FLASH: U.S. Ambassador to Libya, 3 Other Embassy Staff Killed in Rocket Attack in Benghazi

[rayofreason]

142. Actually, try this example...

Filmmaker creates film expressing the belief that gay people - all gay people - are inherently subhuman cannibal-rapists. The men depicted in the film spend their time stalking, raping, and then devouring infant boys. They do this of course, because gay people are actually demons, literal shrieking hordes of hell, spit up by Satan in order to punish good Christians for not killing enough of them.

So after the film is released, a group of gay cannibal-rapists, infuriated by the depiction, attack a US consulate kill the Ambassador, then eat him, but are unable to rape him since he has been eaten already.

That would be the parallel. This film did not incite Christians to attack Muslims for their supposed crimes. If fact there have been no Christian riots over this at all. No "good christian soldier" opening fire at the local school's Muslim-Christian alliance meeting. It is Muslims who are rioting and killing. And killing people who have no connection at all to the film.

I wonder how you would feel if Mormon extremists were to bomb a theatre where "The Book of Mormon" was playing? If you have any intellectual consistency you would then be aiming rhetorical missiles at Matt Stone and Trey Parker, complaining about all the money they get to pocket. After all, their production cost far more, is seen by far more people, and is far more effective at undermining a religion than any crude propaganda made by an amateur.

But somehow I suspect that you would be on the side of Stone and Parker, and their right to express their opinions regardless of any insult perceived by Mormons, justified or not. So pardon my skepticism about your position on this thread and its grounding in any intellectual or moral consistency.