Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: Editor who published Mohammed cartoons confronted by students

  1. #11
    Moderator purplekitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    85,698
    Rep Power
    652088
    Quote Originally Posted by nam View Post
    I know, right? Everybody has free speech rights except student protesters.
    How were the students denied their free speech rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mamapalooza View Post
    My level of tolerance for these buzzwords is worn the eff out. They are meant to trigger an empathetic response, and are overused to the point of silliness.

    They are protesting an individual who published political cartoons meant to invoke a reaction, and they invoked a few. There were several riots in response to the cartoons, but there was also a more subtle reaction of self-censorship that goes on even still. And of course the whole thing was predicated on the idea that it's the worst.thing.ever. to visually depict Mohammad, which of course we know is complete bullshit. There are a multitude of depictions of him, including in the United States Supreme Court. Yet that's what we were told and most of us believed it, or at least didn't question it.

    How exactly do these students feel unsafe in this man's presence? Seriously. Is his presence going to invoke someone to shoot them? Behead them? Give them the stinkeye? How are these students marginalized by his presence? How are they made vulnerable, and to whom? One of the signs itself had picture of Mohammad with a bomb in his turban -- so what was Rose's crime again?

    Another said "check your privilege at the door". Yes, free speech is a fucking privilege, get used to it. It's also a right and an obligation in our world. It is the very mechanism by which we fine-tune our existence in a western democracy and negotiate improvements to our society. The fact these kids have not only failed to learn that, but are going so far as to undermine it by silencing every whisper of an idea they can't be bothered to understand makes them not only ignorant but dangerous. They are a disjointed, unfocused contingent of anger and angst and need for validation. But unsafe? Get a fucking grip. Go to Iran or Saudi Arabia and see what the right to protest looks like under the ideology you're half-assed attempting to defend in your effort to "smash the patriarchy". These people are not even useful idiots and have the inability to even grasp their own damn privilege in the world.

  2. #12
    Non-praying member Mamapalooza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The British Columbia
    Posts
    20,905
    Rep Power
    249490
    Quote Originally Posted by jen View Post
    After Charlie Hebdo, I understand feeling unsafe with him on campus.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I forgot about this thread so I'm just getting back to it. Can you explain this, jen? Sincere question, what danger does his immediate presence bring to the students? Who do they think is going to harm them, how, and why?
    "Wherever in the world much poverty is found, much religion is found also"

  3. #13
    Moderator jen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Persisting
    Posts
    22,595
    Rep Power
    414426
    Quote Originally Posted by Mamapalooza View Post
    I forgot about this thread so I'm just getting back to it. Can you explain this, jen? Sincere question, what danger does his immediate presence bring to the students? Who do they think is going to harm them, how, and why?
    Depicting Mohammed is insulting to Islamists. There has been violence or threats of violence against those who have done so. If he has been threatened, I understand fear around inviting that threat to campus. Not saying it's right; I understand it.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  4. #14
    Full Sponsor TapToTalk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    30,404
    Rep Power
    529922
    Quote Originally Posted by jen View Post
    After Charlie Hebdo, I understand feeling unsafe with him on campus.
    I don't understand this. In the Charlie Hebdo incident, it was Islamists that attacked free speech and killed the people who worked there. If anything, it's Rose who should feel unsafe. Charlie Hebdo also poked fun at other religions, as well. And they poked fun at the far left and the far right.

    Also, a couple days later another terrorist affiliated with the Charlie Hebdo terrorists attacked the Hypercacher Kosher Supermarket. They directly targeted Jews killed a couple and took hostages.

    Given all this, I'm not sure why Islamic (or any other) students would feel unsafe. Are we at a point where free speech is too dangerous to discuss on campus?

  5. #15
    Moderator jen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Persisting
    Posts
    22,595
    Rep Power
    414426
    If Rose is unsafe, then those around Rose are unsafe. So yes, students around Rose might be unsafe. I do not think it's an actual risk, I'm saying I understand concern.
    I think it's not a huge looming threat. I think speech should continue. Do you not see where these things can both be true?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  6. #16
    Full Sponsor TapToTalk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    30,404
    Rep Power
    529922
    Oh, you were concerned about Rose. Misunderstood.

    The OP was about the students feeling unsafe because of his opinions, not his presence.

  7. #17
    Moderator purplekitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    85,698
    Rep Power
    652088
    Quote Originally Posted by jen View Post
    If Rose is unsafe, then those around Rose are unsafe. So yes, students around Rose might be unsafe. I do not think it's an actual risk, I'm saying I understand concern.
    I think it's not a huge looming threat. I think speech should continue. Do you not see where these things can both be true?
    I think this is a stretch as to why they feel "unsafe." People don't protest Salman Rushdie because they fear for their safety.

  8. #18
    Moderator jen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Persisting
    Posts
    22,595
    Rep Power
    414426
    Guess I misunderstood the OP.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  9. #19
    Non-praying member Mamapalooza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The British Columbia
    Posts
    20,905
    Rep Power
    249490
    Quote Originally Posted by jen View Post
    Depicting Mohammed is insulting to Islamists.
    History bears out that this is simply not true. Many (most? all?) Muslims may not like the way he has been portrayed, but they've hardly gone on killing sprees for past depictions. A lot of Christians didn't like the Piss Christ either, but freedom of speech won the day on that matter.


    There has been violence or threats of violence against those who have done so. If he has been threatened, I understand fear around inviting that threat to campus. Not saying it's right; I understand it.
    If they felt he was a literal target, I would recommend not standing beside him, and definitely not holding up a cartoon depiction of Mohammed, like the one student did. But I took it to mean their feelings weren't safe, which is a view I still neither understand nor respect.
    "Wherever in the world much poverty is found, much religion is found also"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •