Posted on 05/06/2015 6:38:43 AM PDT by Leaning Right
The LGBT community should be thankful that Christian bakers and photographers aren’t the extremists...
At the VERY most she was simply “Rude”, but she was never WRONG!
The sun rose in the east this morning and that was wrong too...
Being Provocative or Rude in a nation of pretty little snowflakes is not a CRIME according to liberal academia...
I don’t see those two as similar. Wanting to be treated as humans is not the same as creating a contest to mock someone else’s religion. Even if the second thing “brings up an issue of the 1st amendment.”
Pam Geller was within the law and thus should not be punished or shot at for that. The boys who wrote the Book Of Mormon musical won many Tony awards. No one was killed.
She took a risk because the religion she chose to offend has more violent adherents and that is clear to the entire planet.
If she is a Christian or a Jew she was morally wrong because she chose not to treat Muslims the way she would want to be treated. If she didn’t enjoy Piss Christ or Jesus as depicted on Family Guy, or if Jewish if she didn’t like the Nazi cartoons of Jews, then she shouldn’t mockingly depict other religions either. It is the Golden Rule.
This is good for America. The REAL America. It is totally out.ting the phonies. The folks in the media, and anyone in the spotlight really, their whole existence, many are well paid, is due to the `1A!!!
Now, after 9-11, and repeated examples of terrorism in America, they back down? They don’t have the guts to stand up to the head choppers???
I am soooo glad Americans, beyond the cesspool cities, are well armed.:)
In the words of Sec of State John Kerry, “Bring it on”
Oh wait, that was just tough talk?
What did Geller do that was any different than what Charlie Hebdo did? And why shouldn’t the same people be supporting her right to do it?
Charlie Hebdo had a magazine capturing the worst of the political goings on of the week. They were merciless always to pretty much everyone. Yes there was a political slant, but the weekly was not The Anti Muslim Times.
Geller did what she did SOLELY to provoke. She didn’t just insult a religion, she insulted the one religion who responds with violence. What was her point, and what had she planned if someone got hurt?
I can’t believe you think blacks breaking an unconstitutional “law” to be treated equal to whites is the same thing as Piss Christ.
You guys are not using any sort of logic at all.
This contest was equal to Piss Christ. It was equal to The Book of Mormon musical. Come on, people.
Geller was right, because most are missing the point.....The point being that Islam should be treated no differently than any other religion in terms of allowing mockery, and that Muslims need to grow a thicker skin.
Christians put up with much worse, but you don’t see them going around acting violently.
Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth.Therefore if only one religion were referred to in the First Amendment - if it were impossible for two religions to both enjoy “free exercise” - that one religion would have to be Christianity.
If your faith is such that a bunch of cartoonists tick you off, then maybe you should re-examine your faith.
Charlie Hebdo
Way back when Salman Rushdie was facing a deadly fatwah by the ROP, just as Pamela Geller is receiving death threats today, the Catholic church tut-tutted Rushdie for being provocative.
Recently Pope Frank agrees with al Jazeera on Charlie Hebdo—and vice versa—and presumably thinks Pamela Geller should STFU.
Btw I expect local P. Frank fanbois and other Mother Church zealots to ululate, “Why can’t *you* just shut up about this stuff!?” and that will pretty much prove the point.
Are the piss christ and Book of Mormon musical protected free speech, or not?
Strongly disagreeing, trying to use words and facts to convince others, peacefully protesting (or even boycotting) in response to such provocative acts? Just fine.
But when a group decides their own rules MUST apply to all others, and that they will enforce the rules with bloodshed, a very visible line is crossed. The issue Pamela Geller is highlighting isn’t the prohibition of images of Mohammed. It is the proclaimed death sentence imposed on non-muslims for “violating” their rule (that should apply only within their own adherents).
“then she shouldn’t mockingly depict other religions either. It is the Golden Rule.”
Not quite the same. Any other “religion” does not demand that everyone, including governments, bend over backwards to follow completely incompatible “religious” laws (sheria law) .
If your sister moved to the Middle East it would be one thing. But the Islamist living in this country would have your sister in a burka or a hiijab if they had a little more power.
It goes beyond religious freedom. They are telling others what to do. If you don’t play along they will kill you. Even if you play along, like the cowards in the media, they will kill you.
Otherwise, the First Amendment doesn’t protect non-offensive language. There would be no need for 1A if people all talked nice. Even if Geller is wrong its entirely in her rights. She certainly should not be killed by a thinned skinned religion of pieces because of it.
Alos, she didn’t destroy a city in order to make her point.
To some extent, you are correct. But there are important differences. Neither the Christians nor the Mormons threaten violence against those who defame their religion. And neither the Christians nor the Mormons are aggressively upping their demands on society as a whole.
If a free people don't push back now, those demands will get more and more extreme. And one way of pushing back is by use of ridicule. It's a fair tool for a free people.
No, she was not.
History shows us that the followers of Islam like to “fly under the radar” with respect to the totalitarian, barbarish, murderous nature of their religion until they are in a position of total control.
Anything to unmask this beast is, in my book, righteous.
ignoring cancer, with the mind-set that it isn’t very large yet is not a health-care strategy
Draw the Prophet...draw out the pestilence?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.