NationStates Jolt Archive

Are they going to abandon thier principles and "Self Regulate" speech? One more step down the slippery-slope?


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060209/wl_nm/religion_cartoons_eu_dc_1;_ylt=AnHF7BJCyrsGiYwrL2yJ8djbEfQA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

EU mulls media code after cartoon protests

Wed Feb 8, 11:03 PM ET

LONDON (Reuters) - The
European Union may try to draw up a media code of conduct to avoid a repeat of the furor caused by the publication across Europe of cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad, an EU commissioner said on Thursday.
ADVERTISEMENT

In an interview with Britain's Daily Telegraph, EU Justice and Security Commissioner Franco Frattini said the charter would encourage the media to show "prudence" when covering religion.

The EU nations can always ignore the legislation altogether though, and it hasn't even passed.

The EU nations can always ignore the legislation altogether though, and it hasn't even passed.

I hope the citizens of the EU take action now to send a clear message to Brussels that this type of legislation is not wanted.

I hope the citizens of the EU take action now to send a clear message to Brussels that this type of legislation is not wanted.
As do I. Most nations with a firm commitment to free speech will see right through this. That said, with Austria in the EU's throne, I don't think this will get much attention. Austria is more concerned about the Constitution.

I hope the citizens of the EU take action now to send a clear message to Brussels that this type of legislation is not wanted.
My question is why the EU even thought that legislating on such a divisive issue would be the sort of thing the EU should be about. It completely beggars belief.

What's the freaking problem.

So your media has to tone it down when it comes to religion. It was blatant that this Muslim cartoon had nothing to do with free speech BS, but was an attack on Islam when the Danish editor to the cartoons turned down cartoons that would depict Jesus in a bad light.

SO tough luck, unless you are jst as racist or bigoted as the newpapers that printed these cartoons.

It is not like your going to die or anything.

What's the freaking problem.

So your media has to tone it down when it comes to religion. It was blatant that this Muslim cartoon had nothing to do with free speech BS, but was an attack on Islam when the Danish editor to the cartoons turned down cartoons that would depict Jesus in a bad light.

SO tough luck, unless you are jst as racist or bigoted as the newpapers that printed these cartoons.

It is not like your going to die or anything.

Is living without liberty life at all?

I wonder how long until the non-religious have to wear duct tape on our mouths?

Is living without liberty life at all?
Some people really don't value freedom of speech. I wonder if he had it taken from him, what would he say?

Is living without liberty life at all?

Of course.

What's the freaking problem.

So your media has to tone it down when it comes to religion. It was blatant that this Muslim cartoon had nothing to do with free speech BS, but was an attack on Islam when the Danish editor to the cartoons turned down cartoons that would depict Jesus in a bad light.

SO tough luck, unless you are jst as racist or bigoted as the newpapers that printed these cartoons.

It is not like your going to die or anything.
Oh PLEASE. People have insulted Christianity far worse without anyone ever revoking the freedom of speech. It satirised Islam, but it hardly called for Muslims to be attacked and so on.

Of course.

It is existence, but it is not life.

Some people really don't value freedom of speech. I wonder if he had it taken from him, what would he say?

Nothing much?

Nothing much?
I wouldn't be so sure :p

It is not like your going to die or anything.

Nor were they. A free society requires that you tolerate ideas and expression the you find offensive or distasteful and sometimes deeply, deeply offensive.

If you are a muslim, and it bothers you that much, don't read the newspaper that prints the cartoons. It is as simple as that.

A large reason why the EU may want to enact this is because the politicians who have Muslim constituencies want to look good and get votes.

Now, my view on the cartoons. I'm not a Muslim(atheism rules!:cool: ), so they didn't offend me, and I found some of them quite funny. However, they were in bad taste, and these cartoons aren't the best thing for Europe, politically. And I fully respect the rights of Muslims to protest these cartoons. However, inciting violence is not acceptable, and the police should crack down on those who wave signs that say "Kill all defilers" and deport them. They're a danger to Western society, as far as I'm concerned.

Then again, I live in America. We still remember 9/11, and if these kinds of protests happened, we would crack down on these scumbags and have them deported with no second thoughts. In fact, I wouldn't surprised if some of them would be killed, and frankly, I can't say Iwould have any sympathy towards them (the ones that incite violence, I've got nothing against peaceful protest).

Nor were they. A free society requires that you tolerate ideas and expression the you find offensive or distasteful and sometimes deeply, deeply offensive.

If you are a muslim, and it bothers you that much, don't read the newspaper that prints the cartoons. It is as simple as that.
Exactly. If they want to live in a democratic society, they have to learn to play by its rules.

Thing is, I'm not a Muslim. I am a Heathen, but to you Christian dudes, you like to blame the Pagans and heathens for the Holocaust but that is another subject.

The point is, why can't you have some religious tolerence. What is the problem of toning it down;

so as the editor did with the Christian cartoons which is a fact, you turn down the Muslim cartoons. What is so hard with that.

Is that hurting your freedom of speech. No!

This is religious discrimination, immediately after it came out about they didn't print the Christian Cartoons. So tough luck if you can't be racist or bigoted to another religion.

Thing is, I'm not a Muslim. I am a Heathen, but to you Christian dudes, you like to blame the Pagans and heathens for the Holocaust but that is another subject.

The point is, why can't you have some religious tolerence. What is the problem of toning it down;

so as the editor did with the Christian cartoons which is a fact, you turn down the Muslim cartoons. What is so hard with that.

Is that hurting your freedom of speech. No!

This is religious discrimination, immediately after it came out about they didn't print the Christian Cartoons. So tough luck if you can't be racist or bigoted to another religion.

I am an atheist. I find much that is said by many religious people offensive. Also, if I was as thin skinned as much of the religious community, probably very hurtful. Yet I recognize their right to hold and publish such opinions. A democracy -a functioning one at least - should be a marketplace of ideas, free as far as possible from government interference. Therefore, I toleratethe religious, and their opinions, and do not ask that much of their scripture be banned, even though it discriminates against me.

I support the right of the newspaper to publish this. I would support the right of a muslim owned newspaper to publish anti-christian cartoons.

We Americans don't cave in to extremists...

We "elect" them.

I'm not quite sure what to think of the idea of self regulation in this case. Most of the western media already seems cowed into submission by not even reprinting the cartoons in context. This is where it gets murky though: if someone tells you that bees are peaceful, hardworking creatures so you kick a beehive to show them how horribly violent and nasty bees can be, are they going to thank you for putting them on the right track or are they going to call you a dumbass for kicking a beehive and stirring up so much trouble?

Perhaps we should all just take this moment to step aside and listen to the great American poet laureate , Ann Coulter, and ponder before deciding on our next move... ;)

Wed Feb 8, 8:16 PM ET

As my regular readers know, I've long been skeptical of the "Religion of Peace" moniker for Muslims -- for at least 3,000 reasons right off the top of my head. I think the evidence is going my way this week.

The culture editor of a newspaper in Denmark suspected writers and cartoonists were engaging in self-censorship when it came to the Religion of Peace. It was subtle things, like a Danish comedian's statement, paraphrased by The New York Times, "that he had no problem urinating on the Bible but that he would not dare do the same to the Qur’an."

So, after verifying that his life insurance premiums were paid up, the editor expressly requested cartoons of Muhammad from every cartoonist with a Danish cartoon syndicate. Out of 40 cartoonists, only 10 accepted the invitation, most of them submitting utterly neutral drawings with no political content whatsoever.

But three cartoons made political points.

One showed Muhammad turning away suicide bombers from the gates of heaven, saying "Stop, stop -- we ran out of virgins!" -- which I believe was a commentary on Muslims' predilection for violence. Another was a cartoon of Muhammad with horns, which I believe was a commentary on Muslims' predilection for violence. The third showed Muhammad with a turban in the shape of a bomb, which I believe was an expression of post-industrial ennui in a secular -- oops, no, wait: It was more of a commentary on Muslims' predilection for violence.

In order to express their displeasure with the idea that Muslims are violent, thousands of Muslims around the world engaged in rioting, arson, mob savagery, flag-burning, murder and mayhem, among other peaceful acts of nonviolence.

Muslims are the only people who make feminists seem laid-back.

The little darlings brandish placards with typical Religion of Peace slogans, such as: "Behead Those Who Insult Islam," "Europe, you will pay, extermination is on the way" and "Butcher those who mock Islam." They warn Europe of their own impending 9/11 with signs that say: "Europe: Your 9/11 will come" -- which is ironic, because they almost had me convinced the Jews were behind the 9/11 attack.

The rioting Muslims claim they are upset because Islam prohibits any depictions of Muhammad -- though the text is ambiguous on beheadings, suicide bombings and flying planes into skyscrapers.
The belief that Islam forbids portrayals of Muhammad is recently acquired. Back when Muslims created things, rather than blowing them up, they made paintings, frescoes, miniatures and prints of Muhammad.

But apparently the Quran is like the Constitution: It's a "living document," capable of sprouting all-new provisions at will. Muslims ought to start claiming the Quran also prohibits indoor plumbing, to explain their lack of it.

Other interpretations of the Quran forbid images of humans or animals, which makes even a child's coloring book blasphemous. That's why the Taliban blew up those priceless Buddhist statues, bless their innocent, peace-loving little hearts.

Largely unnoticed in this spectacle is the blinding fact that one nation is missing from the long list of Muslim countries (by which I mean France and England) with hundreds of crazy Muslims experiencing bipolar rage over some cartoons: Iraq. Hey -- maybe this democracy thing does work! The barbaric behavior of Europe's Muslims suggests that the European welfare state may not be attracting your top-notch Muslims.

Making the rash assumption for purposes of discussion that Islam is a religion and not a car-burning cult, even a real religion can't go bossing around other people like this.

Catholics aren't short on rules, but they couldn't care less if non-Catholics use birth control. Conservative Jews have no interest in forbidding other people from mixing meat and dairy. Protestants don't make a peep about other people eating food off one another's plates. (Just stay away from our plates -- that's disgusting.)

But Muslims think they can issue decrees about what images can appear in newspaper cartoons. Who do they think they are, liberals?

Self regulation or not, will it work or is it a pointless rest area while we await the next crisis?

Notice how it said "Code of Conduct". I have my doubts whether they could make it legally binding, because that's what would really hurt them in the next elections.

It's more like an official statement saying: "We believe good manners are..."

To be honest, I don't see how it helps, but if it's not binding, it doesn't matter anyways.

By the way: Self-Regulation does work, even for the Jyllands-Posten (which is afterall a right-wing paper). You just have to want to.
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,399653,00.html
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,399840,00.html

Nothing much?

You sir, are the wit of the day.

Thing is, I'm not a Muslim. I am a Heathen, but to you Christian dudes, you like to blame the Pagans and heathens for the Holocaust but that is another subject.

Yes, it is another subject. But you sound like you blame Christianity for the Holocaust.

Man, it had nothing to do with Christianity. The Holocaust was carried out by people with Nazi beliefs. And Nazism, while not a religion, can be alot like North Korea's Juche: Political beliefs so strong that they act like a religion.

Yes, but anti-Christian material is nothing new in Europe. People are used to it, and Christianity has had to endure a shitload of attacks from everywhere for a very long time. And nothing has really happened. You don't get "international outrage" and "embargoes" towards countries whom repress Christianity.

Whereas you make a satirisation of Mohammed, you get mass protests and extreme anger. Go figure.

I fully support the right to publish the cartoons. Otherwise it is just unfair censorship. As a Christian, I also fully support the right to publish anti-Christian material. It happens, oh yes. People are always bitching about "anti-Muslim" politics, but it should be obvious that there really are no policies directed against the Islamic community.

The Muslims have their right to be pissed off. I myself become really quite nettled when I see this kind of stuff insulting my dear religion. Yet I don't go and protest it, because you cannot stop this kind of sentiment or belief.