Any religion that can't stand ridicule is not doing what religion ought to do.

[Ron Green]

That is, bringing peace and accord to the world. And laughing at itself. And forgiving others. And leading by example.

What I've seen of "Charlie Hebdo" is ungracious and needlessly provocative, but whover's lampooned has got to learn to be big.

[Scootaloo]

1. it never ceases to amaze me...

A christian guns down schoolchildren, and he's just "a nut with a gun"

A Jew opens fire on worshippers at a mosque, and he's just "a nut with a gun"

A Muslim kills twelve cartoonists, and 1.7 billion people are guilty of murder and need to explain their existence.

Isn't that weird, how somehow, only Muslim lunatics speak for every muslim on earth, while christian and jewish lunatics get to be, well, lunatics, instead of representatives?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

2. this.

[Warren Stupidity]

5. Well where did the op say "1.7 billion people are guilty of murder"?

I don't actually see that there.

What never ceases to amaze me is that religiously inspired people commit horrible crimes and for some reason it just is never a problem with religion.

[Scootaloo]

8. Well, the entire religion is being held responsible. There's 1.7 billion Muslims on this earth

The religion is minding its manners just fine, judging from the fact that the vast, overwhelming majority of those peopel are behaving like anyone else in the world.

But when two,, or perhaps three assholes decide to be "religiously inspired" dickheads, it's never christian's fault. it's never jews' fault. it's never buddhists or Hindu's fault. Their crazies are always just crazy. Their assholes are just assholes. But when it's a Muslim doing it? Suddenly the entire religion and all its people are called to the carpet to answer for it. Top to bottom, all of them are guilty by association.

This standard is only ever applied to muslims. And I think that's amazing.

[Warren Stupidity]

11. Ah, so the poster never said that, you just made it up.

The poster attacked a religious ideology that has been used repeatedly to justify mass slaughter. You created a strawman to attack the poster. Good job.

[Scootaloo]

15. No, that's exactly what is being said

That you happen to agree with the sentiment doesn't change it.

[Dreamer Tatum]

44. No, you really did make that up. nt

[geek tragedy]

13. the issue is that people are being killed for offending one and only one religion.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/no-one-murdered-because-of-this-image,29553/

there will be blowback because of this.

eventually, people will have to stop rioting over Koran burnings, and shitty b-movies, and cartoons.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/egypt-protesters-us-embassy_n_1874247.html

[Scootaloo]

16. Not quite true. That image has slaughtered countless brain cells

and has undoubtedly caused no small number of eye injuries.

[REP]

18. Or this one, that was actually published in a well-known satire magazine

[geek tragedy]

19. and that same satire mag wouldn't dare run the Charlie Ebdo cartoons, for obvious reasons nt

[REP]

21. Under O'Donoghue or Kenney, I'm sure they would have

Their covers were pretty clever:

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

22. Have you seriously started reading DU like, today?

There are tons of threads when some Christo-facist tries to do something stupid that devolves into "typical Christians" and "No True Scotsman" debate. Funny enough, I don't see you rushing in to tut-tut the "All Christians/Jews/etc suck" cru that not all Christians are bad. There are plenty of them out there, every day, if you are truly concerned.

Somehow, I'm guessing, you just miss those though, eh?

[Scootaloo]

23. No, I'm quite aware

In fact I've come to the defense of Jews and Catholics as well on DU. But the hatred of them is not as rampant, nor as widely accepted here on DU as hatred of Muslims. Plus, there's not really a shortage of Catholics and Jews on Du to speak out on their own behalf. Muslim DU'ers tend to be treated worse than black DU'ers, when they show up however. And given the shit black DU'ers put up with? i'm surprised we've retained the... three? Muslim DU'ers we have.

[DonCoquixote]

59. so WHERE

in this op did the author blame all Muslims. Indeed, where did the OP EVEN MENTION Islam?

[Warren DeMontague]

32. Right, some socially inept, sociopathic college student kills people in Isla Vista and it is

The fault of everyone with a y chromosome. And Seth Rogen movies.

[Jamastiene]

29. That is because if they did not use religion as their excuse for their crimes,

they would just some other excuse. Individual people are responsible for what they do, no matter what excuses they use to try to explain their atrocious crimes. Not all people of any religion think exactly the same or behave the same. Blame the individual for their own actions, because that individual is at fault for their actions. Terrorists are just using excuses. If they didn't use religion as an excuse, they'd use some other excuse, e.g. political, as their excuse.

Most people who believe in Islam aren't out there gunning people down or any of the other hideous crap that extremists do in the name of religion. There are fuckton of people who follow that religion and the vast majority are not out there committing acts of terrorism.

[Warren Stupidity]

31. Again, where did the op blame all muslims?

The OP didn't. Instead the OP pointed out what is fucking obvious: right now there really is something wrong with Islam. Right now Islam is the motivating ideology for mass murder on a daily basis. Pretending that this is not so, or white-washing it by claiming that if it wasn't Islam it would be something else, or by noting that 1.7 Billion -2 Muslims were not involved in today's atrocity of note, is pathetic. The OP did not blame all muslims, the op stated that there is something wrong with Islam as it exists right here and right now. That is manifestly obvious. There is also something wrong with just about every other major religion, especially the Abrahamic ones, but for the most part extremists are not committing mass murder on a daily basis using those religions as their motivating ideology. They could, and they all have in the past.

When Marxism was the motivating ideology for terrorism and totalitarianism was it wrong to suggest that there might be a problem with Marxist ideology?

When Fascism was the motivating ideology for genocide, totalitarianism, and wars of aggression was it wrong to suggest that there might be a problem with Fascism?

Why is it when religion is a motivating ideology for abominable acts some people get all antsy about any suggestion that there might be a problem with religion?

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

7. And some of us choose to shove it up all the asses of all religious fundies.

And not stand around handwringing and giving a pass to a select few like you do.

[smirkymonkey]

27. Thank you!

Couldn't have said it better.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

9. Nope, 1.7 billion people are not guilty of murder

Last edited Wed Jan 7, 2015, 09:52 PM - Edit history (1)

In fact, I would imagine the majority of them are quite outraged at this act of violence.

Unfortunately, too many muslims do support ideas like suppression of free speech, and that is what is very worrisome. People who cannot assimilate into the simplest aspects of western culture - like, democracy, free speech, and women's right to self determination - are a problem. Period.

Notice I said too many muslims, and I don't mean "most." Just "too many."

[CrawlingChaos]

12. ^^ this times infinity

Thank you for saying it.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

24. Well, I believe it

It is a mistake to move to a country and expect the host country to change its core values for you and your children.

Sure, bring some of your culture with you. Your religion. Your food. Add to the wonderful mix that we already have. But don't expect that that the people who have allowed you to move to their country will give up their freedoms for you or that they will support you in attempting to change their culture. If I have to walk through your neighborhood to get somewhere I will NOT wear a burka, and I shouldn't feel unsafe if I'm not wearing one.

And I do realize that many are not immigrants and were born in France, but my rant applies to them, as well.

[CrawlingChaos]

25. Well that was entirely divorced from reality

But they'll be so glad to know you approve of them bringing their food.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

26. Edit post

Have misread the order of posts and who was responding to whom.

But the reality is that some do want France to change. Or is that not what you get out of this massacre? "Shut up, give up your free speech, or we will kill you."

So, they're just fine with satire against the prophet?

[still_one]

28. Let me translate the OP for you. "Any Religion". Which part of any religion don't you understand?

[Scootaloo]

33. Context of current events

"Gosh, I could mean anything, tee hee!" - that fig leaf is kind of transparent, you know.

[still_one]

40. I don't see that in this particular thread for the most part

[cwydro]

35. Yup.

[Warren DeMontague]

30. If the act is done in the name of the religion or for religious reasons, no.

If someone robs a bank who happens to be a scientologist, unless their motivation for doing so directly relates to the belief system, it's not relevant.

if you are talking about murders done BY religious fundamentalists for reasons OF religious fundamentalism, it is facile to demand that religious fundamentalism not be part of the discussion.

[Scootaloo]

34. Distinctions not made in the OP

keep stretching to defend miserable bigotry, Warren.

[Warren DeMontague]

45. Yeah, we don't want to make broad generalizations based on the actions of disturbed individuals

At least not this week.

[closeupready]

42. And Islam is, in fact, a person, singular.

[Humanist_Activist]

49. Who is saying this strawman of yours?

Did you forget the Christian terrorist, Anders Breivik?

What do people call many of the extremist Jewish settlers in the West Bank?

And those are just two examples.

[Warren Stupidity]

3. As far as I am concerned, what religion ought to do is wither away into irrelevance,

and the sooner the better.

[Ron Green]

4. Perhaps it ought to, but not likely

as long as humans seek to share their spiritual existence.

[backscatter712]

6. Every religion breeds intolerance of ridicule, criticism and opposition to it.

Religion has had thousands of years to reshape social norms, and make basic criticism, like saying "that deity isn't real" to be regarded by society as horrible obscenity.

Islam these days is especially good at that. Try being an atheist in Egypt or Saudi Arabia. Just saying "I don't believe in Allah" gets you thrown in prison, or gets your head chopped off.

Of course, Christianity and Judaism have done more than their share. Even if they don't saw your head off, you still get ostracized, censured, condemned just for saying that you don't believe. And if you dare to make fun of the religion, hoo boy...

I'm with Christopher Hitchens. Religion poisons everything. With the Charlie Hebdo attack, it was the poison equivalent of a nerve gas attack on a subway. But even moderate religion is poisonous, but on the level of smoking a pack a day, or driving a car on leaded gasoline. Religion breeds intolerance, irrationality and stupidity.

[Union Scribe]

39. So what's your excuse?

This shit in Paris certainly has opened the bigotry floodgates in GD.

[CrawlingChaos]

10. Unhinged individuals committed this crime

You can condemn the crime without making vaguely sinister insinuations about well over a billion people whose religious faith does NOT teach them to go out and murder people.

Or what is the point of your OP?

[Ron Green]

14. The point of the OP is

that a spiritual belief system, in its maturity, ought to have found its way to tolerance and forgiveness. If it's true for individuals, why not for groups?

[CrawlingChaos]

17. What does that mean?

You're trying to make this about Islam instead of the small number of people who actually committed the crime.

Within any group you can find individuals who commit horrific acts. Only with Muslims has it become acceptable to smear the whole group based on the actions of a few.

[Ron Green]

20. What's in the news right now is the enormous tension

between Islamic people and a secular Europe, not to mention other spots and events around the world. If the sort of disrespectful "humor" as distributed by Charlie Hebdo is to be allowed to continue, then ANY religious group in these sights will have to forgive - or kill the messenger.

[liberal_at_heart]

48. French Muslims have denounced the killings. This is not about an entire religion. This is about

a few violent fundamentalists.

[Dr. Strange]

36. John Fugelsang's recent tweet:

If your religion tells you that God wants someone dead but doesn't feel like killing them Himself then your religion sucks at religion.— John Fugelsang
(@JohnFugelsang) January 8, 2015

https://twitter.com/JohnFugelsang/status/553014834678489088

[Coventina]

37. I love that guy!!

[randome]

38. Isn't that a Western/European concept?

Clearly there is very little lampooning done in the Muslim world itself. Or do we simply miss out on that?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]

[Ron Green]

46. Humor, especially ironic or cynical humor,

doesn't mix well with extreme devotion. Consider Judaism, which in this country has become quite secular; and it's arguably the wellspring of American humor and show business. Islam, another great monotheistic religion (also from the Middle Eastern desert, but hundreds of years younger), enjoys a five-a-day prayer and rigorous social constraints, but not so many chuckles.

[closeupready]

41. Right because Islam is a person.

What a stupid thread.

[MohRokTah]

43. In Japan for an international conference on religion, ...

Joseph Campbell overheard another American delegate, a social philosopher from New York, say to a Shinto priest, "We've been now to a good many ceremonies and have seen quite a few of your shrines. But I don't get your ideology. I don't get your theology."

The Japanese paused as though in deep thought and then slowly shook his head. "I think we don't have ideology," he said. "We don't have theology. We dance."

This is the essence of true religion.

[Humanist_Activist]

47. Who are you to say what any particular religion "ought" to do?

Did you even bother to read any authoritative texts of any of the major religions?

[WhiteAndNerdy]

50. And also --

I think a religion should not offer cut-and-dried answers so much as help people ask the right questions and maybe provide a "working hypothesis" to help them make sense of the world and to provide a foundation for growth. A religion that can't tolerate criticism is obviously not going to promote questioning, speculation, diversity of opinion, or even personal growth.

[Humanist_Activist]

51. Uhm, you do realize that no religion exists that follows any of those suggestions of yours. n/t

[WhiteAndNerdy]

53. Wrong.

You seem to think all religions function like the Big Three Abrahamic traditions -- they don't. You need to read more.

[Humanist_Activist]

55. Some religions of the NRM(New Religious Movements) perhaps, but many of them...

were constructed specifically as a counter to religions of old.

As far as I'm aware of, even religions such as Buddhism, Daoism, Shinto, and Jain claim provide some cut and dried answers, they may allow for more deviation, but not as much as many people imagine. Hinduism is probably the only one that does belong on your list, but mostly because its nearly a misnomer to call it a "religion", perhaps religious grouping, with some similar rituals and shared culture is better. Hindus can be atheist, hard polytheist, soft polytheist, pantheist, parantheist, and/or monotheist and still be Hindu.

Even then you have Hindu nationalists who burn Muslim neighborhoods, and murder Muslims in India.

[liberal_at_heart]

52. Again, you can't say that about an entire religion. There are people in every religion that

critically think and question and think for themselves. It is the fundamentalists that insist people follow without question.

[WhiteAndNerdy]

54. Yes, I can say that about Islam.

It's obvious that not all religions are equally open to change; some emphasize adherence to established tradition and law to a much greater degree than others. Christianity has also, historically, been resistant to change, although that has begun to change in recent decades. You're not seriously denying that some cultures are more conservative (that is, resistant to change) than others, are you?

[liberal_at_heart]

57. Yes, I am. Western Muslims are very open to change. And even Middle Eastern Muslims are

fighting for greater freedom. Just because the fundamentalists throw hissy fits does not mean that people are not fighting for change. Look at the young women in Afghanistan. It is true that the fundamentalists are causing great damage to the people there. But the people themselves are fighting for change. The girls are risking being killed to go to school. It is the fundamentalists that are resistant to change, not the people.

[jberryhill]

56. People kill over non-religious insults as well

It's what people do.