Nashrakh Posts

Being part of the chain of causes shouldn't mean it was his fault. Of course, it was the "sin" he committed that led the extremists to make the choice to murder others. I don't know much about the story, but I'm assuming he didn't draw those pictures with the intention of arousing violent behavior. This is why I can't see him as the main problem. The choice the extremists made remains the main problem, and it makes the violence that occurred entirely their fault, even though your mind, in a way, instinctively wants to go deeper down the perceived causal chain and point a finger at Lars Vilks as the cause of the problem.

Something I think we'll notice is that when a soldier dies in a terrorist attack, the first thing people will do is blame those who burned a bunch of books. They won't bother to think that maybe the reason he killed that soldier was because he's a fucking terrorist. They'll forget that correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation.

I'm late to the after party. Oh well, I'll leave it at this.

Freedom.

But were those 30 deaths the fault of Lars Vilks? Was he the problem? I maintain that the problem is the extremists who show themselves to be the barbarians that they are, all because someone drew a picture.

In this quran burning scenario, I see the burners as a lesser evil. These people who say, "You must respect my religion, or else", should not be catered to. Draw muhammad day was similar in that it was a giant middle finger to those who would impose their will on us.

Either way, quran burning as a way of honoring the victims of 9/11 is moronic.

In a way, you're correct. In my mind, the way it's used against extremists is not just with disrespect, but it also includes my disgust. Other than that, it's just something I use to replace the word muslim. Just like if I want to express my disrespect for the christian religion, I call christians christfags.

It's not about personally attacking someone. People only get butthurt because they adhere to these stupid beliefs and it's a part of their life.

Offensive to muslims, sure, but inciting violence against them? Come on. All I see is them saying "Fuck your beliefs and values." Until they're explicitly inciting violence, claiming they're trying to fuck muslims up is only based on speculation.

The only thing that seems to have worked is the suppression of free expression. In America, freedom of speech means allowing people to express ideas that others disapprove of. It protects those who express unpopular views, whether or not it offends someone. Or is this Sweden shit about violence? Did they criminalize expressing disapproval of or offending other groups, or did they criminalize inciting violence against these other groups?

Going back to this quran burning, are these people trying to incite violence against muslims? If not, then whether or not the allallahfags get pissed off shouldn't matter, and using the government to legislate your value of forced respect makes you an asshole as well. These quran burners aren't the problem here, it's the cocksuckers who would resort to violence just because others don't respect their stupid faith that are the problem.



Is forcing others to shut up and not express themselves under threat of incarceration really the way you would spread tolerance?

You'd criminalize something just because it's disrespectful to a group of people?

Add to that the drawing of pictures, right?

So fucking what if some assholes across the world shit themselves over it? We should limit our freedom because they're psychotic douchebags? Disgusting.

I'm pretty sure he'll get laid if he builds a collider.

What is that law? If someone from a nation burns the quran, you're supposed to kill everyone from that nation?

The only bad thing about this event is its publicity. Other than that, they should do what the fuck they want to religious texts. It's just a bunch of idiots opposing idiots anyway.



Owned.

"we are praying about it"

They're doing something about it, guys.

It's not an excuse, rather, it's the truth. I assume the word "absolute" in this context is being used to mean "perfect". It just so happens that I don't believe in a "perfect" anything. Even if I ask myself, what is "perfect" to me specifically, I can't think of anything that will not be flawed in some way.

If philosophy teachers have a problem with the truth as I see it, fuck them. Luckily for me, I don't need anymore philosophy credits.

Or instead of trying to manufacture some kind of elaborate explanation on something you may not be too sure about yourself, maybe you could say that it doesn't mean anything to you, and that you don't believe in such a thing. That's what I'd say to my philosophy teacher, whether they liked it or not.

But that assumes you're like me, which I doubt you are.

No, it won't. Then again, maybe it will. I haven't fucking played it yet, damn it.

Someone should tell 4chan, they'll find his dad in no time.

Resistance is futile.






Seriously, it's been tried before.

I'd like to amend that: Honestly, if people weren't such assholes (this includes the media, but not all who covered this topic though) and didn't make a big deal out of a non-issue, this controversy wouldn't have happened in the first place, and we could have focused on more important business.

Since people are deciding it's a good idea to nominate g-$, I won't mind as long as he isn't a fucking rulefag.

You know kids these days, I'm sure someone will have this on youtube by tonight.