Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship Media Television Entertainment Your Rights Online

South Park's Episode 201 — the Expurgated Version 1224

Posted by timothy
from the but-officer-the-threat-was-oblique dept.
Yesterday we mentioned the controversy facing Matt Stone and Trey Parker after last week's South Park (episode 200) depicted Muhammad, founder of Islam, concealed in a bear suit. Today, penguinman1337 writes "Apparently, all is not well over at Comedy Central. The heavily censored version of episode 201 that aired last night has a lot of people angry, including the show's creators." From their note: "In the 14 years we've been doing South Park we have never done a show that we couldn't stand behind. We delivered our version of the show to Comedy Central and they made a determination to alter the episode. It wasn't some meta-joke on our part. Comedy Central added the bleeps."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

South Park's Episode 201 — the Expurgated Version

Comments Filter:
  • by denzacar (181829) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:28PM (#31946950) Journal

    There is no knee-jerk but knee-jerk and jerks are its prophets.

  • Re:You don't say (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:29PM (#31946972)

    At the risk of my good karma, you're a moron. They didn't censor the part with Jesus watching porn, or Buda doing lines of coke, they censored the speaking of the word "prophet muhammed" and the "I learned something today" speech that didn't even mention muhammed. All because people are scared of offending muslims.

  • Give them an inch (Score:5, Insightful)

    by interkin3tic (1469267) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:32PM (#31947010)

    Ah, comedy central has made it clear that in response to death threats, they'll censor themselves. I'm sure that will be the last time religious nuts get their panties in a twist and threaten them with violence because they're angry. After all, religious fundamentalism goes hand in hand with being reasonable.

    Wonder if we'll ever see Colbert gagged because some right-wing "hutatree" terrorist realized they were being made fun of...

  • by Sycraft-fu (314770) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:32PM (#31947026)

    I am more than a little tired of this crap of "Oh we have to be culturally sensitive towards the Muslims." No, we don't. We don't need to be culturally sensitive to anyone. I liked Philip Pullman's talk about this general idea when he said "No one has the right to live without being shocked, no one has the right to spend their life without being offended." (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQ3VcbAfd4w&feature=player_embedded).

    The media needs to learn that about the Muslims as well. They aren't a special group any more than Christians or Atheists or anyone else. If they want to get whiny about people making fun of them the answer needs to be "Shut up, nobody cares," and then go back to making fun.

    A very important part of free speech is the ability to make fun of things, including, maybe even especially, the things people hold sacred.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:34PM (#31947044)

    The heavily censored version of episode 201 that aired last night has a lot of people angry, including the show's creators.

    The terrorists have won.

  • Re:You don't say (Score:5, Insightful)

    by eln (21727) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:36PM (#31947086) Homepage
    According to the statement by Matt and Trey, the final speech (which in the broadcast version was nothing but an extremely long beep) didn't even mention Muhammed, it was about intimidation and fear. Comedy Central really went way overboard on the censoring of this episode. Hopefully whenever their current contract expires they can take South Park to a network that isn't run by a bunch of gutless cowards (if such a thing even exists anymore).

    Personally, I thought the whole two-part episode kind of sucked anyway, but the overzealous censoring of the second part was just ridiculous.
  • by NetNinja (469346) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:37PM (#31947098)

    And this is what happens when you let terrorists censor you.

  • Re:You don't say (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Le Marteau (206396) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:39PM (#31947126) Journal

    > All because people are scared of offending muslims.

    The are not scared of offending Muslims, per se. They are scared of being murdered. Their fear is not unfounded and is with precedent.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:40PM (#31947132)

    Muslims told everyone else how to behave and what they are allowed to say?

    You don't say?

    I thought it was a coincidence that many of the most theocratic, oppressive, and evil regimes justify their existence with Islam.

    This was of course the point of the South Park episode. They insulted every religion in the world in that episode, and only one threatened violence and managed to get their bit censored. It's 2010 and Islam is stuck in the 1300s. It's impact on the world is violent, pushy, and fascist.

  • Re:1984? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Beelzebud (1361137) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:40PM (#31947134)
    On please. Go back and re-read 1984, and tell me how a comedy channel is the same thing as a fascist dictatorship... If this was government censorship, you might have a point.
  • Re:You don't say (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jayhawk88 (160512) <jayhawk88@gmail.com> on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:40PM (#31947140)

    It's also interesting in the way they chose to censor it. Tom Cruise got censored when he "received Mohammed's goo", but it was done in the exact same way Mohammed in the bear suit was, implying a joke. Presumably Matt and Trey did not have Tom transform into Mohammed, since not showing Mohammed was the joke to begin with; perhaps he transformed into a bear suit too or something along those lines. Whatever was really there, CC had no need to censor the image of Cruise, since Muslims would not have had a problem with Cruise in a bear suit or whatever. Censoring him in the same way was, again, a joke.

    As for the end speech being entirely bleeped, if it's true that it didn't mention Mohammed at all, then bleeping it makes no sense at all. This is the network that had no problem with 216 utterances of the word shit after all; what could Stan and Kyle possibly been saying that was so offensive? Again, it seemed like this was a joke, poking fun at the whole censorship thing.

    What's disturbing here is that, if it's true CC made these censors without Matt and Trey's knowledge, then they were not only censoring, but adding or changing jokes in the episode as well. Censorship is one thing, but creatively changing an episode...I would think that from the creators eyes that would be even worse, and I can't believe CC would dare do such a thing.

    Despite the statement, I'm still not convinced this isn't all some big hoax or joke. The censoring done in the episode just doesn't make any sense, unless it's part of the episode, jokes about the whole situation.

  • by Beelzebud (1361137) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:41PM (#31947156)
    To me this smells like one giant PR stunt.
  • Re:You don't say (Score:1, Insightful)

    by xaxa (988988) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:43PM (#31947172)

    Because while Christians will turn the other cheek

    Really? I think someone needs to tell the gun-toting Americans...

  • by Paul server guy (1128251) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:43PM (#31947176) Homepage

    Too bad you posted that AC - Or are you afraid as well?

  • by rolfwind (528248) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:44PM (#31947180)

    I think you overestimate the current profitability of the online audience... hell, South Park even made fun the difficulty to monetize online success in "Canada on Strike", a relatively recent episode.

    Otherwise, I agree with you, those 3 shows carry comedy central. Comedy Central tries to strike out on other good shows but they usually suck, whether cartoons (Drawn Together, Ugly Americans) or shows like Tosh.0.

    Hell, reruns of Futurama is their 4th biggest thing, but seeing the same 60 episodes gets old fast... hopefully the new ones will be good.

  • by couchslug (175151) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:44PM (#31947184)

    "A very important part of free speech is the ability to make fun of things, including, maybe even especially, the things people hold sacred."

    An even more important part of free speech is the right to attack and ridicule any belief and any person. This is vital to freedom because otherwise restraints on speech will be exploited to censor debate and stop opposition.

    As for the superstitions of the desert, it would be nice if their followers had but one throat and my hands were on it.

  • Pathetic (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kuwan (443684) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:44PM (#31947190) Homepage

    What Comedy Central did was absolutely pathetic. Parker & Stone had already self-censored the episode by not actually showing any pictures of Muhammad and the way they did it was absolutely hilarious. But apparently you can't even speak the work "Muhammad" on Comedy Central. That Comedy Central allows them to ridicule anything and everything - any and all other religions are open game - but when it comes to anything Islam-related suddenly there's a whole new set of rules. Hypocrisy and cowardice at its finest.

    I hope that the uncensored version makes its way out soon.

  • Re:You don't say (Score:3, Insightful)

    by StrategicIrony (1183007) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:45PM (#31947198)

    I think that's supposed to read

    "are supposed to turn the other cheek"

    The christianists in the bible belt haven't followed Jeebus for a long ass time.

  • by socz (1057222) <socrates@[ ]ttobsd.org ['ghe' in gap]> on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:48PM (#31947230) Homepage Journal
    This morning I heard "so who is really to blame? The creators of south park who write the offensive satire or those who are making the threats of possible violence and death? Well, obviously those making threats are wrong, but what about the creators?"

    So lets see, at least in the United States of America we have the beleif of "Freedom of Speech" right? That means we can dissent when we feel especially strong about something.

    So I figure, for anyone who says "the creators are wrong in their satire" just opens the door for "those hippies supporting marijuana" (Viva Marijuana was the sign I saw this morning on the way to work) to also be "censored."

    Oh but that's totally different right? Lets move to 'scientology.' Why should they not be allowed to censor people? Political groups? Schools? Religions with abuse scandals? Where/when do we stop censoring?

    The best and most straightforward argument I have heard regarding this is:
    "South Park has made fun of Christians, Jews, people of different ethnicities and organizations. But none other than the Muslims have threatened violence before." That should tell us where the real problem lies.

    From my point of view, when I first saw South Park I was offended (Jesus Christ Vs. Santa Claus). But as time passed and I gave it a chance... eventually viewing it when it came on Comedy Central I enjoyed it. As a matter of fact, I regularly recommend it to people when key issues come up. Such as their red cross/catholic scandal episode.

    Finally, what happened with Issac Hayes was tragic but eye opening. He shows that "I can be part of something (great) that covers a lot of subjects - that consequently offend everyone at some point or other, as long as it doesn't offend me or my beliefs."
  • by Huzzah! (1548443) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:48PM (#31947238)
    of a guy who was making and selling intentionally offensive/controversial items (Jesus dildos and the like) why he didn't have a dildo in Mohammed's likeness. He said that he was a coward because he didn't want to die, and making Christians mad was OK because they wouldn't walk up and stab him in the chest.

    I infer from that that those who enjoy christian-bashing would quit if the christians started being equally forgiving as followers of Islam are.

  • Re:You don't say (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:49PM (#31947248)

    I think that's supposed to read

    "are supposed to turn the other cheek"

    The christianists in the bible belt haven't followed Jeebus for a long ass time.

    Sure, but by that same token, I seriously doubt the Koran explicitly advocates killing people indiscriminately.

  • Re:You don't say (Score:4, Insightful)

    by uncanny (954868) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:55PM (#31947330)
    Why is this modded troll? are you kidding me? maybe the "nerds" on here get the luxury of working only with other nerds, however i have to work with two conservative, gun crazy people who sit there and every day complain about "the government is trying to disarm the american people, we need to buy more guns". One day one of them said "we need to just round up all the muslims and shoot them" holy crap, dont realize if you know this, but that's called ethnic cleansing!! Yeah, there are "gun-toting americans" that i'm more afraid to be around then any of the muslims i went to school with! sorry for the rant
  • Re:You don't say (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Rijnzael (1294596) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:58PM (#31947378)
    I also doubt that as well. Nonetheless, many Islamic scholars who wish to justify the hatred they feel and the violence they desire against those they perceive as enemies have and continue to advocate such indiscriminate killing. I think this Youtube video adequately describes some of the problems with Islam as a whole: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyNQ1zc-q74 [youtube.com]
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:58PM (#31947384)

    Islam is just a particularly stupid and virulent version of it.

  • by adamofgreyskull (640712) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:58PM (#31947388)
    I'm not being funny, but South Park has made fun of a lot of other religions [wikipedia.org] and as far as I know, have not received death threats from any of them. This is what I remember, but you can see for yourself at Wikipedia:
    • Atheism
    • Christianity - (Jesus's public access show, etc.)
    • Mormonism - (Complete deconstruction/mockery of the articles of faith, mockery of John Smith)
    • Catholicism - (General mockery, representation of priests as homosexual paedophiles, queen spider controlling the religion)
    • Scientology - (Do I need to elaborate?)

    What's more, they've even depicted Muhammad before!! In the episode Super Best Friends [wikipedia.org]. It boggles the mind that followers of a religion of love can be so hateful over something so mind-bogglingly ridiculous.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 22, 2010 @06:59PM (#31947398)

    He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security. -Benjamin Franklin

  • Re:You don't say (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:05PM (#31947496)
    The "image censored" strip over Muhammad and Cruise were probably part of the original episode - you can hear Tom Cruise exalting that "it worked" and there was no other sign that he had the "goo" powers. Comedy Central added *all* the audio bleeps, though. They censored the ending speech because it said something like "we shouldn't let threats of terrorism dictate our actions". Since CC choose to let threats of terrorism dictate their actions...
  • No, they have not. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by khasim (1285) <brandioch.conner@gmail.com> on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:05PM (#31947522)

    The terrorists only win when we lose the will to fight for our Freedoms.

    If anything, this shows that Comedy Central has surrendered to terrorism.

    But Matt and Trey are still fighting for Freedom of Speech.

  • by Hatta (162192) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:05PM (#31947524) Journal

    If The Simpsons on Hulu can be more profitable [newteevee.com] than on network TV, why would you think South Park wouldn't be able to pull better ad revenues online than on cable?

  • Re:You don't say (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Rewind (138843) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:06PM (#31947532) Homepage
    Well thats the old part. I am hardly a theology scholar, but I think (could be wrong) a lot of the stuff in the new testament was ment to invalidate the old stuff, like stoning. So if someone is doing it for Jebus then they should be likewise against that stuff. If they just follow the old testament then they aren't really Christains, but that would be some valid form of religion I guess.
  • by Erinnys Tisiphone (1627695) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:13PM (#31947624)
    Sensible Christians can smile at themselves. Sensible Atheists can smile at themselves. Sensible Catholics can smile at themselves. Sensible Hindus can smile at themselves... And so on... This is a sacrifice we have to make to coexist with the rest of the planet in globalized society. Taking oneself too seriously all of the time (at others' expense) is an indication that one has absolutely no willingness to permit others to be different.
  • by Oxford_Comma_Lover (1679530) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:13PM (#31947630)

    > Because while Christians will turn the other cheek, and Buddhists likewise, Muslims will fucking kill you.

    It's rather a shame that this was modded informative, because it means we don't actually know that much about Islam here. Yes, there are Islamic extremists who will kill you. We had Christian extremists who would kill you for being Muslim for hundreds of years--the Crusades. We still have Christian extremists who burn crosses to scare people they don't like. The extremism on either side uses religion to justify its extremism, but it's not an inherent part of any faith. People have killed for Judaism, but I don't think any of the Jews I've known ever have. (I don't recall offhand if any of them have been in the IDF, and there are plenty of complicating factors, but the point stands. The IDF is not an extremist group by any stretch of the imagination, and I believe they try to do things correctly, but they also commit war crimes from time to time. Some militaries are worse about it than others. My rough estimate would be they're worse than the US but much better than, for example, Sudan. Though everybody's better than Sudan. Mmm... a little offtopic, though many militaries look to the will of God for justification, officially or unofficially. As does nonconventional warfare/terrorism.)

    Anyway, the point is that some Christians kill too, and most Muslims don't. There may be more Muslims who will kill you for satire right now, but we shouldn't be generalizing because it polarizes us, and that's a bad thing. We want to bring people together on common interest in--for example--not being blown up. Living well. We don't want to drive wedges between America and the rest of the world by generalizing "America good. Muslims kill."

    The interesting question is whether they censored it because it will be offensive, or because they'll get killed. To my mind the former is legitimate, if they decide to do that. (It's their network, and it's okay to be polite--even in comedy.) The latter is a much less satisfying and more probable possibility.

  • Re:1984? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheRaven64 (641858) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:13PM (#31947632) Journal
    You might need to re-read 1984 yourself. One of the points was that the Party itself was not actually that powerful; it appeared so because most people were willing to censor their own speech and even thoughts (see: doublethink). The Party only needed to worry about the people who weren't.
  • by MrHanky (141717) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:16PM (#31947684) Homepage Journal

    Perhaps not so much afraid of Islamist terrorists as of the dreaded -1, off topic, I suspect.

  • by Shivetya (243324) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:17PM (#31947700) Homepage Journal

    and I am sure Jewish and Hindu would be ignored.

    No, they backed down for two reasons. The radical Islamic groups are known to carry out their threats. The current trend in upper American government is to treat these loons with kid gloves all based on this idiot idea if we are nice to them they will be nice to us. The fact is they totally dictate to the media what the media can say. One or more of their kind makes a real threat but others "the supposedly peaceful side" claims that its not what it seems and that the people who dared to say something bad about Islam are the real problem. It works out so well and we read about it daily.

    They fear them rightfully so but their reaction is still wrong. The reason this fear and threat can persist is because far too many leaders want to act magnanimous in declaring they will turn the other cheek. This is nothing more than the good old policies of liberal lore where certain races are predisposed to violence, theft, or just need help getting an education because they don't have the ability to do good on their own. Condescending through and through

  • Re:1984? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mikael_j (106439) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:17PM (#31947710)

    Ah, the classic "it's not censorship if it's not the government" argument.

    The problem is that if all the major sources of entertainment and news choose to censor themselves then you still end up with a situation that's just as bad as government censorship, it's just the reasons for censorship that are different (money + fear instead of ideology).

  • by Viperlin (747468) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:19PM (#31947736) Homepage

    was recorded off comedy central and therefore censored, you insensitive clod

  • by cduffy (652) <charles+slashdot@dyfis.net> on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:19PM (#31947750)

    I learned everything I need to know about Islam on 9/11/2001...

    And you learned all you needed to know about white guys who hate big government on 4/19/1995?

  • Re:You don't say (Score:5, Insightful)

    by niko9 (315647) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:21PM (#31947800)

    I'm a gun toting American! I'm also a liberal, and an atheist, and I live in New York City. What exactly does "turning one's cheek" have to do with with carrying a firearm? You do realize that part in the bible about "turning cheeks" had to do with petty insults, right? You do realize that the overwhelming majority of _law abiding_ persons who own/carry firearms do so with the knowledge that they are only to be used only the event of IMMINENT FEAR OF DEATH AND/OR GRIEVOUS BODILY HARM. Even the disciples carried swords, you dimwit. With that said...

    A paradoy of your deity might be considered a petty insult. This is the instance where you turn the other cheek. You don't go around killing people for this petty shit.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:25PM (#31947866)

    So you're essentially saying, "we're going to make fun of you and you damn well better like it because free speech is the ultimate cultural value any one can have."

    Fuck that shit. Who are you to say what my cultural values are.

  • by QuantumG (50515) * <qg@biodome.org> on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:27PM (#31947894) Homepage Journal

    and? What's your call to action here?

  • by RobDollar (1137885) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:30PM (#31947928)

    Out of curiosity, is there anything I'm not legally allowed to draw?

    I'm not a muslim and therefore consider myself to be allowed to draw Mohammed, infact I just did in GIMP (not MSpaint as I didnt want to offend Linux fundamentalists)
    Do not click if offended by shocking religious imagery http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/1287/mohow.jpg [imageshack.us]

    So is there anything I can't draw on a piece of paper (without any words in any language) ?

  • by Bemopolis (698691) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:41PM (#31948066)
    Sounds like Islam is a lot like fundamental Christianity.
  • Re:You don't say (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Aladrin (926209) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:43PM (#31948090)

    And there are Muslims that I'm more afraid to be around than the 'gun-toting Americans' I went to school with.

    What's your point?

    (For record, I know what you were trying to say, and it's bullshit. There are crazies in every group. Just because some asshole said he wants to kill Muslims is no reason to brand all 'gun-toting Americans' as genocide-supporters.

  • Re:You don't say (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Monkeedude1212 (1560403) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:50PM (#31948188) Journal

    It's easy to bash on Comedy Central when you aren't the one in danger.

    Where is it written that innocent television broadcasters need to put their lives on the line to adhere to your ideals?

  • Re:You don't say (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Psychopath (18031) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:54PM (#31948240) Homepage

    When one is presented with contradictory instructions, one chooses the instruction that fits what one wants to do.

  • by Bemopolis (698691) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:55PM (#31948266)
    The fact that none of the authorsof the four Gospels were contemporaries of Jesus hasn't stopped fundamentalist Christian from accepting it as the unerrant word of God.
  • by helgihg (843017) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:56PM (#31948272) Homepage
    Man, am I getting tired of muslims being offended. Hey, muslims, here's a news flash! WE'RE ALL OFFENDED! ALL THE TIME! People with half the guts of a mouse just live with it, and it's not rocket science, either. You just... live with it. It's really just that simple, and you're not beyond it. Get over yourselves, you whining, gutless, fucking pussies.
  • Re:You don't say (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Dishevel (1105119) * on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:57PM (#31948290)
    Yupppers. The Pope is a fucking pedo protector. We know this. I do not like the catholic church anyway. At least though they are not threatening to kill me because I mentioned it. To continue the fun.

    "Fuck that Pedo The Prophet Muhammed!"

  • by frovingslosh (582462) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @07:59PM (#31948324)
    The terrorists made threats, and in response Comedy Central gave the terrorists what they wanted. The terrorists have won.
  • by divisionbyzero (300681) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @08:00PM (#31948342)

    Now instead of offending a few million whacko muslim fanatics you've offended tens of millions of Americans! Brilliant!

  • by Locke2005 (849178) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @08:06PM (#31948424)
    If it is impossible to misinterpret the Koran, how come the Sunnis and Shiites disagree so violently with each other? Aren't they both reading the same exact Koran?
  • Flex your rights (Score:5, Insightful)

    by WilyCoder (736280) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @08:08PM (#31948444)

    Trey and Matt should have Mohammed in every fucking episode they air from now on. I don't just mean in the intro to the show, I mean like a new character like one of the boys.

    Let those censoring assholes fucking WORK to achieve censorship...

  • Yeah damnit (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Colin Smith (2679) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @08:10PM (#31948472)

    . The current trend in upper American government is to treat these loons with kid gloves all based on this idiot idea if we are nice to them they will be nice to us.

    You should go over there and bomb them into... Wait, didn't you do that already?

     

  • by unity100 (970058) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @08:16PM (#31948538) Homepage Journal

    first, awareness. 'tolerance' wont work with islam. second, politics. middle eastern countries should be pressurized to modernize islam and crack down on extremism. third, worldwide vigilance. there are already numerous islamist organizations which have grown more powerful than small countries and settled in numerous countries of the world.

  • by ejtttje (673126) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @08:16PM (#31948552) Homepage
    I verify, I specifically went back to re-watch this episode a few days ago.

    Bunch of cowards running things at Comedy Central administration. They clearly didn't learn the lesson of the Cartoon Wars episodes, every time you give in to bullies, you only embolden them to ask for more next time. So ironic to have South Parks' own network so clearly demonstrate the head-in-the-sand behavior which is being protested.
  • by unity100 (970058) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @08:17PM (#31948558) Homepage Journal

    it isnt. with even fundamental christianity, you can still come up and argue that what they hold is not a genuine text from god. since all 4 major bibles were edited and decided upon in council of nicea in 325 ad in anatolia by the council called by byzantine emperor. with islam, it isnt the case, it purports to be directly from god.

  • Re:You don't say (Score:3, Insightful)

    by outsider007 (115534) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @08:26PM (#31948638)

    Comedy Central != America. If it did Colbert would be president and Matt and Trey would be secretary of fart jokes.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 22, 2010 @08:26PM (#31948648)

    While I agree that we have a right to say anything we want doesn't mean that we should. I for one don't believe that our only purpose in life is to grow skins thicker than those around us. I'd rather live in a society of respect than one of self-protection.

  • by severoon (536737) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @08:32PM (#31948702) Journal

    For those of you that are unaware, the concern among Muslims about depicting Muhammad is based on a few hadith that warn against doing so to prevent idolatry. The worry is that any depiction could become the focus of worship, and the depiction itself could take the place of what it represents.

    Or, in other words, radical Muslims are fearful that a large faction of the faithful will splinter off and form a new denomination based on the worship of an episode of South Park. They're so anxious over this possibility, these groups have threatened to suborn the murder of Matt Stone & Trey Parker by dispatching roving death squads.

    Don't click away to a calendar app—I assure you, it is 2010 and this is actually happening. (And I understand why some of you with mod points might choose "Funny" for this post, which is totally fine, but I promise everyone that this is as unbiased an accounting of the facts as I find myself able to give.)

    By the way, if you happen to be a techno-savvy hard-line Muslim reading this post, I have one question for you: shouldn't your first problem, before Matt & Trey, be with the second most populous denomination of Islam, the Shi'a, who apparently have no problem with depictions of Muhammad? Is it off-base for me to ask that you sort this out amongst yourselves before requiring the non-believers to follow your religious edicts under threat of death?

  • Re:1984? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Hurricane78 (562437) <(deleted) (at) (slashdot.org)> on Thursday April 22, 2010 @08:32PM (#31948706)

    Uuum, what government? We live in a industrial feudalism, if you haven’t noticed already...
    The government is just their industry forum for negotiations. We are their main resource. (Ever heard of a “human resources department”?) And the media and government agencies are the cowboys, dairy farmers and doctors, controlling us cattle, so we give the maximum of our work in that hamster wheel, in return for shiny glass beads from of our IKEA catalogs, that we don’t need.

  • by Kozz (7764) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @08:36PM (#31948732)

    And this is what happens when you let terrorists censor you.

    It's more (worse) than that. I know you didn't literally mean what you said (as the terrorists don't run Comedy Central... I don't think). It is that CC is censoring its own broadcast out of fear, not because of a decree from another governing entity.

  • Re:You don't say (Score:2, Insightful)

    by mundanetechnomancer (1343739) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @08:47PM (#31948884)

    how did you get sneakers out of IMMINENT FEAR OF DEATH AND/OR GRIEVOUS BODILY HARM?
    but, logically, if someone wants to steal from you, they don't want to get caught. The quickest way to prevent pursuit is to injure those who would do so. I have never been robbed. But, if i were to be robbed, i have no reason to suspect that those who wish to have my things would want me to keep my health as well. Almost anyone who checks on a noise in the night carries a baseball bat, or some other melee weapon, just in case. but i'm suddenly a nut for carrying a gun to check it out instead? no one thinks twice about someone who practices martial arts, and could kill someone in the blink of an eye with the skill they have acquired, yet i'm suspect because i wish to carry a small gun?

  • Re:You don't say (Score:4, Insightful)

    by joebagodonuts (561066) <cmkrnl@NoSPAM.gmail.com> on Thursday April 22, 2010 @08:52PM (#31948956) Homepage Journal

    Bullshit. They DID sign up to let South Park offend everyone. They've made a killing giving South Park free reign. It's hypocritical as hell for them to suddenly do otherwise.

    If it isn't OK, then it isn't OK - even if you will make a lot of money. That's my issue with this. If CC is going to make a decision that says "we don't want to offend" then apply that principle equally. But don't puss out because someone made a threat. Stand up for the principles you've stood by to this point; "We don't give a shit about sensibilities because it make us boatloads of money"

  • by ArcherB (796902) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @09:03PM (#31949072) Journal

    It's 2010 and Islam is stuck in the 1300s. It's impact on the world is violent, pushy, and fascist.

    That is unfair to the majority of modern and progressive muslims. The image of Islam we all see is distorted by media coverage, and muslims are usually as irritated as we are by violent, pushy, and fascist muslims.

    Maybe so, but the image of planes flying into buildings, reporters being beheaded, gays being hung, women getting stoned because they had the audacity to get raped and endless missiles launched into neighborhoods from elementary schools tend to leave more of an impression than the puff piece about the Muslim immigrant who saved a kitten from a tree.

  • PR (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 22, 2010 @09:09PM (#31949150)

    I'm pretty sure this is a PR stunt.

  • pessimism leads people to give up, and accept the unacceptable. pessimism is the ideology of slaves

    luckily for the rest of us, pragmatists and optimists alike, your world view doesn't actually decide how the real world plays out. it defines the sad arc of your life, not my life. so step aside, give in to your ignorant helplessness and shut up, and let those of who think we can actually still make difference actually make a fucking difference

  • by blueworm (425290) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @09:31PM (#31949402) Homepage

    Any time force is threatened, the threatening party has lost moral authority. If you seek to affect moral change in somebody, then your own representation of your ideals should be enough to convince them.

  • by Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @09:35PM (#31949428)

    Bunch of cowards running things at Comedy Central administration. They clearly didn't learn the lesson of the Cartoon Wars episodes, every time you give in to bullies, you only embolden them to ask for more next time.

    Sounds like what's needed is for someone to threaten them unless they take the beeps out.

  • by Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @09:41PM (#31949506)

    I agree with your post, but what does a mainstream Muslim have in common with these people?

    Didja ya miss the part where he directed the question at any "techno-savvy hard-line Muslim reading this post?"
    It isn't like all sunni are hard-line or even close to it.

  • by fermion (181285) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @09:43PM (#31949520) Homepage Journal
    Let's see about christians. Killing civilians at the holocaust museum. Killing civilians at the Atlanta Olympics. Killing children in Oklahoma. Enetering a church and shooting at children, killing others who are at church. Killing children in Waco. Killing Doctors in small towns. Torturing and killing minorities. Pickiting funerals expressing how glad they are the people are dead because god obviously wants them dead. Telling the public that it is god's will that thousands of men, women and children are dead.

    I am sure that many will say that the persons who do these things aren't christian. But who are you to say? They say they are christian. When a self identified muslim kills someone, people are fast enough to implicate the entire faith of Islam, no one seems to think that these people are just wingnuts, rougue elements. But when a prominent member of the First Baptist Church in North Myrtle Beach threatens a elected leaders life, we do not condemn the entire congregation, or the baptist faith, we just assume that one member is a dangerous wingnut, and pray that she never has any authority.

    I don't know why there is not more christian violence. I say more because there is a lot. For instance the kids who are going around killing immigrants. What is think is that we don't think about because most of is random. Very little of it is directed, you know, some wacko sending anthrax though the mail. Alot of it is just some good old boys thinking they start beating up on their fellow students, and then crying when the fellow students start beating back.

  • by Pharmboy (216950) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @09:48PM (#31949558) Journal

    Its not like making fun of religious figures is illegal.

    It is in Saudi Arabia and all other Muslim countries. Of course it isn't in America, which is what should matter but doesn't to CC.

    Perhaps CC doesn't want to miss out on all the advertisers who have Muslim specific products, who might pull their ads.......

  • Re:You don't say (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Buelldozer (713671) <cliff@gi[ ]lis.net ['ndu' in gap]> on Thursday April 22, 2010 @09:56PM (#31949642)

    So you've got a couple of Christian Crazies in your office talking about maybe doing something. Big fucking deal. Get back to me when they're chopping peoples heads off or murdering them for cartoons.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 22, 2010 @10:03PM (#31949712)

    I'm not a muslim, but I can speak on behalf of them based on what I see on my college campus. Anyone who is crazy enough to throw down a rug and pray at a designated time and be oblivious to their surroundings is crazy enough to worship a cartoon.

  • by WesternActor (300755) * on Thursday April 22, 2010 @10:10PM (#31949754) Homepage

    You could play it earlier today. I rewatched it this morning. By this afternoon, it was gone.

    Scary times, and even scarier when people like those at Comedy Central are determined to prove their cowardice to the world.

  • by kg8484 (1755554) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @10:11PM (#31949760)

    Do we ever tell the Pope to STFU because he disagrees with some other Christian Church 1/10th their size?

    If it involved the Pope sending a death threat, then yes, yes we would.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 22, 2010 @10:14PM (#31949796)

    And The Hitchhiker's Guide To the Galaxy teaches one how to fly.

    It's a book. Written by some guy. As all books are. It doesn't matter if it's the Bible, the Koran, or Adventures Of Lambchop.

    If you read a book, any book, and devote your life to its tenets, without question or omission, you have disavowed what makes people diverse and creative. You have escalated an unnecessary struggle; that of individualism versus conformity.

    If you want to believe that there is an omniscient entity, fine. If you want to believe that an alien landed in a volcano and is to be worshiped, fine. Even if you want to believe that one group of people is better than another group of people simply because of what they believe, great. But the minute you decide that I am a lesser person simply because I don't believe what you believe, then you have become too wrapped up in your own beliefs to offer anything of value to your fellow man. To denigrate, or threaten, another man for simply not falling into line with your own beliefs is short-sighted and selfish.

    Live your life. Enjoy your life. But think for yourself. A book is a book. Written by some guy. Agree with him? Great. But if you're gonna threaten my non-intrusive existence because I might not, fuck you. I'd rather live a short, happy, free-will life than a long, pre-constructed life being controlled by a possibly misguided idea from thousands of years ago.

    Wake up.

  • Oh, scared? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Aphoxema (1088507) * on Thursday April 22, 2010 @10:28PM (#31949906) Homepage Journal

    Terrorists win.

  • by Sycraft-fu (314770) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @10:30PM (#31949938)

    The problem with the situation in Iraq is that the US's goal was to occupy the country and bring about a peaceful democracy. That is a tough goal when the people don't want it and the army isn't designed for it. The US has never had an army of conquest, it is not an army with massive manpower needed to occupy a country. It is an army designed to kill effectively, something it does extremely well. You'll note that the Iraqi army was smashed in days, with next to no loss on the US side.

    I'm not talking about going in and occupying countries, I'm talking about killing people. If radical country X attacks the US because their crazys don't like South Park, the US attacks them and wipes out the crazies. They don't stick around. The idea is deterrence and prevention, not nation building.

    As a practical matter, that isn't likely to be necessary. If there are attacks it is probably just lone crazies. For that we have a competent criminal justice system. Ideally they are stopped before hand, with deadly force if necessary, and if you they are tried and imprisoned or executed.

    Oh and have you had a look at the world economy? This down turn is not a US thing and is not related to military spending, but rather to the collapse of a bubble caused by rampant speculation, poor regulation, and odd financial products.

  • Re:You don't say (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Keen Anthony (762006) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @10:34PM (#31949960)

    I've met religious zealots before -- none Muslim, and what I learned from being open-minded to their beliefs and killing them with kindness so to speak, is that I often am regarded as one of the "good ones", an exception to an otherwise horrible lot of people that ought to be either put on an island somewhere or converted. To me, religious extremists are unreasonable, and you can only gain so much with them. You can never be one of them in their eyes. At best, you're a pet. Still, it's admirable to try, and it doesn't help to go provoking overly sensitive people.

    On the other hand, perhaps OP is a dick, but going through life having to make special exceptions for Muslims is absolutely unreasonable. We are not bound by Muslim law in this part of the world, and we resist attempts to have our freedom of expression taken from us in order to please them. There is nothing special about the Muslim sensitivity that it deserves this treatment. I would say the same of other religious extremists too however, including various Christian groups.

  • by Snaller (147050) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @10:47PM (#31950082) Journal

    All of it.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 22, 2010 @11:05PM (#31950252)
    I can't seem to quite express my sadness at the responses that pop up when stories like this hit. Especially from a broadly educated crowd, like /. attracts. But, I guess part of it is that nerds tend to be on the 'judging' end of the spectrum.

    Look, criticizing Islam in the US today is NOTHING like criticizing Jesus. Since 9/11 it's practically national belief that all Arabs are Muslim, and all Muslims are Terrorists. YOU might not think that way (whilst pointing out all the flaws in Islam), but you won't have to work hard to find someone that does. You think what happened to Borat at the rodeo was a singular event? Get real. We live in a world of racial profiling, and ignorant assumptions. Look at the comments that are modded 'insightful' or 'informative' and you'll see a long list of 'Islam is evil/wrong/violent', which is unacceptable in this age. I truly feel sorry for people who live in our country having been raised with an Islamic belief system. The stories of community outrage/fear are depressingly numerous - all for what? Because there are people who have hijacked a religion and use it to exploit violence? That's unique to Islam? Tell that to your friendly community safe and legal abortion doctor. The US today is a country with a mob mentality against Islam, and a country where Jesus is absolutely EVERYWHERE - it's not a level playing field from the get go when it comes to satire.

    Then there are all the blatantly racist comments referring to a group of savages that haven't had their Enlightenment. As though the average person gets to choose their religion. I'm an atheist, and I was raised in a semi-religious household, as I know that a massive number of people here on /. are, but the fact of the matter is that for most people religion is not about choice, but is a matter of birthright. Becoming a terrorist is a choice, but believing in Jesus over Muhommed is trained, and especially for large parts of humanity that live in abject poverty and have no opportunities for education and learning about differing cultures, it's nearly impossible to change one's religious belief because it is incorporated into life as fundamental fact and necessity. You think it's a coincidence that poor/uneducated are on average massively more committed to religion than wealthy/educated?

    All this righteous indignation about a group of people that have a simple rule &ndash; we don't like images of our prophet? Are you kidding me? We can't even teach SCIENCE in public schools in this country because the fucking 'word of God as giving by the Holy Bible' doesn't support it (even if the damn Pope does!)! We murder people for lawfully giving women a choice on pregnancy, even when it's a fundamental issue of safety. We have a long history, up until only 50 years ago, of murdering people one at a time for having the wrong religion or race! You think it's dangerous to mock Islam (out of nothing but sanctimonious hostility thinly veiled behind censorship arguments)? Imagine being Jewish and traveling through Mississippi in 1940. Hell, the cast of Top Gear was attacked down there just a couple years ago!

    Get off your fucking racist, and Muslim, high goddamn horses people. No one superstition has more rights than any other, but if you're going to pretend it's all equal and fair in this country, you're pretending we live in a more diverse and more balanced world than we do.
  • by Chowderbags (847952) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @11:35PM (#31950542)
    Censoring yourselves due to fear of violence is a quick way to the bottom. If any nutjobs can threaten you and you'll back down, you might as well just show Teletubbies all day (until someone complains of gay overtones, then you have to stick to static). Your network wants to think it's edgy by airing movies without bleeping a couple swears, but you can't even say one person's name. Just a name. That's it. All because there's some possibility that already unbalanced people (who probably already hate you anyway) will go off the deep end and commit violence? There's always the possibility that someone will commit violence against you, but you can't live in fear because of that. You can't hide your thoughts and hope that crazy people won't act crazy. You can't censor an idea just because someone might not like it. Because if you do, you'll just be giant fucking pussies waiting for the next person trying to fuck you.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 22, 2010 @11:37PM (#31950568)

    Uh, says now that they can't show it.

    Fucking goddamned raghead sons of bitches.

    When the NY MOMA showed the Piss Christ picture, Guiliani and a bunch of other Catholics tried to get the show shut down -- that's all.

    Danish cartoonist draws a bomb-head Mohammed and the Moslem bastards have to torch the entire world, with people dying in many nations.

    So where's the outrage on the part of all these pious, peaceful Mohammedand who want us to believe they're not like the bomb-throwers? Until they come out of the shadows and scream like hell and turn the motherfucking terrorists over to the law, they can all kiss my ass, after I smear bacon grease on it.

  • Re:1984? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Lemmy Caution (8378) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @11:43PM (#31950616) Homepage

    I was waiting for someone to make the "it's only censorship if the government does it" bullshit line, because this situation shows just how asinine that line of reasoning is. Apparently, the threat of getting fined or not being allowed to sell your stuff to kids is censorship (if the government does it), the threat of getting fired or blown up isn't (if the government isn't doing it.)

  • by OakDragon (885217) on Thursday April 22, 2010 @11:48PM (#31950680) Journal
    Yes, but they're brave enough to take on the Bush administration!
  • by zullnero (833754) on Friday April 23, 2010 @12:11AM (#31950824) Homepage
    Yes, yes, yes, Christians have bad people too. We get it. But that's not what this is about. It's about knee-jerk reactions to the very limited depiction of a holy figure in a cartoon. A holy figure that most people have no idea what he looks like anyway, so we basically have to put his name with an arrow pointing at the figure to tell who it might be.

    If you want this to slip into a "well, Christians have bad people too" thing, South Park makes Jesus Christ a recurring character all the time. The number of protests against those episodes have been relatively limited. No attempts by Christian assassins have been reported on the lives of either Matt Stone nor Trey Parker. The Scientologists pretty much had the biggest tiff against South Park, and even that was more of a huff than a "march in the streets burning things in effigy" thing.

    We all know there are bad people in all religions. But the point of this is about humorous depiction, and all religions in the world have had their figures depicted humorously at times. But only one religion seems to put out a death sentence on anyone who does it to their major figure, even though almost no one even knows exactly what he looked like and generally has to be drawn as a crude stereotype with his name pointed at him for anyone to know. Which is also really sad, and I don't mean that in a mocking way, in a lot of ways.
  • by bakes (87194) on Friday April 23, 2010 @12:36AM (#31951048) Journal

    In order to do that someone will have to start a new religion based on South Park.

    What about a religion based on freedom of speech?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 23, 2010 @12:40AM (#31951072)

    Do we ever tell the Pope to STFU because he disagrees with some other Christian Church 1/10th their size?

    Not for that reason exactly, but we do tell him to STFU.

  • by AlamedaStone (114462) on Friday April 23, 2010 @12:41AM (#31951092)

    Before the current conflict in Iraq...brainwashed by Western media...

    This is the part where you are supposed to provide informative links to support your contention, and set us all free of this indoctrinated delusion perpetrated by Western media that the shia/sunni conflict started prior to 2003.

    Proceed.

  • Re:You don't say (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 23, 2010 @12:42AM (#31951102)

    The Declaration of Independence, whose signers signed it under penalty of death. THAT is where it is written.

    They were rejecting, standing up to, a king, and rejecting the very notion of a king.

    You do know what a king was, right? A ruler who was believed to have derived his power from divine authority blessing his ancestral family.

    In other words, our very nation is based on rejecting religion as ruler.

    If you fail to abide by these "ideals" then you are essentially rejecting your own country.

    "It's easy to bash on Comedy Central when you aren't the one in danger." Kowtowing to religion puts us all in danger.

  • And (Score:2, Insightful)

    by mahadiga (1346169) <mahadiga@gmail.com> on Friday April 23, 2010 @12:47AM (#31951140) Homepage Journal

    Muslims are brainwashed to believe that Islam is above the Nation.
    For Hindus, Casteism is above the Nation.
    Now Christian missionaries are brainwashing ppl like Brahmins did for Hindus.

  • by Skreems (598317) on Friday April 23, 2010 @01:02AM (#31951242) Homepage

    The nice thing about Christianity though is that for the most part, with the exception of a few kooks, they're all content to leave it to God to handle unbelievers in the next life.

    NOW they are. Try that attitude out against any time in the majority of the last 2000 years and see how far it would have gotten you.

    Christianity is no more or less violent than any other religion. It's just the core of the faith has been supported by societies that have moved toward more progressive values in recent years. I suspect this is largely by chance, and nothing to do with Christianity itself.

    It's much easier to find evidence to support whatever you want to believe in any religion than it is to find one definitive meaning in any of them.

  • by miffo.swe (547642) <daniel,hedblom&gmail,com> on Friday April 23, 2010 @01:38AM (#31951446) Homepage Journal

    All they do nowadays is kicking in open doors. They wont dare taking on things like israeli lobbyism, afganistan, Iran, irak, palestine, south america, US foreign policy or anything even remotely sensitive. The greed that has put american factories in China making countless americans out of work just for very shortsighted profits isnt something i expect them to cover either.

    Poking fun at radical muslims are about as courageous as telling a redneck nascar sucks and that jesus blows Hulk Hogan every night.

  • by Skreems (598317) on Friday April 23, 2010 @02:03AM (#31951602) Homepage

    No attempts by Christian assassins have been reported on the lives of either Matt Stone nor Trey Parker.

    I haven't seen any reports of attempts on their lives by Islamic assassins either, for whatever that's worth...

  • by Bemopolis (698691) on Friday April 23, 2010 @02:06AM (#31951620)
    So, in a church it's called "the word of God Almighty"; in a court of law it's called "hearsay".
  • by TheLink (130905) on Friday April 23, 2010 @02:45AM (#31951806) Journal
    > The statements by RevolutionMuslim are mostly for intimidation purposes and will most likely have no bearings in reality.

    There were some dead people who would probably have liked to still be able to disagree with you.
  • by Pecisk (688001) on Friday April 23, 2010 @03:55AM (#31952134)

    Well, not exactly. Christianity as itself is staunch denier of killing anyone, it's a sin, pure and simple. However, book is one thing and people with intent are other. Let's say, "you shall not kill" haven't stopped "true" Christians to kill their brothers, to kill nonbelievers, never mind about people who just look or act strange or could be possibly truly inspired by God. And all the time it was claimed that it was done "in the name of God". Go figure. Human nature I guess.

    Let's be honest - reason why Christianity is not so violent anymore is that Western society, while still having it's problems, have painfully learned true nature of human being and trying to balance it. That's why we don't have Sharia law, but we have courts. That's why we don't practice blood revenge, but try to work it out with laws. It doesn't work always, but it is not a complete mess either.

    Muslims are like Christians in middle ages - they believe their own words and feel they are justified to do anything they want to. What scares me more that they even don't have to explain themselves - if their priest says so, they should carry out order,

    In fact, as for someone who has found true reasons behind Christianity it's painful to watch that people try to fit their practical mindsets into something they don't and maybe even don't want to understand. Christianity is about spirituality, but in fact all I see is just using those legend frameworks for something else. Again, human nature I guess.

  • by lpq (583377) on Friday April 23, 2010 @04:29AM (#31952336) Homepage Journal

    Don't forget the quote of Christian Crusaders ... "Kill them and all and let God sort them out"...

    Christians do kill, they do bomb clinics, they do blow up buildings in Oklahoma -- just that most of them are not so included, but they organized well from all states in the US to overwhelm the electorate in the last California election to remove the rights of same sex people to marry.

    Monotheism is inherently antithetical to human life, as human life needs freedom and monotheism says there's only one way -- and ultimate it's followers enforce their beliefs on others. Until people realize that one-wayism is a threat to everyone, it will remain an insidious problem.

     

  • by thephydes (727739) on Friday April 23, 2010 @04:42AM (#31952406)
    yes I'm shouting. Who the fucking hell do these cunts think they are. Any minority ie less than 50% who think they can tell me what I can enjoy or laugh at can go and shove their fucking beliefs up their fucking arses - because that's where they belong - in a pile of shit, Fuck off religious nutters of any persuasion.
  • by shadowknot (853491) * on Friday April 23, 2010 @04:42AM (#31952412) Journal

    Absolutely. Even the "nice" christians somehow find it in their heart to hate homosexuals, and their public stance against their civil rights is no less ugly because it's done with a smug smile.

    If you're a religious believer, you've already established yourself as partially insane

    It's interesting to me how you manage to both decry tolerance and display an utter lack of it so concisely in one post. Bravo biggot.

  • by AlXtreme (223728) on Friday April 23, 2010 @04:48AM (#31952446) Homepage Journal

    NOW they are. Try that attitude out against any time in the majority of the last 2000 years and see how far it would have gotten you.

    But we don't live in 1200 AD, we live in the present. At the moment Christianity is much less violent than Islam: it's that simple.

    Yes, Christianity did terrible things in the past but currently similar things are being done by Muslims. IMHO it is our ethical duty to stop religious insanity in the present, regardless of the past.

  • by SamSim (630795) on Friday April 23, 2010 @05:34AM (#31952662) Homepage Journal

    No, that was the day that the USA lost. "The terrorists" have an entirely different set of victory conditions - most of them not yet satisfied, although it depends greatly on the terrorist - and it's not a zero-sum game. If they cared about your personal freedoms they would have hit the Statue of Liberty.

  • by Shivetya (243324) on Friday April 23, 2010 @06:38AM (#31952926) Homepage Journal

    in place of Kenny. It would be much fun to see the Simpsons help out, with Bart writing on the blackboard I will bleep out all spoken references to Mohamed

  • by TheVelvetFlamebait (986083) on Friday April 23, 2010 @06:42AM (#31952944) Journal

    Christianity is no more or less violent than any other religion.

    This rings false to me. It seems you're implying that the violence level of "any other religion" is well-defined, as in, every other religion is more or less as violent as each other. I've never seen, for example, militant Buddhists. Well, perhaps a Buddhist (or someone claiming to be one) who is militant about something else, but no-one who spreads Buddhism by force.

  • Re:You don't say (Score:2, Insightful)

    by mindmaster064 (690036) on Friday April 23, 2010 @07:10AM (#31953078) Homepage
    It's not ethnic cleansing if they're trying to kill you, it's called self-defense! Stop giving these retards a home, and a forum. Shut 'em down. They can believe whatever they want until they start shaking their fists at folks.If we dropped one bomb every time one of these guys started threatening people I'm sure it'd stop really fast. They are doing it because >we are allowing it. You don't want to get taken out? Don't stand with the fist shaker. It's not about religion it's about their constant threats and terror campaigns.
  • by God'sDuck (837829) on Friday April 23, 2010 @07:15AM (#31953114)

    Christians do have the advantage in the "whose religion is inherently violent" mudslinging match that nobody was killed in Jesus name while Jesus was alive, or while any of his students were alive, or their students, or their students, or their students, or their students. It took several HUNDRED YEARS for people to start killing in Jesus name. Why? Because Jesus made it very clear you were not supposed to kill in his name, even to the point of literally turning your other cheek to somebody who was slapping you in the face. It was not until Christianity became the dominant regional religion and rulers began looking for justifications for political wars and capital punishment that killings began, and then continued in force for ~1300 years, largely until the enlightenment pulled out a lot of dusty verses.
     
    Muhammad, on the other hand, personally led the Muslim armies: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad#Beginning_of_armed_conflict [wikipedia.org]

  • Re:You don't say (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Lillebo (1561251) on Friday April 23, 2010 @08:41AM (#31953674)

    Where is it written that innocent television broadcasters need to put their lives on the line to adhere to your ideals?

    "Innocent"? The very reason South Park has become successful is because of its controversial and offensive nature. By censoring the show they're betraying their audience.

  • Re:1984? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Friday April 23, 2010 @08:57AM (#31953876) Homepage Journal

    "and let the agents of terror dictate your actions. "

    Typical liberal BS exaggeration.

    Please demonstrate, using the dictionary, which word was an exaggeration. I can justify every word in that sentence, and it wasn't even mine.

    You are limited in your actions every day of your life by common sense, by laws, by morality.

    I am not limited by laws, they only provide for consequences for my actions. Common sense and morality are what limit my actions, yes. But given that you lump the three together I wonder if you actually understand any of the words you're using.

    There is one aspect we Muslims make a principal stand on, and that is of course the action that you are choosing.

    Okay... threatening someone is an action. Censoring content is an action.

    "Oh, my god! If we let them win this, they are going to take away our freedoms!" That's your train of thought, liberal moron, no different from the train of thought of inbred Fox News audience.

    Uh, no. That's not the argument at all. But thanks for jerking your knee, proving that you are in the same class as the typical Faux News viewer. The argument is that if we give up our freedoms, we won't have them any more. I think it's pretty straightforward.

  • by DJRumpy (1345787) on Friday April 23, 2010 @09:05AM (#31953996)

    I suspect Christianity's new found 'peaceful' resolution came about when governments told them to mind their own business. When they lost the power to sway law in the US and Europe, they in turn had to comply with a slew of new restrictions to what they could and couldn't do. Agree with the parent. Christianity was an extreme force for violence, and could be again. Imagine if religion was allowed to blend with Law in the U.S. Now imagine the more radical folks who tend to push those agenda and the 'ideals' they strive for. I could definitely see that evoking violence, either through resistance or compliance.

    In the middle east, Religion and Law or intermixed freely. Look at the violence created by such a mix.

    If there is one thing that I think absolutely made things better in the US was a Separation of Church and State.

  • by mcgrew (92797) * on Friday April 23, 2010 @09:20AM (#31954198) Homepage Journal

    Do we ever tell the Pope to STFU because he disagrees with some other Christian Church 1/10th their size?

    The Catholics and Lutherans aren't killing each other, and the Catholics and Lutherans aren't telling each other to STFU. Plus, Muhammed's meassage was different than Jesus', whose message was forgiveness, "love your enemies" and "do good to those who do you wrong", and don't judge people.

    Apples and oranges (or Apples and Dells).

  • by sir lox elroy (735636) on Friday April 23, 2010 @09:25AM (#31954266) Homepage
    That the way it always goes with humans it seems. They say they are tolerant, but most of the are a biggot on some level.
  • by RichiH (749257) on Friday April 23, 2010 @09:29AM (#31954324) Homepage

    Somehow, I doubt this matters to the poor sod dying for the penis-wagging of a random religion.

    The moral might be that people will pervert anything, given a motive and chance.

  • by Nursie (632944) on Friday April 23, 2010 @10:17AM (#31954920)

    I fail to see the intolerance there.

    Sure, there's an insult, but he's not calling for them to be banned/beheaded/banished or anything.

  • by wonkavader (605434) on Friday April 23, 2010 @10:19AM (#31954928)

    Fundamentalists are people who base their religion on an unmovable foundation: Generally this means a text which they believe to be 100% true.

    So Christian fundamentalists believe that the bible is the word of God and thus 100% true (generally that bible is the KJB, since translations have essentially made Christian fundamentalism impossible without creating a fundamental text by fiat) are fundamentalists. Those that don't aren't. Those that say they are that don't believe some text is completely true are wrong about what they are. Those that do believe the text is 100% true but say "I'm not a fundamentalist" are deluding themselves.

    If he says he's a fundamentalist, and he knows what that word means, then he's a fundamentalist. It doesn't have to mean a baby-killer. There are plenty of very nice fundamentalists in the world. (I find their take on reality a little annoying, but virtually all the fundies I know are very nice people who wouldn't dream of blowing anyone up.)

    Fundies are deranged, yes, but we all are in some ways. Very, very few of them are dangerous.

    The weird thing about being a fundie is that it seems like all religious texts contradict themselves any number of times (especially if you assume any particular 10 words means 100 words, and that the post-hoc analysis which expands the short text must be completely true) and yet, it must ALL be true, so they wind up having to come up with little intellectual dances to make the whole thing consistent.

  • by Nursie (632944) on Friday April 23, 2010 @10:22AM (#31954968)

    No true Scotsman eh?

    "The black ink is just the backstory, the message and teaching is in red."

    LOL.

    So someone has sat down and decided this? They got to decide what are the real teachings and rules and what aren't?

    Face it, like most religious people, you're picking and choosing which bits you think apply to you based on your own values. You don't follow the religion, you fit it around yourself.

  • by jimbolauski (882977) on Friday April 23, 2010 @10:31AM (#31955084) Journal

    Sounds like what's needed is for someone to threaten them unless they take the beeps out.

    Only Muslims are allowed to call for violence when the views contrast with their religion, since it's in the koran it's part of their religion and they have a right to practice their religion.
    -So first a religion must be created and accepted as an official religion that shouldn't be too hard Scientology did it.
    -When creating the religion state in there that it is OK to kill people if they don't believe what you do and that you will be rewarded in the afterlife for doing so.
    -Then blow up buildings and bomb public areas in the name of the religion.
    -Finally you will be able to threaten media outlets by saying that the reality is that if you don't do what we want you might end up dead but it's not a threat and post addresses and family photos of the people you are trying to "convince".
    -After that get a few people to claim that people are prejudice about the religion and that the religion has been corrupted by a few people and that their views do not reflect all followers of the religion even though the actions of the few radicals are never denounced.

  • by JAlexoi (1085785) on Friday April 23, 2010 @11:16AM (#31955822) Homepage
    Wait! Are you talking about the Jews? Or are you talking about how Islam got started?
    Yes, both Judaism and Islam are religions that were initiated by the need for laws. Christianity is more of a philosophical movement, than a religion like Judaism.
  • by Khisanth Magus (1090101) on Friday April 23, 2010 @11:37AM (#31956124)
    *looks at prop8 in california, all other anti-gay legislation, anti-abortion laws* And that is just the tip of the iceberg. Christians have been trying to push their morals and beliefs down the throats of everyone in the US for centuries.
  • People today just want to redefine a term with a long-standing meaning to get money from their fellow citizens.

    You mean money and benefits that other married couples already get, right? But of course, in the case of heterosexual couples, it's not just about the money - that would be morally wrong. Am I right? Howabout interracial marriages? That's not a norm, so should we ban that, too? Clearly

    There is no benefit to society to recognize anything else.

    Except that plenty of same-sex couples would love to adopt and raise children. Adopting children improves our society by providing them with a place to live, love, and grow. But that doesn't benefit us at all, I guess.

  • by mrdoogee (1179081) on Friday April 23, 2010 @02:17PM (#31958380)

    Th problem with 4chan and anonymous is that they are unpredictable. To use a metaphor, if the courts are a scalpel, and the army a broadsword, then 4chan is a rabid 3 legged badger with chronic flatulence.

All warranty and guarantee clauses become null and void upon payment of invoice.

Working...