Condemning "Innocence of Muslims"
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-09-2012, 10:53 AM
RE: Condemning "Innocence of Muslims"
(22-09-2012 10:30 PM)cufflink Wrote:  
(22-09-2012 10:10 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  condemn (third-person singular simple
present condemns, present participle
condemning, simple past and past participle
condemned)

1. (transitive) To confer some sort of eternal
divine punishment upon.

2. (transitive) To adjudge (a building) as being
unfit for habitation.
The house was condemned after it was
badly damaged by fire.

3. (transitive) To scold sharply; to excoriate
the perpetrators of.
The president condemns the terrorist.
The president condemns the terrorist
attacks.

4. (transitive) To judicially pronounce
(someone) guilty.

5. (transitive) To determine and declare
(property) to be assigned to public use. See
eminent domain

6. (transitive) To adjudge (food or drink) as
being unfit for human consumption.

7. (transitive, law) To declare (a vessel) to be
forfeited to the government, to be a prize,
or to be unfit for service.

[Edited to remove unwarranted snarkiness.]

I don't see your point. The most common meaning of "ban," and the only one that's relevant in this case, is "forbid" or "prohibit." Since that idea is nowhere to be found among the seven dictionary definitions of "condemn" that you've listed, doesn't that simply reinforce the fact that there's a big difference between the two?

In other words condemning anything is basically no better than a complaint, or calling it bad.

It doesn't actually address the root issue. It doesn't fix anything, and requires just little bit more effort than pressing the dislike button.

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes fstratzero's post
23-09-2012, 11:21 AM
RE: Condemning "Innocence of Muslims"
(23-09-2012 10:53 AM)fstratzero Wrote:  In other words condemning anything is basically no better than a complaint, or calling it bad.

It doesn't actually address the root issue. It doesn't fix anything, and requires just little bit more effort than pressing the dislike button.

Quite true. We have an administration in the US that believes that nice sounding words and apologies are all that matters. Meanwhile, the Middle East is on fire and they have no clue as what to do next. Other than handing out checks in Southside Chicago and calling the US constitution a flawed document, Obama has little to offer in the form of leadership. He believed that just the fact that he was the US President the middle east would begin loving the US, but obviously they still hate us. Obama has basically turned his back in Israel, yet they still hate us. Just maybe bragging 21 times at the democratic convention that Obama got Osama, wasn't such as good idea. that thing was televised you know and they do have TVs in the middle east.

No criticism in the US media regarding our incompetence in foreign affairs. We're more concerned with Romney's tax returns, not dead ambassadors and embassies on fire. It's all about getting Romney while the rest of the world goes to hell. I'm glad we have our priorities straight. No wonder the rest of the word believe the US has its head up its own ass, because we do, and it's so painfully obvious.

The old gods are dead, let's invent some new ones before something really bad happens.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thomas's post
23-09-2012, 03:36 PM
RE: Condemning "Innocence of Muslims"
An informed and rational take on the "Islamic problem":

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/opinio...ophet.html

Religious disputes are like arguments in a madhouse over which inmate really is Napoleon.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cufflink's post
23-09-2012, 06:18 PM
RE: Condemning "Innocence of Muslims"




I agree with this guy. The Muslims have been easy to provoke worldwide in the past, and it wasn't surprising that this movie created animosity and rioting. But the movie's apparent goal was exactly that. That's stupid. Tell the Muslims why they're wrong -- they ought to know, but don't. But we shouldn't be antagonizing them just for the purpose of pointing at them and saying "See? I told you they were violent!" It's like telling a guy that you fucked his mother just so you can show everyone how angry he gets.

I'm not excusing the rioting Muslims... they have shown themselves to be intolerant. But the makers of this film weren't exactly "minding their own business when all of a sudden..." either.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Starcrash's post
23-09-2012, 07:49 PM
RE: Condemning "Innocence of Muslims"
Stupid people are stupid.
This doesn't help with the image of Islam at all. Do they not have the decency to at least at like civilised people? They are acting like savages! Now this is the image that people are going to perceive as Islam. A backwards religion with overly sensitive and violent followers. I have seen clips of this film and I don't what you need to be offend about. It's a shitty film. No one knew about this film. Its like extremists actively try to find things that will easily offend Muslims and cause conflicts. *sigh*

[Image: boston-terrier-gets-scared.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like tazmin98's post
24-09-2012, 01:14 AM
RE: Condemning "Innocence of Muslims"
I think Obama should have said that freedom of speech is an inalienable right. That the US not only defends it but promotes it. That the reactions from these Muslim extremists is wholly inappropriate and that this video should not have been used by them to try and gain political power. Then he can talk about the great tradition of the US to defend religious freedom. But if any message was made, it should not have been this one.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ABC's post
24-09-2012, 02:00 AM
RE: Condemning "Innocence of Muslims"
(23-09-2012 06:18 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  



I agree with this guy. The Muslims have been easy to provoke worldwide in the past, and it wasn't surprising that this movie created animosity and rioting. But the movie's apparent goal was exactly that. That's stupid. Tell the Muslims why they're wrong -- they ought to know, but don't. But we shouldn't be antagonizing them just for the purpose of pointing at them and saying "See? I told you they were violent!" It's like telling a guy that you fucked his mother just so you can show everyone how angry he gets.

I'm not excusing the rioting Muslims... they have shown themselves to be intolerant. But the makers of this film weren't exactly "minding their own business when all of a sudden..." either.

While this is a good point "fucking his mother" is a bad metaphor in this case.

This case is more like a very very very very very very very very light tap on the shoulder, resulting in a near death beating.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Now with 40% more awesome.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-09-2012, 03:23 AM
RE: Condemning "Innocence of Muslims"
(23-09-2012 10:39 AM)cufflink Wrote:  
(23-09-2012 03:42 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  However, once an american ambassador has been killed that is over. A dead ambassador means that anyone who seriously condemns and seriously criticises this film is siding with the bad guys. I'm not saying Muslims are the bad guys. I'm saying the ambassador killers are the bad guys, and once that happens the entire Muslim world lost the right to criticise this film. That right has been stolen from them. If you criticise this film with any veracity you are siding with bad people, and you need to go back and have a hard look at yourself in the mirror lest you find that you yourself have become a bad person. There is no middle ground on this film. That middle ground has been taken. Now you are either for violence or against violence. I'm against it. If you aren't against it then you are a bad person.

I'm trying to understand the logic here, and I'm baffled. Why in the world can't someone legitimately say that the film is shit AND ALSO say that the killing of the ambassador was a hideous, disgusting, totally unjustifiable act? Where's the contradiction there? If I'm against violence, do I then have to support the film, because some idiots have responded to it violently? Huh

Say it's shit all you like. Say its offensive, should be banned or shouldn't be protected speech and you're siding with the bad guys.

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Hafnof's post
24-09-2012, 07:26 AM
RE: Condemning "Innocence of Muslims"
Our official government response should have been the following (putting aside their blatant attempt to spin the political reality and blame a video for riots):

In the US, we have freedom of speech which allows someone to express an idea no matter how ignorant or hateful. We will not change from that position.
We understand that to many this video is offensive. However, violence and murder is never, ever, a legitimate response to words. Stop being such a bunch of thin skinned assholes and join the fucking 21st century already, you are screwing up the world.

Maybe the last sentence needs some work.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like devilsadvoc8's post
24-09-2012, 09:23 AM
RE: Condemning "Innocence of Muslims"
Just an observation:

Many of the same people who say the non-extremist Muslims should be condemning the violent actions of the extremists also think this film shouldn't be condemned by our leaders.

Interesting.

Wrong is wrong no matter how big or small.

"Religion has caused more misery to all of mankind in every stage of human history than any other single idea." --Madalyn Murray O'Hair
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: