We simply cannot dictate how other people should feel about their religion jus because

[nanabugg]

we don't like it. Knowing how strongly Muslims feel about their religion I hold responsible the film maker and the release of this nasty film at a time like this. I think it had the exact reaction it was intended to have and the expected reaction is aimed at hurting President Obama. The money against him flows all over the globe from those with vested interest in the election of a puppet.

[boston bean]

1. I hold both in contempt.

No one gets a free pass on murder because of their beliefs.

[hifiguy]

71. + a brazillion.

Fundamentalist religion - of any stripe - is the only mental illness that one voluntarily opts into.

[barbtries]

94. bingo.

it's fundamentalism that is really dangerous, scary, and anti- human progress.

[bhikkhu]

108. Very much agreed

...and there is still plenty of doubt about whether the killing itself had anything to do with the protest, or whether the protest was just used as an opportunity by an unrelated group. Though that would probably wind up having a fundamentalist core anyway, unless it was old Gadhafists.

[mike_c]

80. +1

Religion = mental illness.

[disidoro01]

2. BS

Would you feel the same way about a Christian who kills a Doctor who performs abortions?

[nanabugg]

3. Ok so tell me how I feel. nt

[disidoro01]

7. I am

asking you to inform me.
There is no justification to kill over religion and i am getting tired of this crap that drawing a picture or poking fun at or even insulting Muhammad is grounds for death. Imagine what would happen if there was a piss Muhammad. Sure there was some outrage at Piss Jesus but it was not violent. The guy got a grant to do it, won awards and had it on display. It was vandalized but the artist didn't have to go into hiding and is still producing works. People supported his rights yet now we want to throw some idiot in jail because he offends some fools and those fools kill others.

[lame54]

8. I've yet to hear mention of jail time by anyone here

on edit
On further looking I found someone calling for his imprisonment - a low poster like you

[disidoro01]

12. Low poster

Is post count a measure of intelligence? Perhaps of not having a real life and sitting on DU all day? Or could it be that people simply have different post counts and it really isn't important. I think it's a bit pathetic that post counts are thought to be relevant to anything.

[disidoro01]

26. Thank you

I should "know my place". Thank you for setting me straight.

[lame54]

31. as long as we understand each other

[Biafran]

14. Thank you.

[1StrongBlackMan]

83. How is the violent reaction ...

of Muslims over the insulting of Muhammad any different than the violent reaction of Americans for insulting the U.S. Flag?

The only difference is access. These killers had access to the those they felt responsible for the insult; whereas, most Americans do not have access to those that have defiled the flag.

[Llewlladdwr]

104. Ummm, the difference is that there is no violent reaction from Americans?

Please provide a link to information concerning the last time Americans attacked a foreign embassy on our soil over an insult to the US flag. I don't believe such a thing has ever happened.

[1StrongBlackMan]

109. But ...

Americans have attacked Americans on U.S. soil over an insult to the U.S. flag.

The connect is not that not to make.

[treestar]

35. Christians have proven they generally can deal with the fact there are abortions

without murdering the doctors - it's an exception in our society. In fact, that's an action that other than Christians might oppose.

I mean we know how upset some Muslims can get - we've had experience of that.

[graham4anything]

4. WW1 started with an event like this

and there are many people looking to embarrass our president

but more important, those that hate Muslims to me are as bad as David Duke and the KKK
and the John Birch Society (all groups btw that support Rand and Ron Paul, interesting, isn't it?)

[boston bean]

5. Can people hate the action of what some did in the name of a religion

and not be compared to the KKK?

[Odin2005]

6. Murdering an ambassador over a stupid MOVIE has no justification.

WTF does an Israeli film maker have to do with the US government?

[smirkymonkey]

103. Hear, hear!

Way to target their anger against the wrong target. It's so F**ed up.

[Codeine]

9. I can most assuredly view as a savage anyone who would kill and riot over a film. nt

[randome]

10. There is a baseline of human behavior we should never abandon.

Killing someone for religion is one of them. Another is mutilating people on the basis of cultural 'tradition'. Another is child abuse.

Do any of those strike a chord of contemptibility in you? I understand the position of all morals are relative but what happened in Libya is not.

Yes, we SHOULD dictate human rights when lives are at stake. We should use everything at our disposal -outside of war- to stop senseless killings.

[get the red out]

52. Thank you

I think the makers of this film were out for exactly what happened, but in no way can horrific behavior like this be condoned or excused away.

Human rights are extremely important, we need to always support them. In my mind saying all cultures are equal is the same thing as saying all human beings are NOT.

My guess is that the guys that made and supported the making of this film are ecstatic at the death that has come as a result, I am disgusted by them also.

[Brickbat]

11. People can feel however they want. It's their actions I find stupid and contemptible.

[Zalatix]

13. So it's a filmmaker's fault that they started killing. Gotcha.

[Skidmore]

17. Oh, sure, that film maker had no agenda and is a pure as the driven snow.

Please make note of the sarcasm in my response.

Media matters. Media is a powerful way of swaying large groups of people and if you send a message out there, you are responsible for it. I get really sick of people who lob grenade into the public via the media and then step away as though they have no role in the discourse or fallout.

[boston bean]

19. It doesn't matter what his agenda was.

Especially if he wanted people to murder over it.

He did not make those people do what they did. He offended them and they took an action.

[Skidmore]

20. That is an astounding set of sentences.

It does matter, especially if it had the effect he desired. You can't so neatly always divide the interactions of people. He knew the culture he was antagonizing and how it reacts. Just as that asshole preacher knew that his burning of a Q'oran would get violent reactions, but went with it anyway.

[boston bean]

23. You can consider it astounding.

He didn't make them do anything. They did it themselves.

Because he hoped they would act is one thing. But they did act all on their own.

[tama]

27. Puppeteers

have no responsibility for anything. Only puppets do. Gotcha.

[boston bean]

28. That is pretty insulting to the believers in islam, don't you think?

You might want to edit that.

[tama]

32. If it was an insult

then it was a universal insult against all authoritarian puppets.

[boston bean]

33. The puppets referred to are usually a gov't entity.

Are you saying that the Libyan and Egyptian gov't made them do this.

Or are you saying that the US gov't is involved?

Or are you saying that the makers of the film were in cahoots with the Libyan and Egyptian gov't.

[tama]

39. Nah

nothing more complex than basic human psychology of mechanistic reaction models, easy strings to pull.

[boston bean]

41. we have a basic disagreement

It is those who perpetrated the murder who are responsible for the murder. Not a movie that offended them.

The movie itself was offensive, so freakin what. He didn't make them kill anyone. They did that all be themselves.

[tama]

46. I'm not interested in silly disagreements

emotional reaction mechanisms are much more interesting, and the art of puppeteering.

[Zalatix]

57. So what kind of video could you watch that would send you out looting and killing?

[Kablooie]

82. The broadcast of the Rodney King beating trial and the police being found not guilty.

Outraged feelings of injustice were so strong that riots broke out.

There are emotional issues that are so deeply held by some populations that to attack them will result in violence.
In that case and this the violence was not justified but human nature will override a civilized response in certain situations.

[Zalatix]

96. So we blame the people who broadcast the Rodney King trial?

[Kablooie]

99. No, we blame the jury who didn't bring justice to the situation.

[Zalatix]

100. So we put the jury to a kangaroo court in South Central? Exactly what country did I wake up in?

It's starting to sound more like Genghis Khan's Mongolia than America.

[Kablooie]

101. Nope, but putting it in a community of retired cops wasn't smart in a justice kind of way.

Simi Valley, where the trial was held, is where the Reagan shrine is and is famous as a retirement community for law enforcement.
Kind of stacks the jury when the defendants are all policemen.

[Skidmore]

15. The religious zealotry of Muslims was flamed by the equally contemptible zealotry

of a fundamentalist Jew and Christian working together. Damn them all.

[leftynyc]

18. The filmmaker is an asshole

The one who killed the diplomat is a murderer. That you compare the two is part of the problem.

[leftynyc]

16. Bullshit

I don't give a shit if they're outraged. You don't get to murder American diplomats because your feelings are hurt. What you're suggesting is giving into murderous animals who cannot control themselves.

[tama]

29. Indeed

Those murderous mobs are not humans. We civilized humans have the decency to murder with drones.

[leftynyc]

37. Moronic comparison

and I suspect you know it. If you're one of those who think Americans are responsible for every ill on the planet and think they can use that as an argument in support of murderers, you are very simply not worth my time.

[tama]

40. I'm not

and I'm not interested creating arguments in support of murdering anyone. What grabbed my attention was your remark that those others are not humans but just animals, which is a classic dehumanizing argument in support of murdering the dehumanized objects.

[leftynyc]

43. I consider most murderers - rapists also

animals who cannot control their baser instincts. Not my problem that you don't like that.

[tama]

45. Well

Your views on biology and psychology sound weird, but it's weird world.

[FightForMichigan]

21. There's a difference

No one, I don't think, is telling them how to feel.

Feelings don't make someone dead.

Actions do.

[tama]

36. And guns don't kill

humans do, when they get in the killing mood. Like when they blow up the Symbol of American religion of money and power and hurt capitalist feelings so that the American mob can be easily fearmongered into war and torture and what not. The fear that produced the war on terror (or rather war of terror) didn't and doesn't make whole bunch of people dead. Guns do.

[FightForMichigan]

48. ?

I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say.

What I'm saying is that, at least in the example yesterday, killing is choice. Missiles weren't fired on accident. People who genuinely felt offended (valid and understandable) then chose to kill people who had nothing to do with the person who had offended them, other than sharing a nationality. That was a calculated decision.

To say that someone was so outraged that they had no choice but to run out and kill people robs them of their ability to reason and makes people think of them as animals.

Don't let them off so easy.

[tama]

54. Not sure either

what came out was a rather nice piece of circular logic about the chain of causes. Maybe the point was that making too strict analytical distinction between emotions and actions can lead to loosing sense of whole. And that if we, each of us, loose sense of whole and become unconsciously guided by our emotions of fear and rage, we act accordingly.

[FightForMichigan]

58. Nice apologizing

but I don't have a use for it.

[we can do it]

22. Religious insanity is a waste of humanity.

[Lucy Goosey]

24. I would never expect to dictate how anyone feels about anything

I do, however, hold people responsible for their actions, and ‘nasty film’ justifies any violent actions. The film maker is not responsible for the violence, and no ‘feelings for their religion’ do anything to mitigate any kind of violence. Period.

I can't believe anyone would give people a pass for this kind of insanity because they have 'strong feelings for their religion', frankly.

[FightForMichigan]

49. Exactly.

To say that someone was so outraged they had no choice but to kill means you don't think this person has the ability to reason like the rest of us. And when you apply that to a group - they can't think like we do - guess where that leads.

No one made them do this. They chose it.

[tjdee]

30. No--they were lied to about what this movie was.

They were under the impression that this film was a huge Hollywood production, like Spiderman.

Their own media lies to them.

THAT is who to blame.

Or, their misunderstanding of wtf Youtube is.

It's a tragedy of miscommunication and misunderstandings and hyper-religionistic behavior.

[treestar]

34. True. We all know how Muslims can be about such things

Salman Rushdie, etc. Examples again and again. So doing it is inviting the expected reaction.

Subtle critiques are possible too. Choosing something that's going to inflame them is choosing to cause a reaction.

[boston bean]

42. wow...

[treestar]

44. Well that was helpful

Of course you are jumping to conclusion. I did not say it was OK, just that we know some Muslims will get what we think unduly upset over such things. Also, there could be other causes, as people in the middle east don't really need a movie to be willing to attack Westerners.

Quit trying to intimidate others and discuss the issue instead. We know from past experience that Muslims get get murderously upset over "insults" to Mohamed. We don't have to agree with that in order to recognize it.

[boston bean]

47. the word wow is intimidating? I was referring to this statement that you made...

We all know how Muslims can be about such things

[tama]

51. You didn't know?

That they have their religious trigger mechanisms of getting into rage? And that other cultures have other similar symbolic trigger mechanisms?

[boston bean]

53. No, I didn't realize the muslims were prone to murder people over things such as

offensive films. And that it is a normal response to things that are offensive to their religion.

[tama]

55. Well, now you know.

Depicting Mohammed has caused such riots in the past, and after the civil war, ordinary Libyans have plenty of weapons to riot with.

[boston bean]

61. Wow! Again!!!

Yes, those people do murder for whatever reason and we all just ought to shut up about it when they murder innocent americans.

There is no excuse for that behavior. They do not get a pass, because they do it. We should not be quelled in any way by threats of violence and murder.

[tama]

66. Get a grip man

Don't use this tragic event as an excuse to get hysterical and blather incoherently.

[boston bean]

68. I have a firm grip. Thank you!

I know now, with your attack, that I must have said something you cannot make a retort to.

Thanks for playing.

[tama]

72. You are welcome. :)

[hifiguy]

77. The Islamic fundies are very much predisposed to murder anyone

who "insults" their silly belief system. It's part and parcel of that particular set of irrational beliefs and is in fact a duty. Check out Sam Harris' "The End of Faith" for an exhaustive review of just how batshit and medieval fundamentalist Islam truly is. It makes our teabaggers look almost sane.

[treestar]

89. Yes you are using that to pretend I am behind the pale

Yes, over the Cartoons, the Rushdie book, other such examples of this, yes, we do know that there are Muslims who have a low tolerance for what they consider to be blasphemy. That is a fact right wingers use to try to prove them inferior in general.

If you can't discuss the issue without just relying on trying to make out the other person to be a bigot, you aren't discussing an issue in good faith, but trying to rile up others against someone stating a fact you don't like. '

Shame on you for, instead of discussing the issue, parsing my words so you can "find" I am somehow an anti-Muslim bigot. I am not. I was merely pointing to the history of such types of reactions to writings, cartoons, books or films in the past. Get off your high horse. You are an ineffective debater who has still not answered the point and the only point you are trying to make is the rather pathetic one of "I'm more politically correct than you and therefore a better person than you." Wow.

[boston bean]

91. No. Emphatic NO!

those who murdered are responsible. A movie did not provoke that. The religious fervor of religious nuts may have.

[Llewlladdwr]

105. So you're a non-bigot...

who just happens to believe that Muslims are incapable of controlling their actions if anyone insults their religion.

Yeah, that's not bigoted at all...

[4th law of robotics]

62. Isn't his comment basically the premise of this OP

and a great many others?

"Muslims are different. They are not like you and I. They can't be held to our standards. So we real people have a responsibility not to show them things that might get their tiny and irrational minds all aflutter."

They don't come out and say it. But pretty much that is the mentality you must have to blame a westerner for causing this violence. You have to A) assume we know better and are superior and B) they are inferior and do not know better and must be watched after by us westerners.

[boston bean]

65. You're right.

Pretty much what they are saying is that muslims are different, in a bad way.

[4th law of robotics]

70. I find it humorous how often the far right and the far left overlap

in this case both would agree that muslims are different. They are irrational, emotional, and violence prone lesser-people and must be dealt with by us superior-people in some way.

The manner in which they ought to be dealt with is different but the underlying assumptions are exactly the same.

[hifiguy]

78. Fundamentalist religion promotes a particular kind of insanity.

It can overlap with the far left, but in most cases does not. Killing "infidels" - understood as 'anyone who disagrees with or challenges our irrational and medieval belief system' - is very much a part of the fundamentalist Islamic mindset and has been for centuries as Sam Harris and others have detailed at length.

[tama]

69. Symbolic differences

Symbols that trigger this kind of violence vary from culture to culture, but Western people are certainly not above such behavior.

[4th law of robotics]

73. What kind of video would elicit this response here?

Or any sort of critique using any media?

Can you think of any real or at least hypothetical examples?

[tama]

74. 9/11 nt

[4th law of robotics]

79. The movie about it or the event?

Because you see actually murdering people is different than showing a video.

To be comparable you must find something that offends us and forces us to commit violence but doesn't actually harm anyone. Like this video.

[tama]

81. Are you now saying that Moslems ARE different

and Western people ARE superior to them???

[4th law of robotics]

84. Not at all

I'm saying these individuals are different.

And I feel free holding them 100% accountable for their actions because I believe they, just as we do, are capable of choosing how they act.

I don't assume they must act in this way because they are lesser people. So I condemn them as fully for their actions as I would anyone else in this situation.

Can you do the same?

[tama]

85. I'm not into condemning anyone

there are enough of condemners to take care of of all necessary and/or unnecessary condemning without my contribution.

But I do try to avoid football games and other sports events, political and religious mass events and generally all forms of us-against-them tribalism because they make me feel uncomfortable. Also here on DU.

[4th law of robotics]

87. You don't condemn people who murder innocents over a movie?

But I do try to avoid football games and other sports events, political and religious mass events and generally all forms of us-against-them tribalism because they make me feel uncomfortable. Also here on DU.

Not even when "us" is defined as people who don't commit murder and "them" is defined as people who do?

Notice I'm not lumping the murderers in to a larger group. I'm calling them out explicitly for their own personal actions.

[tama]

88. It gets tricky

First, though I'm not Christian I see wisdom in the Jesus' lesson about stone casting.

Second, we are discussing on a forum that expects members to vote and support and enable political party and political system that commits murder, which makes attempt to define and find an "us" of "people who don't commit murder" (by proxy etc.) at least problematic.

[gollygee]

38. There is no excuse to run around rioting and murdering people

because of any movie. I'm sure if someone made a movie showing Jesus Christ as a pedophile (as this movie showed Mohammed as a pedophile), the US Christians would be angry beyond words and would react in some way - probably with other YouTube movies or something. It's understandable to get upset. It is not understandable to kill people over it. People who have nothing to do with the movie, yet.

But yes the movie was horrible and I am stunned that anyone thought that it was a good idea to make it.

[deaniac21]

64. Aisha

[hobbit709]

50. when religion stops holding me in contempt, I will stop holding religion in contempt.

[MadHound]

56. Nope, a film, any film, is not an excuse to kill people

The film's producer violated no laws, was exercising his right to speak what he wanted to say. The sole fault for this tragedy lies with the religious fanatics who killed and rioted.

[4th law of robotics]

59. They can *feel* however they damn well please

but I will hold them accountable for their actions.

I've yet to hear of any message that literally forces people to commit murder who weren't already inclined to do so.

Find me a video that will turn even a Buddhist monk in to a sociopathic serial killer and I will change my mind.

[slackmaster]

60. Blame the victims all the way, all the time, right on down the line.

[NYC Liberal]

63. They can "feel" whatever they want. They went far beyond "feeling".

[JVS]

67. People can feel however they want. That doesn't give them a right to do whatever they want.

[Lizzie Poppet]

75. How they feel and how they act upon those feelings are distinct matters though.

A person's anger over something like this is none of my business. When that anger results in homicide, however, it become everyone's business.

[Nye Bevan]

76. So if the Pope announced that from now on, he will issue a fatwa against anyone

who insults Christianity, you would hold people who insult Christianity responsible for the consequences of their actions?

[LAGC]

86. *crickets*

Don't expect a rational response to that question.

For some Politically Correct reason or another, radical Islam is presumed to be immune from criticism or ridicule.

[boston bean]

93. because a group of radical islamic fundamentalists who will kill people for it.

I don't buy it, but maybe there are some that are so afraid, they are willing to walk on eggshells around this very problematic issue.

[Llewlladdwr]

107. To be fair, it's a difficult question to answer.

Seeing as how there's no real equivalent to the fatwa in the Christian tradition.

[MNBrewer]

90. Being willing to murder because someone ELSE insulted your prophet is inexcusable

Don't make excuses for the ill behavior of others simply because it's religiously motivated. I have every right to insult every so-called prophet that ever existed on this planet, including Mohammed, without being murdered for it. This strain of Islam is very dangerous and needs to be taken as such, not excused.

[randome]

92. You make a point most of us overlooked.

[FreeJoe]

95. So if a Republican...

...went on a murderous rampage because a Michael Moore film mocked his beliefs, you would blame Moore??? Is there a distinction between the two that I'm missing?

[Nevernose]

97. I'm sensitive, too, so please don't say anything else that will offend me

If you DO say something that offends me, under your logic, I would be justified in murdering a random stranger to show my displeasure. The rest is just run-of-the-mill conspiracy BS.

[NutmegYankee]

98. What a crock of ....

There is no justification to murder people (innocent people at that) just because somebody mocked your religion.

I will not blame the film maker and trash free speech. The film was nasty, but welcome to freedom. I blame the animals responsible for these murders, and I hope we quickly kill them. Part of being a human is dealing with emotion.

[tritsofme]

102. Bullshit. Adults are responsible for their own actions. Period.

[yawnmaster]

106. nope...this is similar to saying...knowing how horny men are, I hold the woman...

responsible for dressing provocatively and getting raped.

Both are wrong in a number of ways...
1. people are responsible for their actions, for controlling their emotions and directing those energies down a non-violent path.
2. broad generalization - horny males rape?? strong feeling Muslims riot and kill?

come on now.