"Oh you people take the world way too heavy"

You´re absolutely right!
But you can´t demand that everyone gets this.
It´s a pity.

The first pic is another good example for short sighted activities.
This comparison is flawed. Think a minute about "jews" and "mohammed".

Then think another minute about jews wearing swatsika armbelts. He is mixing it on purpose, but the point still remains: a danish cartoonist made an innocent cartoon, because that is what he does for a living (cartoonists ARE childish, but we read them anyway, because we like that as free-speech people; sarcasm and relativism) and the extremists demand Danish blood now. Not only is this twistedly generalizing all of Danish over this one cartoonist, it is also hypocritical for they are offensive themselves against any other religion/political system that is not like their own.

What cartoonists do is good, they relativate and soothe the problems so sensitive free-speech people don't go all nuts and grow hatred against the extremists, but instead wave it away with a smile.

I know a lot of "infidels" which behave exactly in the same manner - on a "scientific" level.

You can´t compare a picture of a jewish citizen with a picture of a god.
To say it in islam: With the one and only god.
Which reactions do you expect?
Is it really so hard to accept, that this drawings actually hurt a whole culture? Are we really such dumb asses?

Sorry, but I´m feeling rather bad now for coming out of europe...

If these drawings hurt a whole culture (which isn't the case (it only "hurts" the extremists, but then again they take every reason they get to rage a war)) then this culture should not take the world so heavy . It is then the free-of-speech culture that is full of sarcastic tolerance against the fierce conservative culture which doesn't tolerate any sarcasm. It is them who need to adapt, because the world is not just theirs. Free-of-speech culture can tolerate the conservative culture, but not vice versa. And since we do not threaten their countries, but they threaten ours, they go beyond acceptable borders, not us drawing pictures.

Of course you do, because you draw those pictures only to bring them into rage by saying "It's my freedom of speech which allows me to do this".
If you can bring me a single point of what you intend to change with this event or whats your idea in it which creates a long term solution for both sides, no one would complain.

At the moment this is nothing more like two little childs, one having a lolly and waving it in front of the other, while the other has none.

Drawing pictures or flying two planes in a skyscraper and blow up a metro station. Yeah, that's comparable .

I brought a point but nobody seem to accept it as a point, we're a relativistic society which judges the world objectively and with a sense of humour. It is in our nature. Just like it's in their nature to get angry about it. Why would we need to change, if they can change too? Well they wont, but that doesn't mean we should change our standards. If they start drawing funny pictures about us and leave it at that, nobody but pricks would complain.

"it only "hurts" the extremists"

Where did you get this pov?
Take alook at alpha12´s last post...

"If they start drawing funny pictures about us and leave it at that, nobody but pricks would complain."

Ok, wonderful. We should keep it like that.
But is this the one and only way to handle the situation?
Why are you so confident about our so called common sense?
Who gives us the right to determine what´s good and bad?

What is it going to accomplish? Well, if the Radical Muslims start sending out death threats to all those people who participated they are soon going to lose credibility. They will get ridiculed, as a part of that politicians wont bend over for them anymore (hopefully) and finally see just how coockoodoodeldoo those guys really are. Meriting not the help of the government to support their "Religion" but rather help of some mental institution.

Before anyone goes ballistic, I'll repeat again: I have no problem with anyone's religion, but only as long as they keep it to themselves.

The question how it affects me in Germany? Well, if you think that these issues are exclusive to England and Islam, then you are pretty naive. Maybe they don't have many supporters here right now, but if they continue their winning streak in the UK, other countries will be on their list. And Germany as a country where freedom of speech is an important part of the Constitution, we are pretty high on their "hit list".

Of course there are other ways, but they take decades. Politics rarely solved religious problems or removed someone from a position of power when they started to become tyrannical or oppressors. In the end, we - the people - have to take the initiative. We don't want bloodshed and arguing with them has proven to be pointless.

Of course, it will provoke them. I know that, but that is not the main point. If they get angry about an action like this, (as I said above) it will ridicule them. Getting angry at DRAWINGS? If they decided that the Mona Lisa is offensive to their religion, MUST we remove it from the Louvre? Of course not. If they get angry at something this silly, then really nobody is going to pay them any more attention.

"Getting angry at DRAWINGS?"

Just accept it. What´s wrong with that?
What´s right about _not_ getting angry at drawings?
You can´t transfer _your_ common sense to the whole world.

Even better: You _demand_ that radical muslems have to accept other cultures.
You are no whit better if you that.
We demand. Muslems demand. Patt.

Just accept that our way isn´t the only on, the right one, the best one. We are all kleine Würstchen in our small world.



Fail. Da Vinci has had no intentions to offend somebody.
But the mohammed drawers did. If they deny that fact, they should grow up.

I don't DEMAND they accept our culture. I want them to stop changing it just because they believe theirs is better. Like I keep, and keep repeating over and over: I have no quarrel with them, as long as the keep it to themselves!



When did we deny it?