provoked by their incitement to the murder of American citizens, no one would lift a finger against us. The Russian's would laugh all the way to the bank as oil prices skyrocketed. The Chinese would be paralyzed in indecision, since they wouldn't like the price of oil but they would hate to lose access to the American market. The Pakistanis would be paralyed in fear, knowing that India is waiting right there to shove some missiles up its Indus. Israel would throw a party. France would grumble, but in the end, do nothing. Britain would ask, "how high?" after we told them to jump. None of the other countries matter.

So, um, yeah, nothing really to stop us.

Lets hope you never find out ;) you would be turned on so quick your head would spin though (and Im including your own people in this equation, you would likely be welcoming back civil war).

Lets hope you never find out ;) you would be turned on so quick your head would spin though (and Im including your own people in this equation, you would likely be welcoming back civil war).

SapSacPrime

LOL, really? Civil war? I must have missed the great civil war of 1946, right after the US roasted two Japanese cities, then.

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

All the other religions get made fun of and don't threaten to murder or commit acts of violence against others, why should one religion get a pass? Not everyone has the same moral and ethics and they should not be forced to change their beliefs or ideals because someone said "DO IT OR I'LL KILL YOU!".

The reason I want Muhammad in is because if they bow down and say "Fine we won't do it", it's basically giving the message "If you threaten to kill someone, you will get your way and can violate any rights of free speech" which isn't a great message to send to a radical group.

SpinoRaptor24

This whole "It's a free country we can do what we want" argument you're touting sounds incredibly flawed. What you're saying is it's ok to make fun of someones beliefs because "hey it's a free country" but it's not ok when that person who has been offended retaliates.

Of course I don't approve of Muslim extremists who throw death threats (and I'm pretty sure neither does the Islamic community) but you have to understand that they're doing this because they've been insulted to such an extent. Like I've mentioned this isn't like making fun of a celebrity's bad haircut, it's making fun of Religion, something far, far more serious.

And again, this accounts to all of them. Just because a couple of religions accept being insulted doesn't mean all of them should do the same. The only reason they 'get a pass' as you so claim is because they're defending their honour and beliefs while other religions either don't care about being insulted or are just oblivious.

Thats basically what this country is founded upon. Sorry if you disagree with it. You are free to say what you like without fear of reprisal.

I don't know many civil societies in the world that support "taking the law into your own hands" and attacking people who say something that upsets you. Most places I know would arrest you and put you in prison, not say "Good job! He deserved it!"

Being insulted doesn't give them the right to demand everyone say only what they like. I'm offended when some christians say "God hates homosexuals". But it's their right and I cannot go and attack them because it upsets me. Society does not tolerate hot headed tempers.

No, the only reason they are getting a pass is because they threatened to murder people if they didn't get it. Scientologists and christians also stand up for their beliefs and more often than not, get ignored. The muslim community is getting their way due to threatening to kill the shows creators.

[QUOTE="dkrustyklown"]

[QUOTE="jeremiah06"]Sure if the whole country is willing to go to war over it. I'm 1000% positive America won't war over two dead cartoonist. So, the question is Principle in death? Or shame in life(as if it would really bring you shame)? Really there is a line between courage and stupidity. Color me a coward but there are more important things in life than dying over a offensive image.jeremiah06

If religious leaders in another country call for the death of two American cartoonists and they end being murdered, then yes, the US should wage war. Our hydrogen bombs produce very little residual radiation and would be most effective.

I guarantee you that the rest of the world would shut the fudge up if the US actually reacted this way. Of course it won't happen, however, because our leaders are too wimpy for this. I subscribe to the Curtis Lemay school of foreign policy :twisted:

Since when did the US start giving into the demands of terrorist organizations and allowing them to dictate how Americans operate?

[QUOTE="BiancaDK"][QUOTE="dkrustyklown"]I guarantee you that the rest of the world would shut the fudge up if the US actually reacted this way.dkrustyklown

Oh, puh-lease. If the US nuked one of the middleastern countries, especially after being provoked by their incitement to the murder of American citizens, no one would lift a finger against us. The Russian's would laugh all the way to the bank as oil prices skyrocketed. The Chinese would be paralyzed in indecision, since they wouldn't like the price of oil but they would hate to lose access to the American market. The Pakistanis would be paralyed in fear, knowing that India is waiting right there to shove some missiles up its Indus. Israel would throw a party. France would grumble, but in the end, do nothing. Britain would ask, "how high?" after we told them to jump. None of the other countries matter.

So, um, yeah, nothing really to stop us.

I can assure you some country would. Or some country (most likely Israel, India, Pakistan or North Korea) would take this as the okay to launch nuclear attacks at the slightest provocation and start WW3. The UN would likely toss sanctions and condemn us as would most of the civilised world. You cannot NUKE A COUNTRY because some extremists who may or may not of been affiliated with it killed a US citizen. Well, you can do that, but it'd likely be the last thing your country did. The US isn't an indestructible juggernaut that can do whatever it wants. If America launched nuclear attacks at countries with little provocation, there would be serious hell to pay.

@Pixel Pirate,

I don't have a problem with you defending the right to Freedom of Speech or Freedom of expression. Unfornuately, Freedom of Speech is not free from imperfections & there are limitations when Freedom of Speech becomes Hate Speech which protects individuals, race, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, gender & RELIGION. True, Matt & Trey are just making fun of Prophet Mohammed but the Islamic religion deems it blasphemous so which in turns becomes a Hate Speech because it is forbidden by a religious group. So the question is why do it?

Here's the thing, Pixel Pirate. I'm all for Freedom of Speech but why use such a great liberty that has been given to us (Americans) by our fore fathers in such a profane & moronic way? To my understanding, Freedom of Speech (which is written in the Constitution) is the act of seeking, receiving & imparting information & ideas. Nowhere in there does it say to insult, slander or demean other's beliefs. Do you know why Americans are mocked at everywhere else in the World? It's because we have this notion that Freedom of Speech gives us the ability to insult others & do whatever we want in such a unintelligent manner that makes us look like morons. In actuality, Freedom of Speech/ Freedom of Expression is to pass on great ideas & information. Insulting Prophet Mohammed does nothing except making Americans look like a bunch of ignorant imbeciles & making a group of religious zealots very very mad.

If you still want to defend Matt & Trey's right to Freedom of Speech, that's fine & dandy but do so with knowing what it is about instead of waving it around like a chicken with its head cut off.

This whole "It's a free country we can do what we want" argument you're touting sounds incredibly flawed. What you're saying is it's ok to make fun of someones beliefs because "hey it's a free country" but it's not ok when that person who has been offended retaliates.SpinoRaptor24

There's a significant distinction between exercising the right to free speech, and threatening violence. The retaliation is illegal in that sense; if Muslims made nasty cartoons about the creators of South Park, and Stone and Parker complained, you'd have a point.

@Pixel Pirate,

I don't have a problem with you defending the right to Freedom of Speech or Freedom of expression. Unfornuately, Freedom of Speech is not free from imperfections & there are limitations when Freedom of Speech becomes Hate Speech which protects individuals, race, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, gender & RELIGION. True, Matt & Trey are just making fun of Prophet Mohammed but the Islamic religion deems it blasphemous so which in turns becomes a Hate Speech because it is forbidden by a religious group. So the question is why do it?

Here's the thing, Pixel Pirate. I'm all for Freedom of Speech but why use such a great liberty that has been given to us (Americans) by our fore fathers in such a profane & moronic way? To my understanding, Freedom of Speech (which is written in the Constitution) is the act of seeking, receiving & imparting information & ideas. Nowhere in there does it say to insult, slander or demean other's beliefs. Do you know why Americans are mocked at everywhere else in the World? It's because we have this notion that Freedom of Speech gives us the ability to insult others & do whatever we want in such a unintelligent manner that makes us look like morons. In actuality, Freedom of Speech/ Freedom of Expression is to pass on great ideas & information. Insulting Prophet Mohammed does nothing except making Americans look like a bunch of ignorant imbeciles & making a group of religious zealots very very mad.

If you still want to defend Matt & Trey's right to Freedom of Speech, that's fine & dandy but do so with knowing what it is about instead of waving it around like a chicken with its head cut off.

envybianchi

[QUOTE="dkrustyklown"]

[QUOTE="BiancaDK"] I guarantee you they wouldn't. =)Pixel-Pirate

Oh, puh-lease. If the US nuked one of the middleastern countries, especially after being provoked by their incitement to the murder of American citizens, no one would lift a finger against us. The Russian's would laugh all the way to the bank as oil prices skyrocketed. The Chinese would be paralyzed in indecision, since they wouldn't like the price of oil but they would hate to lose access to the American market. The Pakistanis would be paralyed in fear, knowing that India is waiting right there to shove some missiles up its Indus. Israel would throw a party. France would grumble, but in the end, do nothing. Britain would ask, "how high?" after we told them to jump. None of the other countries matter.

So, um, yeah, nothing really to stop us.

I can assure you some country would. Or some country (most likely Israel, India, Pakistan or North Korea) would take this as the okay to launch nuclear attacks at the slightest provocation and start WW3. The UN would likely toss sanctions and condemn us as would most of the civilised world. You cannot NUKE A COUNTRY because some extremists who may or may not of been affiliated with it killed a US citizen. Well, you can do that, but it'd likely be the last thing your country did. The US isn't an indestructible juggernaut that can do whatever it wants. If America launched nuclear attacks at countries with little provocation, there would be serious hell to pay.

I beg to differ. What stopped WWII? Hmm..... wait a minute! I'm getting a call from Hiroshima & Nagasaki! They want to talk to you. :D

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="dkrustyklown"]

Oh, puh-lease. If the US nuked one of the middleastern countries, especially after being provoked by their incitement to the murder of American citizens, no one would lift a finger against us. The Russian's would laugh all the way to the bank as oil prices skyrocketed. The Chinese would be paralyzed in indecision, since they wouldn't like the price of oil but they would hate to lose access to the American market. The Pakistanis would be paralyed in fear, knowing that India is waiting right there to shove some missiles up its Indus. Israel would throw a party. France would grumble, but in the end, do nothing. Britain would ask, "how high?" after we told them to jump. None of the other countries matter.

So, um, yeah, nothing really to stop us.

envybianchi

I can assure you some country would. Or some country (most likely Israel, India, Pakistan or North Korea) would take this as the okay to launch nuclear attacks at the slightest provocation and start WW3. The UN would likely toss sanctions and condemn us as would most of the civilised world. You cannot NUKE A COUNTRY because some extremists who may or may not of been affiliated with it killed a US citizen. Well, you can do that, but it'd likely be the last thing your country did. The US isn't an indestructible juggernaut that can do whatever it wants. If America launched nuclear attacks at countries with little provocation, there would be serious hell to pay.

I beg to differ. What stopped WWII? Hmm..... wait a minute! I'm getting a call from Hiroshima & Nagasaki! They want to talk to you. :D

[QUOTE="envybianchi"]

@Pixel Pirate,

I don't have a problem with you defending the right to Freedom of Speech or Freedom of expression. Unfornuately, Freedom of Speech is not free from imperfections & there are limitations when Freedom of Speech becomes Hate Speech which protects individuals, race, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, gender & RELIGION. True, Matt & Trey are just making fun of Prophet Mohammed but the Islamic religion deems it blasphemous so which in turns becomes a Hate Speech because it is forbidden by a religious group. So the question is why do it?

Here's the thing, Pixel Pirate. I'm all for Freedom of Speech but why use such a great liberty that has been given to us (Americans) by our fore fathers in such a profane & moronic way? To my understanding, Freedom of Speech (which is written in the Constitution) is the act of seeking, receiving & imparting information & ideas. Nowhere in there does it say to insult, slander or demean other's beliefs. Do you know why Americans are mocked at everywhere else in the World? It's because we have this notion that Freedom of Speech gives us the ability to insult others & do whatever we want in such a unintelligent manner that makes us look like morons. In actuality, Freedom of Speech/ Freedom of Expression is to pass on great ideas & information. Insulting Prophet Mohammed does nothing except making Americans look like a bunch of ignorant imbeciles & making a group of religious zealots very very mad.

If you still want to defend Matt & Trey's right to Freedom of Speech, that's fine & dandy but do so with knowing what it is about instead of waving it around like a chicken with its head cut off.

Danm_999

Are we still talking about the same show here? South Park, right? Was it an educational show? Oh my gawsh! I didn't realize that. I'm sorry.

[QUOTE="Danm_999"][QUOTE="envybianchi"]

@Pixel Pirate,

I don't have a problem with you defending the right to Freedom of Speech or Freedom of expression. Unfornuately, Freedom of Speech is not free from imperfections & there are limitations when Freedom of Speech becomes Hate Speech which protects individuals, race, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, gender & RELIGION. True, Matt & Trey are just making fun of Prophet Mohammed but the Islamic religion deems it blasphemous so which in turns becomes a Hate Speech because it is forbidden by a religious group. So the question is why do it?

Here's the thing, Pixel Pirate. I'm all for Freedom of Speech but why use such a great liberty that has been given to us (Americans) by our fore fathers in such a profane & moronic way? To my understanding, Freedom of Speech (which is written in the Constitution) is the act of seeking, receiving & imparting information & ideas. Nowhere in there does it say to insult, slander or demean other's beliefs. Do you know why Americans are mocked at everywhere else in the World? It's because we have this notion that Freedom of Speech gives us the ability to insult others & do whatever we want in such a unintelligent manner that makes us look like morons. In actuality, Freedom of Speech/ Freedom of Expression is to pass on great ideas & information. Insulting Prophet Mohammed does nothing except making Americans look like a bunch of ignorant imbeciles & making a group of religious zealots very very mad.

If you still want to defend Matt & Trey's right to Freedom of Speech, that's fine & dandy but do so with knowing what it is about instead of waving it around like a chicken with its head cut off.

envybianchi

Are we still talking about the same show here? South Park, right? Was it an educational show? Oh my gawsh! I didn't realize that. I'm sorry.

[QUOTE="envybianchi"]

[QUOTE="Danm_999"] In what sense are they making fun of Mohammed? Their issue is they aren't allowed to depict him at all.Danm_999

Are we still talking about the same show here? South Park, right? Was it an educational show? Oh my gawsh! I didn't realize that. I'm sorry.

So making Prophet Mohammed wear a Bear Costume isn't insulting to the Muslims & the Islamic Religion? I pretty sure when they say NOT to depict Prophet Mohammed, it also includes that. I haven't watched all of South Park's episodes so I didn't know that Prophet Mohammed was shown earlier. If he was, maybe the particular group of Muslims who are threating now didn't know at the time.

I just don't get it. Why do Americans want to do something to offend others? Can't we come up with better ideas to entertain people? "Turns on TV....... turns off TV." Nope, I guess not. Just kidding. I love Adult Swim & all its wacky goodness.

Edit: I'd love to keep on chatting but it's 4 am here. I'm gonna down some Whiskey & force/drink myself to go get some sleep. I love staying up all night but I end up never getting anything done during the day so yeah...... Gotta stay productive & active! Later!

So making Prophet Mohammed wear a Bear Costume isn't insulting to the Muslims & the Islamic Religion? I pretty sure when they say NOT to depict Prophet Mohammed, it also includes that. I haven't watched all of South Park's episodes so I didn't know that Prophet Mohammed was shown earlier. If he was, maybe the particular group of Muslims who are threating now didn't know at the time.envybianchi

Firstly, he was forced to wear the bear costume BECAUSE he wasn't allowed to be shown.

Secondly, in the bear costume, Mohammed didn't move, speak or interact. It was literally a depiction of a bear costume, which was supposed to have Mohammed inside, and it caused controversy. By a slippery slope argument, Muslims should complain each time the Earth or galaxy or universe is depicted, because implicitly somewhere in there Mohammed will be present.

Thirdly, he has already been depicted on South Park, in an infinitely more insulting capacity. Yet it generated zero controversy, because it came before the Danish cartoons.

The complaints are not reasonable.

I just don't get it. Why do Americans want to do something to offend others? Can't we come up with better ideas to entertain people? "Turns on TV....... turns off TV." Nope, I guess not. Just kidding. I love Adult Swim & all its wacky goodness.

envybianchi

Again, this isn't the issue. Nobody has complained that Buddha snorted cocaine during the episode. Nobody has complained about the episodes humiliating depictions of Jesus, Krishna, Moses or Joseph Smith. These all occured in the very same episode for this point; Christians, Buddhists, Jews and Mormons all consider these figures holy. Why can they be depicted?

The issue is, one particular topic is apparently off limits, because violent retaliation is threatened. South Park isn't fighting for the right to belittle Mohammed, they've already done that.

They're fighting for the right to insult who they want, to demonstrate that there aren't immunities and distinctions, and discriminatory limits to free speech.

I love how everyone touts about "free speech" and all that crap, yet when some evidently offended muslims fight back it's "Who are they to threaten us?!" like they're all supposed to sit back and allow their religion to be trampled.

I love how everyone touts about "free speech" and all that crap, yet when some evidently offended muslims fight back it's "Who are they to threaten us?!" like they're all supposed to sit back and allow their religion to be trampled.

SpinoRaptor24

I beg to differ. What stopped WWII? Hmm..... wait a minute! I'm getting a call from Hiroshima & Nagasaki! They want to talk to you. :Denvybianchi

[QUOTE="jeremiah06"] This is truly foolish, You don't think the UN would throw us under the bus after we nuked a whole country over one extremist group because they killed TWO PEOPLE? The pretentious snobbery of your people will soon come to an end... would be the last words we heard before all the world went to war with us!dkrustyklown

ROFL! The UN?!? Ha! What army does the UN have? What's their transport capacity? How many long range missiles to they have in their possession? What's the UN's military industrial capacity?

The UN, pffft, ROFL! Ever heard of a security council veto? Do you know what that is?

I already explained why the nuclear powers would do nothing. The Russians would have much to gain as bystanders and too much to lose as combatants. The Chinese are too economically intertwined with the US to do anything (their export market depends on the US, plus the US owes them money...money which I assume they will want back some day), the Pakistani's are scared of India. The Israelis would cheer us on. The French just aren't up to it. The British, well, they just do what we tell them to do.

As for the rest of the countries, their combined arms, all of them, wouldn't amount to squat. Number of US nuclear warheads=over 5,000. Number of nuclear warheads between all of the countries other than China, Russia, France, Israel, Pakistan, India, and Britain=3 (North Korea...and with a horrible delivery system).

Hmmm....5,000 vs 3? I wonder how that would turn out?

EDIT: Oh, and nevermind that a big chunk really wouldn't care if the US did that, either. I'm originally from Spain, and I can guarantee you that Spanish people would not fight a world war to avenge the destruction of a middleastern country. I really don't know of any country outside of the middle east that would fight that war agains the US. I think that you would be surprised by just how many countries remained silent in secret support of the US.

I know the Spanish, and I know that they would not fight a war on behalf of people that they call Moors. I don't think that the Portuguese, Austrians, Hungarians, Bulgarians, Serbs, Romanians, Italians, Greeks, or Armenians would fight such a war, either.

EDIT#2: Also, I never suggested that the US nuke a country because of extremists murdering our citizens. I suggested it as a response to another country calling for and inciting the murder of US citizens. There is a difference.

I love how everyone touts about "free speech" and all that crap, yet when some evidently offended muslims fight back it's "Who are they to threaten us?!" like they're all supposed to sit back and allow their religion to be trampled.

SpinoRaptor24

I love how everyone touts about "free speech" and all that crap, yet when some evidently offended muslims fight back it's "Who are they to threaten us?!" like they're all supposed to sit back and allow their religion to be trampled.

SpinoRaptor24

I love how everyone touts about "free speech" and all that crap, yet when some evidently offended muslims fight back it's "Who are they to threaten us?!" like they're all supposed to sit back and allow their religion to be trampled.

SpinoRaptor24

[QUOTE="Famiking"]Why do they even bother airing episodes with Mohammed in it? The reason they're offended is because he's in it. Not because they made him a bear or something. And no, I don't think it's determental to free speech. If you're going to do something stupid/disrespectful, then you have to accept any criticism that's thrown at you.GabuEx

Why would they not air it? Muslims should not be special-cased to be protected from parody they might find offensive when members of other religions are not.

[QUOTE="SpinoRaptor24"]

I love how everyone touts about "free speech" and all that crap, yet when some evidently offended muslims fight back it's "Who are they to threaten us?!" like they're all supposed to sit back and allow their religion to be trampled.

Danm_999

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="Famiking"]Why do they even bother airing episodes with Mohammed in it? The reason they're offended is because he's in it. Not because they made him a bear or something. And no, I don't think it's determental to free speech. If you're going to do something stupid/disrespectful, then you have to accept any criticism that's thrown at you.Jaguar_Shade

Why would they not air it? Muslims should not be special-cased to be protected from parody they might find offensive when members of other religions are not.

Who are you to say what kind of free speech is legal or not? What if I decide that depicting people's religions is illegal? SquatsAreAwesom

[QUOTE="Danm_999"][QUOTE="SpinoRaptor24"]

I love how everyone touts about "free speech" and all that crap, yet when some evidently offended muslims fight back it's "Who are they to threaten us?!" like they're all supposed to sit back and allow their religion to be trampled.

SquatsAreAwesom

I think you should get your head out of the sand. It was one blogger, no 2 Billion people who made a statement. SquatsAreAwesom

[QUOTE="Danm_999"][QUOTE="SpinoRaptor24"]

I love how everyone touts about "free speech" and all that crap, yet when some evidently offended muslims fight back it's "Who are they to threaten us?!" like they're all supposed to sit back and allow their religion to be trampled.

SquatsAreAwesom

[QUOTE="SquatsAreAwesom"]Who are you to say what kind of free speech is legal or not? What if I decide that depicting people's religions is illegal? Engrish_Major

[QUOTE="Jaguar_Shade"][QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Why would they not air it? Muslims should not be special-cased to be protected from parody they might find offensive when members of other religions are not.

SquatsAreAwesom

Eh, not sure if serious. Neither is illegal unless you YOURSELF are confining the limits of free speech.SquatsAreAwesom

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"][QUOTE="SquatsAreAwesom"]Who are you to say what kind of free speech is legal or not? What if I decide that depicting people's religions is illegal? SquatsAreAwesom

[QUOTE="SquatsAreAwesom"]Eh, not sure if serious. Neither is illegal unless you YOURSELF are confining the limits of free speech.Engrish_Major

[QUOTE="SquatsAreAwesom"][QUOTE="Engrish_Major"]Showing a person on TV = legal. Telling people to murder someone = illegal. It's not that difficult to tell the difference.Danm_999

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"][QUOTE="SquatsAreAwesom"]Eh, not sure if serious. Neither is illegal unless you YOURSELF are confining the limits of free speech.SquatsAreAwesom

The US court system has absolutely nothing to do with this. The United States does not govern the Internet. In fact, it is hilarious that you do not see your own hypocrisy. On one hand South Park intimidates and you have a blogger flip out. On the other hand, this flip out that occurs on his blog, in which he exercising the right to HIS Freedom of Speech is met with an even greater flip out from hypocrites. SquatsAreAwesom

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"][QUOTE="SquatsAreAwesom"]Eh, not sure if serious. Neither is illegal unless you YOURSELF are confining the limits of free speech.SquatsAreAwesom

Yes, it does. Reno v. ACLU ruled that the First Amendment applies the same on the internet as it does in print, TV, the real world, when it occurs in the USA, and in this instance it did.

You seem confused about how free speech works. When you incite violence, it ends. By implying that Stone and Parker should shut up or they might meet an unfortunate fate, then posting their home and business addresses, the blogger has done exactly that.

Moreover, how has South Park intimidated Muslims?

@Pixel Pirate,

I don't have a problem with you defending the right to Freedom of Speech or Freedom of expression. Unfornuately, Freedom of Speech is not free from imperfections & there are limitations when Freedom of Speech becomes Hate Speech which protects individuals, race, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, gender & RELIGION. True, Matt & Trey are just making fun of Prophet Mohammed but the Islamic religion deems it blasphemous so which in turns becomes a Hate Speech because it is forbidden by a religious group. So the question is why do it?

Here's the thing, Pixel Pirate. I'm all for Freedom of Speech but why use such a great liberty that has been given to us (Americans) by our fore fathers in such a profane & moronic way? To my understanding, Freedom of Speech (which is written in the Constitution) is the act of seeking, receiving & imparting information & ideas. Nowhere in there does it say to insult, slander or demean other's beliefs. Do you know why Americans are mocked at everywhere else in the World? It's because we have this notion that Freedom of Speech gives us the ability to insult others & do whatever we want in such a unintelligent manner that makes us look like morons. In actuality, Freedom of Speech/ Freedom of Expression is to pass on great ideas & information. Insulting Prophet Mohammed does nothing except making Americans look like a bunch of ignorant imbeciles & making a group of religious zealots very very mad.

If you still want to defend Matt & Trey's right to Freedom of Speech, that's fine & dandy but do so with knowing what it is about instead of waving it around like a chicken with its head cut off.

envybianchi

The US has no such limitations on freedom of speech with regards to hatespeech. This is why the KKK and other hate groups can exist.

So Americans are mocked because we don't execute/imprison people for saying things someone else doesn't like? Or for defying some ancient scripture we may not believe in? Why should Matt and Trey be held to muslim beliefs if they are not muslim?

I don't have to respect someones religion, there is no law that requires this, I have the freedom to say what I want and it should not be taken away because an extremist group threatens me.

I'd much rather defend Matt and Treys right to free speech over an extremist groups non-existant right to threaten to murder people if they don't change their beliefs/actions. I don't necessarily agree or disagree with what Matt or Trey said. But I cannot fathom how someone can somehow think they are the bad guys here and an extremist group bordering on terrorism are the good guys here just defending their beliefs. You can defend your beliefs all you like. You cannot go around attacking people if you dislike what they say.

If I was a muslim, I'd be upset at the people protesting this. Why? Because this paints an extremely bad image for muslims. That if you don't agree with them/say what they don't like, they'll hurt you. This is a stereotype rather commonly believed in America. If I was Muslim I would not support a radical group making the people of my religion look violent.

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="dkrustyklown"]

Oh, puh-lease. If the US nuked one of the middleastern countries, especially after being provoked by their incitement to the murder of American citizens, no one would lift a finger against us. The Russian's would laugh all the way to the bank as oil prices skyrocketed. The Chinese would be paralyzed in indecision, since they wouldn't like the price of oil but they would hate to lose access to the American market. The Pakistanis would be paralyed in fear, knowing that India is waiting right there to shove some missiles up its Indus. Israel would throw a party. France would grumble, but in the end, do nothing. Britain would ask, "how high?" after we told them to jump. None of the other countries matter.

So, um, yeah, nothing really to stop us.

envybianchi

I can assure you some country would. Or some country (most likely Israel, India, Pakistan or North Korea) would take this as the okay to launch nuclear attacks at the slightest provocation and start WW3. The UN would likely toss sanctions and condemn us as would most of the civilised world. You cannot NUKE A COUNTRY because some extremists who may or may not of been affiliated with it killed a US citizen. Well, you can do that, but it'd likely be the last thing your country did. The US isn't an indestructible juggernaut that can do whatever it wants. If America launched nuclear attacks at countries with little provocation, there would be serious hell to pay.

I beg to differ. What stopped WWII? Hmm..... wait a minute! I'm getting a call from Hiroshima & Nagasaki! They want to talk to you. :D

Do you really think a global conflict in which only the US had such weapons and in which the world was united against one common enemy would be the same as the US nuking countries at random for vague reasons?

Really?

[QUOTE="Danm_999"][QUOTE="envybianchi"]

Are we still talking about the same show here? South Park, right? Was it an educational show? Oh my gawsh! I didn't realize that. I'm sorry.

envybianchi

So making Prophet Mohammed wear a Bear Costume isn't insulting to the Muslims & the Islamic Religion? I pretty sure when they say NOT to depict Prophet Mohammed, it also includes that. I haven't watched all of South Park's episodes so I didn't know that Prophet Mohammed was shown earlier. If he was, maybe the particular group of Muslims who are threating now didn't know at the time.

And the Christian religion says not to be homosexual. But we don't force people to become straight or force people to change because one religion dislikes something. The US is not a muslim country. It is under no requirement to enforce the beliefs of the Muslim religion. Why, again, does the Muslim religion get special treatment?

This isn't a Theocracy. Jesus is portrayed in negative light quite often, and no one threatens others because of it or arrests others because of it.

[QUOTE="envybianchi"]

@Pixel Pirate,

I don't have a problem with you defending the right to Freedom of Speech or Freedom of expression. Unfornuately, Freedom of Speech is not free from imperfections & there are limitations when Freedom of Speech becomes Hate Speech which protects individuals, race, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, gender & RELIGION. True, Matt & Trey are just making fun of Prophet Mohammed but the Islamic religion deems it blasphemous so which in turns becomes a Hate Speech because it is forbidden by a religious group. So the question is why do it?

Here's the thing, Pixel Pirate. I'm all for Freedom of Speech but why use such a great liberty that has been given to us (Americans) by our fore fathers in such a profane & moronic way? To my understanding, Freedom of Speech (which is written in the Constitution) is the act of seeking, receiving & imparting information & ideas. Nowhere in there does it say to insult, slander or demean other's beliefs. Do you know why Americans are mocked at everywhere else in the World? It's because we have this notion that Freedom of Speech gives us the ability to insult others & do whatever we want in such a unintelligent manner that makes us look like morons. In actuality, Freedom of Speech/ Freedom of Expression is to pass on great ideas & information. Insulting Prophet Mohammed does nothing except making Americans look like a bunch of ignorant imbeciles & making a group of religious zealots very very mad.

If you still want to defend Matt & Trey's right to Freedom of Speech, that's fine & dandy but do so with knowing what it is about instead of waving it around like a chicken with its head cut off.

Pixel-Pirate

The US has no such limitations on freedom of speech with regards to hatespeech. This is why the KKK and other hate groups can exist.

So Americans are mocked because we don't execute/imprison people for saying things someone else doesn't like? Or for defying some ancient scripture we may not believe in? Why should Matt and Trey be held to muslim beliefs if they are not muslim?

I don't have to respect someones religion, there is no law that requires this, I have the freedom to say what I want and it should not be taken away because an extremist group threatens me.

I'd much rather defend Matt and Treys right to free speech over an extremist groups non-existant right to threaten to murder people if they don't change their beliefs/actions. I don't necessarily agree or disagree with what Matt or Trey said. But I cannot fathom how someone can somehow think they are the bad guys here and an extremist group bordering on terrorism are the good guys here just defending their beliefs. You can defend your beliefs all you like. You cannot go around attacking people if you dislike what they say.

If I was a muslim, I'd be upset at the people protesting this. Why? Because this paints an extremely bad image for muslims. That if you don't agree with them/say what they don't like, they'll hurt you. This is a stereotype rather commonly believed in America. If I was Muslim I would not support a radical group making the people of my religion look violent.

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="envybianchi"]

@Pixel Pirate,

I don't have a problem with you defending the right to Freedom of Speech or Freedom of expression. Unfornuately, Freedom of Speech is not free from imperfections & there are limitations when Freedom of Speech becomes Hate Speech which protects individuals, race, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, gender & RELIGION. True, Matt & Trey are just making fun of Prophet Mohammed but the Islamic religion deems it blasphemous so which in turns becomes a Hate Speech because it is forbidden by a religious group. So the question is why do it?

Here's the thing, Pixel Pirate. I'm all for Freedom of Speech but why use such a great liberty that has been given to us (Americans) by our fore fathers in such a profane & moronic way? To my understanding, Freedom of Speech (which is written in the Constitution) is the act of seeking, receiving & imparting information & ideas. Nowhere in there does it say to insult, slander or demean other's beliefs. Do you know why Americans are mocked at everywhere else in the World? It's because we have this notion that Freedom of Speech gives us the ability to insult others & do whatever we want in such a unintelligent manner that makes us look like morons. In actuality, Freedom of Speech/ Freedom of Expression is to pass on great ideas & information. Insulting Prophet Mohammed does nothing except making Americans look like a bunch of ignorant imbeciles & making a group of religious zealots very very mad.

If you still want to defend Matt & Trey's right to Freedom of Speech, that's fine & dandy but do so with knowing what it is about instead of waving it around like a chicken with its head cut off.

Danm_999

The US has no such limitations on freedom of speech with regards to hatespeech. This is why the KKK and other hate groups can exist.

So Americans are mocked because we don't execute/imprison people for saying things someone else doesn't like? Or for defying some ancient scripture we may not believe in? Why should Matt and Trey be held to muslim beliefs if they are not muslim?

I don't have to respect someones religion, there is no law that requires this, I have the freedom to say what I want and it should not be taken away because an extremist group threatens me.

I'd much rather defend Matt and Treys right to free speech over an extremist groups non-existant right to threaten to murder people if they don't change their beliefs/actions. I don't necessarily agree or disagree with what Matt or Trey said. But I cannot fathom how someone can somehow think they are the bad guys here and an extremist group bordering on terrorism are the good guys here just defending their beliefs. You can defend your beliefs all you like. You cannot go around attacking people if you dislike what they say.

If I was a muslim, I'd be upset at the people protesting this. Why? Because this paints an extremely bad image for muslims. That if you don't agree with them/say what they don't like, they'll hurt you. This is a stereotype rather commonly believed in America. If I was Muslim I would not support a radical group making the people of my religion look violent.

That seems somewhat milky at best. A KKK rally in a mainly black area is likely to incite violence, but it is allowed. You can't do it with the intention of trying to start violence.

[QUOTE="SquatsAreAwesom"][QUOTE="Engrish_Major"]Not me. The US court system. Post a blog stating that you're going to kill someone (or instructions to do so) and see how long until the FBI comes a'knockin.Danm_999

Yes, it does. Reno v. ACLU ruled that the First Amendment applies the same on the internet as it does in print, TV, the real world, when it occurs in the USA, and in this instance it did.

You seem confused about how free speech works. When you incite violence, it ends. By implying that Stone and Parker should shut up or they might meet an unfortunate fate, then posting their home and business addresses, the blogger has done exactly that.

Moreover, how has South Park intimidated Muslims?

[QUOTE="SquatsAreAwesom"][QUOTE="Engrish_Major"]Not me. The US court system. Post a blog stating that you're going to kill someone (or instructions to do so) and see how long until the FBI comes a'knockin.Danm_999

Yes, it does. Reno v. ACLU ruled that the First Amendment applies the same on the internet as it does in print, TV, the real world, when it occurs in the USA, and in this instance it did.

You seem confused about how free speech works. When you incite violence, it ends. By implying that Stone and Parker should shut up or they might meet an unfortunate fate, then posting their home and business addresses, the blogger has done exactly that.

Moreover, how has South Park intimidated Muslims?

Gotta love how Islam gets special treatment. As if picturing Buddha snorting cocaine or Jesus watching porn isn't offensive...

Whoever is making these threats needs to go move to a different country. Here in America, there's this little thing called free speech. Who the hell are you to say that you're religion deserves special protection.

Gotta love how Islam gets special treatment. As if picturing Buddha snorting cocaine or Jesus watching porn isn't offensive...

Whoever is making these threats needs to go move to a different country. Here in America, there's this little thing called free speech. Who the hell are you to say that you're religion deserves special protection.

SpartanMSU

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]Why would they not air it? Muslims should not be special-cased to be protected from parody they might find offensive when members of other religions are not.

MrGeezer

Perhaps because Comedy Central is in the business of making money? They can choose to protect their image in whatever way they see fit. And if Parker and Stone have a problem with that, then they can end their relationship with Comedy Central and start distributing their little cartoons themselves.

Unless this "censorship" was government mandated, then Comedy Central can choose to not show whatever the **** they feel like not showing, and for ANY reason. They should absolutely be allowed to make a "special case" for Muslims, because that's how free speech works.

Yes we know that. But the whole point is that they're censoring his image because Muslim groups are going crazy over it. No other religion gets treatment like that.