South Park Creators Threatened by Radical Muslims

[Shady]

Hey everybody....let's go see the "Piss Christ" !!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ

Or we could all go see the "The Holy Virgin Mary."

and, most controversial, artist Chris Ofili's work titled "The Holy Virgin Mary;" it is this work -- a depiction of a black Madonna adorned with elephant dung and sexually-explicit photos

PBS

Nothing says Mary like elephant dung and pictures of vaginas. At least South Park doesn't use tax payer money to offend.

[bush_cheney2004]

....Nothing says Mary like elephant dung and pictures of vaginas. At least South Park doesn't use tax payer money to offend.

Now isn't that just swell....good thing Catholics are not "ultra-sensitive". LOL!

[Sir Bandelot]

If you read the article in the link you'd know what happened there. Rudy Guliani shut the show down. Then they punished the museum for showing it.

MAYOR RUDOLPH GIULIANI: If I ignored it, then the argument would be on the other side: How can you ignore something as disgusting, horrible and awful as this? And my view is you do what you think is right. I believe opposing this is the right thing.

Lets see you gloat over that one, old boy!

Edited April 25, 2010 by Sir Bandelot

[August1991]

I did not say we should tip-toe around bullies. I myself can't do that. What I mean to say is, pick your fights wisely. Don't expect to insult people with words or ideas and not get some retaliation. Zundels words were a threat. He got retaliation.

Sir Bandelot, I appreciate the argument that you are making here and elsewhere in this thread. I too would prefer to live in a world where we could all politely respect one another.

Sadly, we don't live in such a world and I suspect that we never will.

There's more. My post above tried to argue that this South Park kerfuffle is largely irrelevant to the problem we in the West face. We don't face stupid people who use the Internet or watch American TV.

We face superstitious people from a different era. I'm not certain how you deal with such people but showing a cartoon on TV may seem courageous in our world but in theirs, the act is meaningless. We in the West face a much larger problem than whether a silly cartoon is broadcast or not.

Edited April 25, 2010 by August1991

[bush_cheney2004]

...We face superstitious people from a different era. I'm not certain how you deal with such people but showing a cartoon on TV may seem courageous in our world but in theirs, the act is meaningless. We in the West face a much larger problem than whether a silly cartoon is broadcast or not.

True, but if such silly cartoons can begin to innoculate against the virulent strain of superstition, then it is surely worth it.

[sharkman]

More nonsense.

I'm afraid...

I think it's ok to offend everyone else, etc. How about some more logical arguments.

It should be no surprise that people around the world are willing to kill for their beliefs, even subtle differences in religious belief. Like the Orangemen in Ireland. Here in Canada we have a general attitude, as long as you leave me alone, I'll leave you alone. In other words, everyone should just mind their own damn business, and there won't be any problems. That means, you do your thing in private, don't bother me. Whoever is bothering someone, is being an antagonist.

I would like to differ with the idea that if we would just mind our own business then there wouldn't be any problems. This presumes that both parties have a reasonable attitude and neither has a trigger temper. That if you look at one the wrong way he won't freak out. It assumes too much in the real world, sometimes what bothers people is silly. In Canada, I was attacked by a bully while delivering newspapers when I was 12. I was reasonable and minding my own business being a shy and introverted kid, but somehow the bully was set off.

It's the same with some muslims. If someone half way across the world in a non muslim country prints a picture of Mohhamed, it should be nothing to them. Yet they will plot murder over it. This is not reasonable. Therefore pussy footing around so as to not set off the bullying groups in the world is not realistic. Is is reasonable for Southpark to do a cartoon depicting several holy men and making fun of them? Yes, as has been pointed out already. Is it reasonable to plot violence or murder over it?

Edited April 25, 2010 by sharkman

[Natchuck]

[quote name=

As I already pointed out, if all we do in response to death threats is to give them what they want, we are reinforcing the idea that death threats will silence us when they want us silenced. We are saying that death threats effectively take away our freedom of expression. We are encouraging death threats whenever we say anything that they don't like.

While I have no desire to partake in such an event myself, I don't see "insisting on my rights to say anything I want" as "childish." I see it as standing up for the reality that everyone has the same freedom of expression. I see it as saying 'death threats won't give you what you are demanding.'

It's fighting fire with fire, not one side "putting gasoline on a fire."

If we don't do something (however,apparently childish) like, say"Muhammad sucks!") We encourage these neanderthals to continue threatening and killing. Muhammad sucks!"

[waldo]

Is anyone else outraged that we are becoming so ridiculously politically correct that we are willing to bend over backwards to accommodate the irrational and violent beliefs of these radical muslim groups in our own countries?

perhaps in your expression of outrage, you could edit your thread title to offer distinction to the stated threat as having originated from a 'radical Islamic group'

I admit I made a mistake in the thread title but that shouldn't let what I'm trying to convey be disregarded.

then the thread title should be corrected - yes?

[waldo]

It should be no surprise that people around the world are willing to kill for their beliefs, even subtle differences in religious belief. Like the Orangemen in Ireland. Here in Canada we have a general attitude, as long as you leave me alone, I'll leave you alone. In other words, everyone should just mind their own damn business, and there won't be any problems. That means, you do your thing in private, don't bother me. Whoever is bothering someone, is being an antagonist. Chances are we're gonna tangle. Then fuck your right to free speech.

ah yes, these free speech proponents... they're being denied their free speech rights when someone questions an act... like poking a stick into a hornet's nest - just because it can be done! It's quite revealing to read the comments of those from the, 'land of the free and the home of the brave', particularly in the context of such things as past controversies, legislation, and court rulings surrounding burning the American Flag... or past controversies and court rulings concerning the rights to universally wear/display the Confederate Flag. It would be interesting to have those same MLW members rationalize those controversies, court rulings and shifting limits, against the right to... poke a stick into any ole hornet's nest - just because one can.

[Guest American Woman]

I would like to differ with the idea that if we would just mind our own business then there wouldn't be any problems.

I couldn't agree more.

This presumes that both parties have a reasonable attitude and neither has a trigger temper.

It also presumes that both must mind their own business. No one is forcing Muslims to watch South Park. No one is putting it in their face, so really, to make a show based on satire that some enjoy is "minding their own business." Furthermore, coming out with the idea of "Everyone Draw Mohammad Day" is also "minding their own business" as their rights being threatened by violence/death threats is every American's "business."

If we can't offend them by depicting Mohammad, then they shouldn't be able to offend any Christians or Jews, either; yet they exercise that "right" and aren't censoring their views/beliefs because of death threats issued by the rest of us.

If someone half way across the world in a non muslim country prints a picture of Mohhamed, it should be nothing to them.

Exactly. As I said, that is minding their own business. Their "business" doesn't include worshiping Mohammad and/or following rules of Islam.

Yet they will plot murder over it. This is not reasonable. Therefore pussy footing around so as to not set off the bullying groups in the world is not realistic.

It's only "realistic" if we are willing to allow them to dictate what we can and cannot do. It's only realistic if we are ok with responding to death threats by caving into their demands. It's only realistic if we think it's ok for some to have more rights than others. And of course none of those things are realistic in nations such as ours.

Is is reasonable for Southpark to do a cartoon depicting several holy men and making fun of them? Yes, as has been pointed out already. Is is reasonable to plot violence or murder over it?

It's easy for these radical groups to threaten just one or two people, such as the creators of South Park, but if thousands engage in the same activity out of protest, there will be that many more for these crazies to target. Eventually, if they are bombarded with it, they will have to threaten so many that their threats will be pointless, especially since there will be many others to 'carry on' what they are trying to prevent.

The world doesn't honor Mohammad and the world should not be required to single Islam out as 'more sacred' than anyone else's beliefs. If these radical Muslims simply minded their own business, it wouldn't include what others outside their religion believe. They wouldn't be trying to force their beliefs on everyone's behavior/actions.

[Shady]

Is Islam the hornet's nest? If so, why?

[GostHacked]

As long as they keep doing what they do in the show I will keep watching. I mean they go after everyone. They pick on Jews the most.

Comedy Central is pretty weak to be censoring this.

[Michael Hardner]

Is Islam the hornet's nest? If so, why?

Yes, every religion is. Why ? Because they're always the last vestige of ensconced patriarchal power, social conservatism and the attendant attributes. Mixed marriage, gay rights, and social change is a threat to the proper order as they view it. The world has been completed reformed over the last 50 years and they think it's wrong. Certainly there are other groups that are closed minded too, but these religious groups do stand out.

What are we to do about it ? Not much. They have the right to be upset, so if you want to make fun of them they will speak up loudly and angrily. As Bandelot pointed out, the New York museum depiction of Mary was one example.

So, yes, we have the right to insult them but why do we need to ? The views of religion are not rational, and certainly it is funny to poke fun at them now and again but it's not as necessary to do this as it once was. Religion lost the cultural wars, so I say we could be better sports about it.

You don't laugh at a fat lady on the bus either.

[Handsome Rob]

Yes, every religion is. Why ? Because they're always the last vestige of ensconced patriarchal power, social conservatism and the attendant attributes. Mixed marriage, gay rights, and social change is a threat to the proper order as they view it. The world has been completed reformed over the last 50 years and they think it's wrong. Certainly there are other groups that are closed minded too, but these religious groups do stand out.

I have to throw in, although I think religion is the dumbest thing since Jim Jones, there is a faint hope that they may be correct. What we're doing, energy needs, mass consumption, idolizing a culture that spends much of it's time in drug rehab & counseling (Hollywood), placing value on one's possessions over one's personal wealth, the sexual openness possibly coming too far, etc.

Our moral & rational high ground isn't without question greater than theirs.

So, yes, we have the right to insult them but why do we need to ? The views of religion are not rational, and certainly it is funny to poke fun at them now and again but it's not as necessary to do this as it once was. Religion lost the cultural wars, so I say we could be better sports about it.

At what point does one draw the line though? Do we get to the point where we're watching every step, treading carefully to not step on toes? Will we be surprised if the amount and size of toes increases exponentially? There are dozens of groups that take no end of satire without a word of reprisal, what makes any particular group different?

I agree, as a political statement from Stone & Parker, this was pointless. Re-confirming what everybody knew, and further polarizing the Us VS Them mentality. But how much do we share the blame? How much is our fault for bending too far, and how much is theirs for not bending enough. If such a problem cannot be solved, then perhaps the two cultures truly cannot mesh? I don't know.

The results from this are going to be interesting, I'm guessing South Park will escalate, and interested to see what the long term internet response is.

You don't laugh at a fat lady on the bus either.

The collage of obesity jokes & pictures on the internet disagrees. We may not do it to their face, but most all of us do it in our minds.

Edited April 25, 2010 by Handsome Rob

[bush_cheney2004]

....You don't laugh at a fat lady on the bus either.

The "fat lady" on the bus does not threaten to murder me for depicting an image of cheeseburgers.

[Michael Hardner]

The "fat lady" on the bus does not threaten to murder me for depicting an image of cheeseburgers.

Funny, but also beside the point. If she would threaten you, does that make you more likely to insult her, or indeed change the idea of whether you should insult her or not ?

[Michael Hardner]

At what point does one draw the line though? Do we get to the point where we're watching every step, treading carefully to not step on toes? Will we be surprised if the amount and size of toes increases exponentially? There are dozens of groups that take no end of satire without a word of reprisal, what makes any particular group different?

I wouldn't say watch every step, but be basically polite. After all, it's the Christian thing to do.

[bush_cheney2004]

Funny, but also beside the point. If she would threaten you, does that make you more likely to insult her, or indeed change the idea of whether you should insult her or not ?

Yes....both behaviours would escalate until resolution and satisfaction are obtained. Cheeseburgers would continue to be sold in many configurations.

[bush_cheney2004]

I wouldn't say watch every step, but be basically polite. After all, it's the Christian thing to do.

This is a choice you can make for yourself, not others.

[Handsome Rob]

I wouldn't say watch every step, but be basically polite. After all, it's the Christian thing to do.

At the expense of comedy? After all, South Park's basic premise of existence is making fun of anything and everything. Which groups is next to be offended and respond with death threats?

Now we're being imposed on, because all they have to do is switch off the television. How many members of these groups would ever watch South Park anyway?

[Shady]

Funny, but also beside the point. If she would threaten you, does that make you more likely to insult her, or indeed change the idea of whether you should insult her or not ?

So what you're saying is that if a particular group of people don't like something that's being said or done, threaten or in many cases commit violence as a way to stop it?

Does that also apply to abortion? Because to many people, killing an unborn baby is much more offensive than drawing a cartoon. But I don't hear the same types of defense applied to pro-life proponents. Interesting how that works, eh? I guess that "hornet's nest" doesn't matter as much.

[bush_cheney2004]

...So what you're saying is that if a particular group of people don't like something that's being said or done, threaten or in many cases commit violence as a way to stop it?

I would hope not, as your example is exactly why free speech / freedom of expression rights must be protected. The proper recourse to "offensive" speech is more speech.

[bush_cheney2004]

Uh-oh....no South Park or music for Somalia:

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/04/25/somalia-radicals-declare-music-un-islamic-and-radio-goes-tune/

[waldo]

Is Islam the hornet's nest? If so, why?

no - radical Islam is the hornet's nest... if you feel there is some redeeming value in pushing a dancing bear into that nest... simply because you can... simply because you feel it's your right - have at er! As stated, don't be surprised if you provoke a reaction from those hornets. I offered up a couple of other examples that highlight the "rights" versus limits of acceptance - apparently, those pointed (American) examples of U.S. flag desecration and displaying the Confederate flag don't rise to the level of a dancing bear!

[Michael Hardner]

This is a choice you can make for yourself, not others.

How would I make that choice for others ? If anybody asks me my opinion, though, I will tell them.