No one should be killed for drawing unflattering cartoons of Mohammed...

[Nuclear Unicorn]

that is as far as I'm going in that statement.

[JonLP24]

1. I certainly agree with that

The point of drawing an unflattering image is something I don't understand, I think those who worry more provacateur nature are making the same mistake Gellar is making as acting as if the entire sect is like this when the sect responsible for a death sentence of such an image has bulldozed over Muhammad's graves of his immediate family and his own grave was moved to a mysterious location so no one will know where it is so they are unable to worship. It is based on Muhammad suggesting to not worship images of Muhammad so drawing unflattering images that people are probably not likely to worship it & the killing over the unflattering images --- like I said I don't understand

[roguevalley]

24. I agree that no one should but given this is the reality we live in no one should be surprised when

it happens.

[CBGLuthier]

2. Bear in mind these assholes will kill you for drawing a FLATTERING picture of their precious

I have to be careful not to let loose my utter contempt for them as I do not live in a country with first amendment protection.

Which is one more reason all these asshole attempts to deny the pure concept of free speech offend the fuck out of me. I supported the ACLU when they supported the right of nazi's to march in jewish neighborhoods even though it was a despicable act.

Either you respect the first amendment or you may as well kiss it goodbye and shut the country down.

[betterdemsonly]

3. What if people drew unflattering pictures of holocaust victims

and one of Geller's buds decided to shoot up the place. Would you view them as simple victims?

BTW Geller believes Obama is a closet muslim and the illegitimate child of Malcolm X.

[PeaceNikki]

4. People do not deserve violence and murder for being offensive assholes.

ever

[betterdemsonly]

5. So you aknowledge she is a bigot, and not a liberal we must admire? n/t

[PeaceNikki]

6. Absolutely. Nobody here ever said shit about admiring Geller. Nobody. That's horeshit.

So, by your logic, abortion clinics shouldn't exist because they 'goad' the nuts to bomb them?

[betterdemsonly]

7. Nobody said anything about supporting the shooters. I dislike them both.

I think islamists and extreme zionists like her are trying to start WWIII, or an internal civil war in America. They may succeed.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

20. "...trying to start WWIII, or an internal civil war in America."

Wars are started by those who use violence and murder to force themselves on others. Speech is not war.

[GGJohn]

13. Nobody here has denied she's a disgusting bigot,

that being said, she has the absolute right to free speech in this country.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

9. I'm struck with incredulity --

What if people drew unflattering pictures of holocaust victims

and one of Geller's buds decided to shoot up the place. Would you view them as simple victims?

You're literally basing your argument on hypotheticals and suppositions. "What if"? What if your posts inspire someone to violence? Should we allow you to speak your mind freely based on "what if"?

BTW Geller believes Obama is a closet muslim and the illegitimate child of Malcolm X.

So? It's stupid and untrue but that isn't an excuse for censorship and murder.

[Goblinmonger]

17. OMG! "Geller believes Obama is a closet muslim and the illegitimate child of Malcolm X"?

Then, yeah, shoot that fucker.

for the impaired.

So you are all for limiting free speech? If not by force of law, then by fear of being shot and killed by fucking crazy bastards.

Times like this remind me that I should never be surprised at what I read on a progressive website.

[The2ndWheel]

8. It's a can or can't world

Should is that subjective reality that we humans endlessly tangle ourselves into.

Can someone be killed for drawing an unflattering cartoon of Mohammed? Yes. Then the question is how to do you stop it? That's a tougher question to answer.

[treestar]

10. There are two straw men here

That's one of them. No one says that.

No one says there should be a law against it either, which would violate the First Amendment.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

11. "No one says that."

Don't count your strawmen before they've hatched --

Pam Gellar, a soulless fascist life-hating monster if there ever was one, will try to make this happen again.
She won't stop until she gets her bloodbath.

She has to be stopped,

[treestar]

12. Where does that claim that there should be laws

against what she did or that they could survive First Amendment scrutiny.

That's just a call to oppose her.

[GGJohn]

14. There's at least one that would like to make it illegal.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141083905#post87

Reluctantly Agree

But to call this "the high cost of freedom" (extra security guards) shows that they knew that what they were doing was like shouting "fuego" in a crowded theatre (enough would know what it means to cause a panic). Or shouting "pigs" at a line of cops. There would be known consequences. Death by cops is not a nice game to be playing so I view what this group was doing with extreme disgust. They were the troublemakers but once shots were fired the cops had no choice. If this continues then something will need to be carved out that prevents these provocative moves from being legal. Blasphemy as free speech is a stretch, after all.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

16. "That's just a call to oppose her."

I make an OP stating no one should be killed, no buts about it; yet you seem to find plenty of reasons to complain.

People are showing their buts aplenty and, golly, I'm just so terrible for making note of it.

Please proceed; this ought to be a grand spectacle.

[Adrahil]

15. Jeebus forbid we offend any crazy religious types! Agree with OP. n/t

[lpbk2713]

18. When you run the risk of offending people who are 600 years behind the rest of us.

I think a little caution would be well applied.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

19. "I think a little caution would be well applied."

Such as? An armed protective presence? Self-censorship? Other censorship?

[GGJohn]

21. So we should apply "caution" when dealing with people like that?

Wouldn't that give them what they want? Why should we bow down to these extremists?
Fuck that!!!! I say full speed ahead, nobody has the right to not be offended.

[deaniac21]

22. They don't have to be unflattering.

[GGJohn]

23. Extremists don't have to try to kill someone who draws an unflattering depiction of

Mohammed.