Beheading in France

I won't swear or be rude to fellow members here, but I do agree that free speech is paramount in this case. If it offends some ignorant and superstitious people tough. Possibly my attitude is founded on having spent seven years in a christian boarding school, where the Brothers thought torture was a fair response to any supposed transgressions.
The teacher did warn the students, so he had safeguarded the individuals in his care. If some nut jobs then decided that simply doing what he did demanded a medieval death they are totally at fault.
If that particular branch of that particular religion does think that way, then perhaps they need to be encouraged to go live with others who think similarly.

n7axw wrote: I'm sorry Dilandu, but that doesn't make any sense. There can be a difference between being simply controversial and being outright offensive. I might have the right to be offensive, but is it wise?

Don

-

Er... I never mentioned the offensive/non-offensive theme. All I pointed out, is that Europe made a big blunder by welcoming Chechen radicals, fleeing from Russia, with open arms, instead of kicking them back in chains. Europeans welcomed those peoples, praised them in media, essentially told them, that they were right - and those terrorists, encouraged by Europeans warm welcome, started to taught their children to be as radical as they are. The result is obvious.

n7axw wrote:
One doesn't have to be a religious nut job to be deeply offended by this. I am not Islam and I am offended. Muhammad should not be exposed to ridicule. But, then, Jesus hung naked on a cross. Thinking of it in this context does strip away some of the religious romanticism that Christians indulge in. That has to be a good thing.

But, I know that when I read the article, my thought was "what was the idiot thinking?" I was thinking about the teacher. For dumb, disrespectful and insensitive, this one has to be near the top.

It doesn't justify his murder, of course. The killer will need to be brought to justice in a court of law.

Don-

I’m forced to disagree with you sir in your condemnation of a teacher using a cartoon of the Prophet as a teaching-aid in a civic class, where something as basal as freedom of expression was being taught and discussed.
That the selfsame teacher was fully aware of the sensitive nature of his day’s lesson is clear. In that he gave his pupils the choice of leaving his class if they felt that the day’s topic might conflict with their deep seated religious beliefs.
It’s not as if the cartoon (and others by the same cartoonist) in question were some dirty hidden secret. Their existence was known to all and sundry; the attack on Charlie Hebdo made sure of that.
Teaching the pros and cons of freedom of expression was is certainly better being taught and discussed in the closed environment of a classroom. Rather than having the pupils get their information from the media or the Internet.

Arol, the last thing I am wanting to do is condemn the teacher. But I do call into question his choices here.

Islam has a long history as a violent, aggressive faith. That kids reaction put that on full display. Kids that age don't even have fully mature brains. The last part of the brain to mature is judgment and risk taking which does not happen until the mid-twenties.

I look at this and try to understand. Two lives have been lost and I grieve...

Don

-

Dilandu wrote:

n7axw wrote: I'm sorry Dilandu, but that doesn't make any sense. There can be a difference between being simply controversial and being outright offensive. I might have the right to be offensive, but is it wise?

Don

-

Er... I never mentioned the offensive/non-offensive theme. All I pointed out, is that Europe made a big blunder by welcoming Chechen radicals, fleeing from Russia, with open arms, instead of kicking them back in chains. Europeans welcomed those peoples, praised them in media, essentially told them, that they were right - and those terrorists, encouraged by Europeans warm welcome, started to taught their children to be as radical as they are. The result is obvious.

G
There is no doubt but what it has been a bumpy ride for the Europeans. I suspect that an important vector with Brexit was a desire on the part of many Brits to regain control of immigration within their own borders.

Over here we have also struggled with Islamic radicalization. But at least at this point, it seems as though terrorist incidents have been declining.

Don

-

Now popping popcorn.

Australia has about 2% Moslems, most of whom are sensible multigenerational citizens. Our Islamic terrorism annual death toll is about 1, yet to read our media we are all about to be murdered in our beds. The government fans the flames and spends a disproportionate amount of money on antiterrorism activities. Apart from 9/11 the US seems much the same.
Europe does seem to have a problem though. Not sure as to the answer, as many have been born, raised and educated in a modern system yet still offend. Certainly don't give in and change ourselves so as to to not upset them.

Daryl wrote:Australia has about 2% Moslems, most of whom are sensible multigenerational citizens. Our Islamic terrorism annual death toll is about 1, yet to read our media we are all about to be murdered in our beds. The government fans the flames and spends a disproportionate amount of money on antiterrorism activities. Apart from 9/11 the US seems much the same.
Europe does seem to have a problem though. Not sure as to the answer, as many have been born, raised and educated in a modern system yet still offend. Certainly don't give in and change ourselves so as to to not upset them.

Hear! Hear! Daryl
My sentiments exactly and not just mine but also my upstairs neighbors, a fully assimilated Syrian refugee family who arrived here almost 10 years ago.
Sometimes my solutions to what should be the fate of the extremist Islamic nut-jobs are considered extreme by family and friends. But they are soft-soap, compared to Asims!
When our talks come around to them, his ancient Assyrian genes come fully to expression. (Look them up, they were considered extreme even by ancient standards!)
As he has said, he and his family and others fled from the world the radicals created, and now they want to turn our society into the same sinkhole. So I understand his sentiment.

Arol wrote:

Daryl wrote:Australia has about 2% Moslems, most of whom are sensible multigenerational citizens. Our Islamic terrorism annual death toll is about 1, yet to read our media we are all about to be murdered in our beds. The government fans the flames and spends a disproportionate amount of money on antiterrorism activities. Apart from 9/11 the US seems much the same.
Europe does seem to have a problem though. Not sure as to the answer, as many have been born, raised and educated in a modern system yet still offend. Certainly don't give in and change ourselves so as to to not upset them.

Hear! Hear! Daryl
My sentiments exactly and not just mine but also my upstairs neighbors, a fully assimilated Syrian refugee family who arrived here almost 10 years ago.
Sometimes my solutions to what should be the fate of the extremist Islamic nut-jobs are considered extreme by family and friends. But they are soft-soap, compared to Asims!
When our talks come around to them, his ancient Assyrian genes come fully to expression. (Look them up, they were considered extreme even by ancient standards!)
As he has said, he and his family and others fled from the world the radicals created, and now they want to turn our society into the same sinkhole. So I understand his sentiment.

You will all be submitting to Sharia law within a few more decades.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:You will all be submitting to Sharia law within a few more decades.

You'll get there before we do.