4 ms·

As Philip Pullman so beautifully said (about Christianity, in his case) nobody has the right to never be offended. Video here: http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmar

As Philip Pullman so beautifully said (about Christianity, in his case) nobody has the right to never be offended. Video here: http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/2010/04/philip_pullman.html http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/2010/04/philip_pullman...

pw0ncakes 17y ago
I agree. Obviously, people have the right to depict Mohammed however they wish. Whether they necessarily should is another matter. Offensiveness for its own sake is the province of the Manhattan "high art" world, but (being outside of that world) I don't buy into it as a good thing. I thought South Park was harmless and funny in its 200th and 201st episodes, because the poignancy-to-offensiveness ratio was high (they were pretty inoffensive in their treatment of Islam). What's odd and somewhat inconsistent here is that Islam doesn't forbid only the depiction of Mohammed, but of any of God's creations (defined as the animals including humans). This aversion to depiction isn't rare in human cultures; Renaissance-era Christians considered theatre morally impure and actors were refused Catholic burials at one time. Yet, as far as I know, few Muslims are offended when non-Muslims create cartoons in general, even though strict Muslims aren't allowed to do so. Yet when Mohammed is involved, it's considered to be on a different level.
- MartinCron 17y ago
  Interesting trivia from the good micro-history book "The Immortal Game" is that the classic stylized chess piece shapes that are still used today were adapted from more representative figures specifically to be less offensive to Muslim leaders who didn't approve of the realistic depictions.
foldr 17y ago
Nobody's suggesting that Muslims have a right not to be offended. The point is just that deliberately offending a large group of people is usually a dick move.
- MartinCron 17y ago
  Sure, it's a dick move, but it shouldn't be a crime, let alone a capital crime. Having dicks around is just a price you have to pay to have a free society. To mangle a quote from Voltaire, "I may not like that dick move, but I'll fight to the death for your right to be a dick like that" Update: I don't mean to paint everyone who doesn't like this as wanting to make it against the law. I personally don't like this, just as I don't like flag burning, but I do like and appreciate the fact that it can be done.
  - foldr 17y ago
    Nobody's saying that it should be a crime, either. They're just saying that it's not a good idea to do it. It's kind of silly that you can't argue against this without people assuming that you're in favor of criminalizing the cartoons. You can disapprove of something without wanting there to be a law against it.

pw0ncakes 17y ago

I agree. Obviously, people have the right to depict Mohammed however they wish. Whether they necessarily should is another matter. Offensiveness for its own sake is the province of the Manhattan "high art" world, but (being outside of that world) I don't buy into it as a good thing. I thought South Park was harmless and funny in its 200th and 201st episodes, because the poignancy-to-offensiveness ratio was high (they were pretty inoffensive in their treatment of Islam). What's odd and somewhat inconsistent here is that Islam doesn't forbid only the depiction of Mohammed, but of any of God's creations (defined as the animals including humans). This aversion to depiction isn't rare in human cultures; Renaissance-era Christians considered theatre morally impure and actors were refused Catholic burials at one time. Yet, as far as I know, few Muslims are offended when non-Muslims create cartoons in general, even though strict Muslims aren't allowed to do so. Yet when Mohammed is involved, it's considered to be on a different level.

MartinCron 17y ago
Interesting trivia from the good micro-history book "The Immortal Game" is that the classic stylized chess piece shapes that are still used today were adapted from more representative figures specifically to be less offensive to Muslim leaders who didn't approve of the realistic depictions.

foldr 17y ago

Nobody's suggesting that Muslims have a right not to be offended. The point is just that deliberately offending a large group of people is usually a dick move.

MartinCron 17y ago
Sure, it's a dick move, but it shouldn't be a crime, let alone a capital crime. Having dicks around is just a price you have to pay to have a free society. To mangle a quote from Voltaire, "I may not like that dick move, but I'll fight to the death for your right to be a dick like that" Update: I don't mean to paint everyone who doesn't like this as wanting to make it against the law. I personally don't like this, just as I don't like flag burning, but I do like and appreciate the fact that it can be done.
- foldr 17y ago
  Nobody's saying that it should be a crime, either. They're just saying that it's not a good idea to do it. It's kind of silly that you can't argue against this without people assuming that you're in favor of criminalizing the cartoons. You can disapprove of something without wanting there to be a law against it.