I wish Terry Jones could be compelled to stand in front of...

[MiddleFingerMom]

.
.
.
...all the people who lost 11 loved ones in the ensuing violence and
explain to them that it was not his fault because he had the RIGHT
to burn Korans.
.
.
.
That would certainly give them a conviction that their loved ones died
for a noble cause -- that their deaths were not needless nor avoidable --
but honorable and glorious.
.
Anybody know a SINGLE ONE of their names?
.
A SINGLE ONE of the names of those grieving today?
.
.
.
EVERYBODY knows the name of Terry Jones.
.
.
.
The Terry Jones apologists sicken me.
.
.
.
They're probably the same Internet warriors who are pounding away on
their safe-and-secure little keyboards about "defending to the DEATH"
his right to burn those books.
.
.
.
I'm willing to be that the people out in the field who are ACTUALLY
defending our rights "to the death" wish he would just shut the fuck
up and go away.
.
.
.

[freshwest]

1. Another media whore like the Phelphs. Notice how they're all conservative?

AND his first amendment rights are in no way endangered by people exercising their first amendment rights by complaining about him, either!

[bluestateguy]

2. OK, but if you live by the rules, you have to play by the rules

If you want to make it illegal to burn a Koran, then if such a law is to withstand constitutional scrutiny, you would need to also enforce a similar law banning desecration of of the Bible and any other religious holy books.

Take it or leave it. That's the deal.

[Toucano]

3. R&K

If Jones wants to abuse his rights, he should face the consequences.

He "doesn't feel" responsible? He can be MADE to feel responsible!

[devils chaplain]

11. Please tell me that's not Galileo in you profile pic...

Because if it is, it must've been chosen in an ironic fashion -- Galileo was sentenced to death for blasphemy.

[Toucano]

16. Interesting analogy you make. Galileo was not sentenced to death for blasphemy.

He was sentenced to imprisonment for suspicion of heresy, and that sentence was commuted to house arrest.

I would hope the devils chaplain would know the difference between blasphemy and heresy, but should you not, I do hope you'll look it up.


Other key facts you're probably unaware of that make your analogy between Loony Tunes Yosemite Sam and the Father of Modern Science completely absurd:

• It was his actually his faith that compelled Galileo to beseech the Church to acknowledge the truth - before the Arab "infidels" confirmed his observations and used them to discredit his cherished faith. Galileo did not reject the Church and counted himself among the faithful until his death.

• Galileo wrote books. He did not burn them.

• I haven't seen any evidence that Sparky McGoo has been employing observational methods in his treatise against Muslims, nor any other recognized discipline, for that matter.

• There's no record of anyone being provoked to murder by the publication of Dialogue

• There is likewise no record of Galileo burning anyone's religious text despite his referring to Muslims as "infidels".



Then again, perhaps it's you who is being ironic by assuming the role of Simplicio. I'm content to assume same.

[beac]

41. .

:applause:

Bravo! An excellent rebuttal.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

42. All entirely true, all entirely irrelevant.

The relevant points of the analogy are that

:-The Catholic Church then and the Muslims then and now tried to use force and the threat of force to prevent people disagreeing with their religion.

:-Galileo then and Jones now did disagree with their religions.

:-Neither Galileo then nor Jones now did anything which in any way justified the use of force.

:-Using force and the threat of force to prevent people disagreeing with your religion is wrong.

:-As such, Galileo then and Jones now did not do anything wrong, and the Catholics then and the Muslims then and now did.


The fact that Galileo was one of the greatest scientific pioneers of his age, and Jones is an ignorant bigot, while true, is not relevant to the question of whether it is reasonable not to back down to intimidation by religious groups.

[Toucano]

50. This analogy is strained at best.

Point one: false. The Muslims don't care if you disagree with their religion. They're using force or the threat of force to prevent you from attacking their religion. That's quite a distinction, don't you think?

Point two: false. Does Jones have a religion that he disagrees with? Or does he disagree with someone else's religion? He's not fighting against his own church, or have I missed something? Did he burn his faith's sacred text, too?

Point three: false. Jones has provoked the use of force. Look up "fighting words", a long-recognized doctrine regarding the use of speech to incite hatred and violence. You are free to call my mother a whore, but you might end up with a broken jaw as a result. You can send me to jail for assault, but that won't un-break your jaw. Free speech has both responsibilities and consequences that the law cannot regulate. The sensibility and wisdom of the individual is required. Pastor Sparky has neither.

Point four: true. But that's not what is happening. See point one.

Point five: the two are entirely incomparable. Jones is simply inciting hatred with no scientific, political, or social merit. Galileo expanded human understanding of the world and the universe. He wasn't simply expressing his opinion, he was communicating indisputable facts.

[pnwmom]

4. Did you feel the same way about people who burned the flag

to protest the Vietnam war?

Last time I checked, neither flags nor books are human beings -- and burning either one is a form of protected speech.

[LAGC]

5. I agree.

Terry Jones is a Christo-fascist, but that doesn't change the fact that some people in the Middle East take their religion way too seriously.

Religious extremists on both sides are acting pretty dumb right now.

[emilyg]

6. Exactly.

[Adsos Letter]

25. Yup.

[Raine]

29. Totally agree. nt

[Skip Intro]

7. The apologists for the murderous mobs sicken me. nt

[Nye Bevan]

8. We're not "Terry Jones apologists"

We just don't think it should be against the law to insult religious beliefs. That includes burning books, submerging crucifixes in urine, and referring to God as a "sky monster".

[bigwillq]

10. How I feel.

Good post. :thumbsup:

[Adsos Letter]

26. What bigwillq said.

:thumbsup:

[Fuzz]

48. Agreed.

[darkstar3]

9. Tell that to the people mourning George Tiller.

Either we have freedom of speech, or we do not. Freedom of speech includes that which would be considered blasphemous, offensive, or in poor taste.

I would like justice for the hatemongers too, but as much as I would like to shove a pitchfork up their asses until they are quite simply dead, I WILL defend their right to say the vile things they do.

If I don't, then one day someone will tell me that I have no right to speak against the majority religion of this country.

[louslobbs]

12. Bravo, +1000.....thank you.

Lou

[Adsos Letter]

27. Amen!

[Nevernose]

13. So we're supposed to watch what we say and do...

...in case we offend someone for our nonviolent actions and they feel justified in murdering innocent strangers? Seriously? That's not only ridiculous, but insane.

What's ironic is that some people who consider themselves liberal apparently have a lot in common with Terry Jones: they all believe that a significant percentage of Muslims are irrational and violent. The only real difference is that Terry Jones -- despite his vile, loathsome nature and beliefs -- doesn't believe in kowtowing to extortionists.

It doesn't have anything to do with some asshole redneck preacher in Florida, and for that matter it doesn't have anything to do with anyone's constitutional or god-given rights. What it's about is a group of deranged, murderous, religious fanatics who feel they have the right to dictate the nonviolent, harmless behavior of people living on the other side of the globe. Pointing that out doesn't make anyone a "Terry Jones apologist."

[MiddleFingerMom]

14. Harmless.

.
.
.
What it's about is a group of deranged, murderous, religious fanatics
who feel they have the right to dictate the nonviolent,
.
HARMLESS
.
behavior of people living on the other side of the globe.
.
.
.
Was there any reasonable doubt that someone would die as a result, indirect or otherwise,
of that "harmless" behavior.
.
.
.
Would those ELEVEN HUMAN BEINGS be alive today if that "harmless" behavior had not been acted out?
.
.
.
If those deranged, murderous, religious fanatics had been holding YOUR loved ones, would you defend
as a "right" such "harmless" behavior?
.
.
.
"Harmless"?
.
.
.
ELEVEN HUMAN BEINGS ARE DEAD WHO WOULD NOT BE SO IF NOT FOR THAT "HARMLESS" BEHAVIOR.
.
.
.
01. Harmless (Dead -- Parent? SO? Family member? CHILD?)
.
02. Harmless (Dead -- Parent? SO? Family member? CHILD?)
.
03. Harmless (Dead -- Parent? SO? Family member? CHILD?)
.
04. Harmless (Dead -- Parent? SO? Family member? CHILD?)
.
05. Harmless (Dead -- Parent? SO? Family member? CHILD?)
.
06. Harmless (Dead -- Parent? SO? Family member? CHILD?)
.
07. Harmless (Dead -- Parent? SO? Family member? CHILD?)
.
08. Harmless (Dead -- Parent? SO? Family member? CHILD?)
.
09. Harmless (Dead -- Parent? SO? Family member? CHILD?)
.
10. Harmless (Dead -- Parent? SO? Family member? CHILD?)
.
11. Harmless (Dead -- Parent? SO? Family member? CHILD?)
.
.
.
Oh, so academic and safe behind that keyboard.
.
.
.
Harmless.
.
.
.

[Morning Dew]

17. Of course there's reasonable doubt.

Last fall when the brouhaha over Jones' non-burning of the Koran took place, the Westboro Baptist Church went ahead and burned a Koran.

http://cjonline.com/news/local/2010-09-11/wbcs_flames_p...

- SNIP -
President Barack Obama didn't weigh in like he did when a pastor in Florida threatened to burn the Quran. And Defense Secretary Robert Gates didn't make a personal phone call urging the same minister to call it off.

The burning of a Quran and an American flag Saturday by members of Westboro Baptist Church drew little visible interest. Instead of the hoards of media representatives that descended on Florida, only a handful of area reporters turned out at noon for Westboro's burning.

"I'm glad it didn't get a lot of publicity and it didn't draw a lot of people to the church," said Imam Omar Hazim, of the Islamic Center of Topeka. "It seemed people in Topeka ignored what they were doing."

Members of Topeka's Islamic community were absent from the event. Hazim said that was by design.

- SNIP -




No one seemed to notice. No UN workers were killed.

[MiddleFingerMom]

18. Eleven. People. Dead. n/t

[Morning Dew]

19. I. Guess. So.

Still, there's a bunch of youtube videos of Koran burning that didn't incite violence or murder.

Go ahead and live your life in fear of the threats of fundie nut jobs, be they Muslim, Christian or Pastafarian (surely there's a few of those).

I don't choose to do so.

[MiddleFingerMom]

20. Quite impressive and commendable.

.
.
.
I hope to be as brave as that someday.
.
.
.
Responding, "I. Guess. So." to "Eleven. People. Dead."
.
.
.
I have nothing to say that can counter that.
.
.
.
I should have known better.
.
.
.

[Morning Dew]

23. Well, posting Eleven. People. Dead. appeared to me as:

"Shut the fuck up. There's no further argument."

You ask if there's any doubt that he knew violence would come from his burning of the Koran.

I say... sure, plenty of doubt. Lots of Korans have been burned and burned in public.

[Very_Boring_Name]

35. The funny part is you think you're winning

Honey, as an objective observer, I can say that you're handily losing this one.

[Bluenorthwest]

47. What about the preachers who call for war on gay people?

One Obama surrogate heavily defended on DU calls us vampires, says Christians have to take off the gloves and go to war on us because we are trying to kill children. The violence against us is a constant, and any week following one of these invective rallies or TV sermons is filled with baseball bats and bibles.
So what do you say to that? Well, here on DU, when we complained about being called child killing vampires we were told 'that's just church talk' and accused of poutrage and pony wanting.
What would you suggest as proper treatment for those preachers? I say they are free to be fuckwads and I am free to call them hate bags seeking the money in the pockets of their ignorant followers.

[JVS]

31. 4 of them were part of the violent mob. They deserved it.

[Nevernose]

30. HARMLESS.

That asshole in Florida committed no harm to anyone. His words and deeds were totally harmless. His words and deeds were neither encouraging violence nor calling for violence. His words and deeds did not suggest in any way that people should be harmed. That's what "harmless" means.

You keep mentioning these dead people. Maybe you should be mad at the people who actually killed them, simply because they got their feelings hurt. I know I'm mad at the people who did the actual killings.

And somehow, your mentioning repeatedly of these names and pointing out that they had families is supposed to both imply that I'm both callous and a coward? You don't know their names, either. The main difference between you and me seems to be that you feel entitled to use those victims as a weapon with which to bludgeon your political enemies with while quite safe over an Internet message board. At least I'm not exploiting the dead.

As I said in my original reply to you, this whole thing has NOTHING to do with "rights." One group of murderous religious fanatics feels like they can extort the whole world with threats of violence, and you blame people for not bending over to appease them.

[Very_Boring_Name]

55. +10000

[Cid_B]

36. Weak and pathetic...

Oh.. the scary people might do something bad if someone somewhere does something they don't like. Maybe we could get a list of no-nos.

Fuck that and fuck them... The people responsible are the asshats with the bloody knives.

Oh yeah and fuck the weak willed individuals who want to kiss those murderers toes in the hopes that nothing bad happens to them...

[Donald Ian Rankin]

38. You sound as though you don't believe that?

I am a liberal, and I think that "a significant percentage of Muslims are irrational and violent" is pretty much unarguable - as has just been horribly demonstrated (again).

Obviously it depends on what you mean by "significant percentage" but the percentage of Muslims who support, for example, violent punishment for things like adultery and blasphemy does appear to be uncomfortably high.



The difference between liberals and Terry Jones and his ilk is that we don't extrapolate from "a significant percentage" to "all" or "most".

[JCMach1]

15. Maybe he should try it in Kandahar...

I would definitely support his right to try it there!

[Liquorice]

21. Afghanistan doesn't have free speech like we do. nt

[JCMach1]

22. The point is that he is a coward...

[Liquorice]

24. But my point is that we have freedom of speech in America, and he was exercising his right. nt

[Violet_Crumble]

28. You've totally missed the point. There's nothing stopping him from burning a Koran there...

A country doesn't need to have freedom of speech for him to do that...

[beac]

43. But WHY did he have to "exercise his right"?? Would he be any poorer for having kept his mouth shut?

Would he have suffered ANYTHING for not burning those books? NO.

Just because I am legally allowed to walk down the street hurling vile racial slurs at every person I meet doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.

There is a big difference between legal and moral. What Jones did was legally permissible and morally unforgivable.

The thing is he got EXACTLY what he wanted by burning those books-- one step closer to a holy war that he believes will bring on the "End of Days." The sick bastard wants to be here for the apocalypse his loony beliefs tell him is coming and he's doing whatever he can to help bring it on.


Just so we are clear, I think the murderers of those innocent people are just as morally corrupt and despicable as Jones, They are EQUALLY horrible human beings because they ONLY care about their own beliefs and don't care if they cause others to suffer as long as they are following the hateful tenants of their f-ed up version of religion.




(edited for typo)

[Cid_B]

52. And that is where you are wrong....

"I think the murderers of those innocent people are just as morally corrupt and despicable as Jones,"

You think that the act of burning a book and making an ass out of yourself is equivalent to stabbing someone (11 someones) in the neck.

[beac]

54. He knowingly and recklessly threw gasoline on a smoldering fire, so

YES I do think his actions are as morally corrupt and despicable. There was NO reason he needed to burn those Korans. He did for the sole and express purpose of inciting a response and he got one.

If he hadn't been repeatedly warned that burning the books would likely result in violence, you might have a point. But, instead of taking the high road he decided that his egotistical need to stage a theatrical "death penalty" for a "convicted" book was more important than ANYTHING else.

"Free speech" is not a blanket pardon for vile acts. Jones knew what he was doing and I maintain that he's THRILLED at the results. Now he and his equally religiously insane murdering counterparts can move on to thinking about the next thing they can do to accelerate the fire.

[rdking647]

32. id like to see jones

exiled to a-stan

[treestar]

33. It's not being an apologist for his actions to point out that

other people should not be killed for it.

He's an evil SOB but pales next to the people who killed UN workers.

If they had killed him it would be one thing. Wrong but one thing. But they killed people for being like him.

[Codeine]

34. Better that they save their outrage for the savage imbeciles

who kill over fairy tale books and the burning thereof. The semi-literate redneck is not the problem, the whackadoodle fucktards who see a book being burned and lose their shit so badly that they start murdering people are.

[lynne]

37. It's the murdering extremist apologists that sicken me -

- Can't believe that some are so removed from reality that they can't tell the difference between burning a piece of paper and beheading a person. While Jones is a Jerk Extraordinare, his burning a book didn't kill anyone. Let's place the blame where its due - on the extremist who actually did the killing.

[JoePhilly]

39. Let's collect money and send him on a Christian mission to Afganistan.

So he can spread the word of Jesus's love to the Afgan people.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

40. I'm very glad indeed that he - and we - can't be.

Terry Jones did not harm anyone. He did not call for anyone to be harmed. He did not want anyone harmed (although arguably he cared less about the risk than he should have done. He did not do anything that gave anyone a reasonable reason to harm anyone.

The blame for this lies entirely on the violent bullies who tried to intimidate people into giving up their right to offend their religion, not with those who refuse to give in to them.

[NutmegYankee]

44. If I'm apologizing for Jones, you're apologizing for savage murderers!

I'm not defensing this dipshit in Florida! I'm defending free speech - A cherished American Right!

[Rebubula]

45. UnRec

I can add nothing better than has already been posted.

[Zax2me]

46. I noticed you didn't mention the actual murderers in your post....

How is that possible?!

[WhollyHeretic]

49. Terry Jones is an asshole but the violence is no one's fault except for the violent deranged morons

who killed innocent people.

[Obamanaut]

51. Maybe you should send a harshly worded letter to President

Hamid Karzai condemning the murderers of those eleven.

Jones burned a book. The murderers killed people.

On a scale of atrocities, one sorta outweighs the other, don't you think?

Interestingly, part of the retaliation for Jones' book burning was burning several bibles - in addition to lopping off some heads. Have you heard of any murders as a result of the bible burning? Didn't think so.

[warrior1]

53. I want to know

their names also.

[Initech]

56. Thank god I'm not the only one feeling this way.

[krispos42]

57. Did you vote for Obama?

you had to know that Obama winning the Presidency in 2008 would drive the right-wing whackos nuts, right? That it would invigorate the Klan, the neo-Nazis, the anti-abortion whackos, and the militia movement, right? And you knew that there would be deaths, assaults, and other hate crimes as a result, right?


You must have! It happened during Clinton, so it would most definitely happen when a black person (tarred as a "socialist") was elected.


So, did you vote for Obama? Do you feel compelled to stand in front of, say, the relatives of the three Pittsburgh cops who were gunned down by a RW nutjob? How about the family of that security guard at the Holocaust Museum in DC?


Did the fact that it would drive the mentally-unbalanced and violence-prone RWers nuts to the point of killing people keep you in any way, shape, or from from exercising your Constitutional right to vote for the person you thing would be best suited to hold office?