pimpineasy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ChickenTikka Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > It’s a book. Who cares? They should have > burned > > a bible, a Torah, and Tina Fey’s new book along > > with it to prove that point. Add to that a > copy > > of the CFA code of ethics (especially the GIPS > > section). > > > > If Muslims want to hold onto strife they are > > welcome to it; they are only hurting themselves. > > > Dead soldeirs are cheap and easy to replace. > > Investment, infrastructure and other capital > are > > not. Islam should just do what the Indians and > > Chinese do, take over the world through the > > economy. > > > > “Dead soldeirs are cheap and easy to replace” > > ChickenTikka you’re an arse! ^Agreed, plus the statement isn’t true when you actually do add up the $$, which I won’t out of respect to soldiers. Not to mention that fundamentalist Muslim nations taking over the global economy is like squirrels flying to the moon. They’ve never successfully operated an industry other than pumping their own oil and they can’t even stop fighting within their own sect’s much less everyone else for 2 seconds. Bad for business and capital investment. How’s that gonna work? Not to mention the education curve with a region that is still cutting people’s heads off over spelling errors.
For those of you who are calling me an arse, I’m being ironic to prove a point. Im not celebrating dead soldiers, just pointing out an economic fact. I’m anti-war as well and place a much greater value on life than the politicians. The NPV of your average soldier would be maybe a few million dollars each. That boils down to a couple billion dollars, kids. Way less than we spend on military infrastructure like F-22 and cruise missiles. As for the NPV of soldiers from that region they would be far far less. Rulers and generals throughout history have done similar analysis of the value of the lives on their soldiers, cavalry etc. Get real.
It appears, whether through some biased lens of the media, or whether it is an actual fact, that Islam has a disproportionate amount of adherents who subscribe to a hardline, extreme, violent interpretation of the Quran. Islam, like all religion, is an idea. An idea does not get the rights and protections offered to us by law to the point where it transcends our ability to criticize and ridicule it via our right to free expression. If (some) Muslims want to argue the point that burning the Quran or drawing depictions of their Prophet should not be allowed as it promotes intolerance via offending their religious sensibilities, then they should invariably stop doing things like eating beef/meat as it promotes intolerance via offending the religious sensibilities of Hindus/Buddhists as Hindus consider cows sacred, and Buddhists consider all animal life sacred.
To the discussion about dead soldiers. I read somewhere a while ago, about the value of life in $$ in different countries. They calculated medical expenses, education, etc. Cynical, but it might make sense, with reference to the mentioned study, that Chickentikka, being Indian (if I am not mistaken by his nick), talks about “cheap” life. It’s sad, but half of the kids under three in India are underweight.
Chickentikka, I still think that American soldiers should be pretty expensive in terms of the cost of their education, medical treatment, food, services and even transportation to the ME.
Ah, just found in Internet that American “statistical” life value is around 8 million dollars. The reimbursement for each death in Afghanistan is half a million.
Besides, when you are talking about NPV of a soldier, you obviously don’t take into account future demographic damage for the country, add a few million for each unborn kid in perpetuity. And what is also important, is that since the time of “rulers”, the human sentiment has changed. Basically, it means, that even though the cost ($$ spent) of the missile might be higher, the value is lower than the life of one soldier. For the “ruler” now it’s cheaper to waste missiles rather than lose one life. The society pays for both, and the society does not care about missiles as much as about their countrymen. Strangely enough, the lives of civilian “collateral damage”, as long as they are not American, does not raise the same sentiment, so Afghan kids are bombed now and then
the whole argument is centered around that worshipping something is personal choice, I dont think thats true. When I know my forefathers paid so much respect to the book and it is burnt in front of my eyes, I would like to stop that. Freedom to burn the book? Book is not yours. You cannot burn it.
^^^ Of course you can burn the book, its just a book!! The point is that the world has become so small due to technology. I mean one human being in the US, who decides to burn paper, causes an uprising thousands of miles away on another part of our planet, now thats stupid. Just because you worship something, doesnt give you the right to harm anyone who doesnt share your beliefs. When I run out of firewood, ill just pick up the bible and chuck it in the fire and use that as warmth, I doubt anyone here would care if I did that, maybe my local priest would give me a funny look if he found out, but my response to him would be, that it was just so bloody cold.
^^^ I hope the day wont come when monkey would choose to eat meat instead of starving to death. But I think the idea of burning the book is to provocate me. And if I dont do anything then next day he will burn my temple. If still I dont do anything he might burn me.
^^^ I doubt you have to worry about this pastor, he is just some far right wacko, who is obsessed with his own views and just trying to stir attention to himself, when in reality he is doing f**k all, and even though im not American, I doubt he represents a big majority of Americans, just the crazy few who give the country a bad name. I doubt the man has ever even left the United States.
sameeragarwal Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > the whole argument is centered around that > worshipping something is personal choice, I dont > think thats true. ^ Not personal choice? No wonder your region is full of dictators, you’re born with a slave mentality and a convenient excuse for your actions or lack thereof. > When I know my forefathers paid > so much respect to the book and it is burnt in > front of my eyes, I would like to stop that. ^ Burnt in front of your eyes? You were there? Of course not, you’re just spewing empty bullsh*t. No crap you’d like to stop it, that’s the whole point of freedom of speech, you may see or hear things you don’t like, but you tolerate their right to say those things…like an adult. It’s a two way street, without the graces of freedom of speech / religion, I’m pretty sure Muslims would be locked out of the western world by now. You know how a respectable human like maybe Gandhi would have stopped it? By not behaving like a freaking animal and giving people more cause to burn more Korans. > Freedom to burn the book? Book is not yours. ^Uh, yeah it is. I’m pretty sure that pastor paid for the book, making it his. Everyone knows steeling is wrong… All of your arguments come down to meaningless rhetoric, frankly I don’t see how the fundamentalist Christians and Muslims don’t get along, at least they have that in common. > You cannot burn it. ^ Actually he did. And like total idiots, Muslims responded by killing unrelated innocents who were trying to provide aid, using brutal methods. So the pastor won, because the Muslims fulfilled the world’s expectations with their actions and more people won’t be receiving UN aid in that region. Also, from studying the Koran, I happen to know there is not one sentence in that book that promotes the sort of actions and lack of self discipline and hatred as well as harming of INNOCENT PEOPLE that took place at Muslim hands. Regardless of what “crime” was committed. If you were even half the Muslim you seem to think you are, you’d have realized that by now rather than getting caught up in your own feelings. > And if I dont do anything then next day he will burn my temple. If still I dont do anything > he might burn me. ^ And so we end with it, the fearful rambling rhetoric of a grovelling brainwashed zealot, again devoid of any real logical content whatsoever. Glad to see what we’re really dealing with here. I don’t think I need to point out the clear difference between 1) setting on fire pieces of paper with letters that you purchased at Barnes and Noble and 2) torching innocent people and their homes. But for the sake of clarity I will… action #1 could be an expression of (perhaps) misguided opinion that harms no one. Action #2 would be undertaken by a grovelling lunatic that deserves to live and die under the rule of a regime, the kind of vomit who beheads an innocent UN worker for crimes they did not commit and who most likely is on their side.
i like how when the Pope made ‘controversial’ remarks regarding islam about how they can be violent and/or extreme, the muslim repspone was to kill people, burn buildings and riot for weeks.
Sameer, By your logic, the US should probably firebomb any country that allows demonstrators to burn the US Flag, after all, that means that they are going to burn the United States next, right? But wait, the US Flag gets burned often enough in the US, so what to do? Bomb ourselves? Sameer, I think your posts are to provoke me, now what? Does that give me cover to do violent things to you?
sameerargawal, Freedom of expression trumps your religion, as well as all religion. I am very thankful that the people who believe this have superior military power over those who do not believe this. End of story.
I am probably just as offended, if not more, when I see someone burn the American flag, the symbol that represents my ability to live free, as any Muslim is when they see the Koran burned. It enrages me. However, I believe that it is very important that they are allowed to burn that American flag, and that idea is much more important than the cloth the flag is created from.
bodhisattva Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > CFABLACKBELT Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Black Swan Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > Interestingly, we just had this discussion at > > > work. A seemingly retarded lady told me that > > > burning the Koran was a hate crime, to which > I > > > responded that the victim under that statute > > > cannot be a book, and followed up by pointing > > out > > > that then bra burning is a hate crime too (in > > this > > > case, call me a hater). She also tried to > tell > > me > > > that burning a book somehow wasn’t covered > > under > > > freedom of speech. Which I responded to by > > > staring at her like she had 3 eyes. I then > > > outlined that flag burning, bible burning, > KKK > > > rallies and the “God hates Gays” church are > all > > > covered under freedom of speech and she’s > > drawing > > > the line now? And while all of those things > > are > > > despicable and each attacks sacred beliefs, > it > > is > > > important that the government does not get to > > > decide what opinions may be expressed based > > upon > > > whatever values happen to be in vogue. Such > a > > > system would have prevented protests against > > > segregation in the south. Plain and simple, > > > situations like these are where the rubber > > meets > > > the proverbial road with the bill of rights. > > Many > > > died to create and uphold those rights, we > > > shouldn’t turn away now. She pointed out > that > > the > > > timing was wrong and I said, when is the > right > > > time? She also pointed out that “We could > just > > > not allow him to do it” and I countered with > > “We > > > could just not allow Muslims in the US.” > Both > > are > > > wrong, but both are great instances of why > > freedom > > > of speech and the bill of rights must be > upheld. > > > > > We have let people burn the books of every > > other > > > religion, we cannot create a constitutional > > > exception for the Koran now in the face of > > threats > > > of violence. It sets the precedent that > > violent > > > threat is a valid negotiating tool vs the US. > > > > > > Regarding the “Mosque at Ground Zero”, it is > not > > a > > > mosque, it is a community center. And it is > > not > > > at ground zero, it is 2+ NYC blocks away and > > not > > > even visible from ground zero despite being > 13 > > > stories tall. It features: a 500-seat > > auditorium, > > > theater, performing arts center, fitness > > center, > > > swimming pool, basketball court, childcare > > area, > > > bookstore, culinary school, art studio, food > > > court, September 11 memorial, and prayer > space > > > that could accommodate 1,000–2,000 people. > > > > +10000000 Very well written. > > > > I still do not agree with the idea of the > > community center at GZ, but I do defend their > > right to build it there. > > > Why don’t you agree with the community centre? ^I just find it offensive and in bad taste to put it there. But its just my opinion and doesn’t trump their right to put it there.
sublimity Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > sameerargawal, > > Freedom of expression trumps your religion, as > well as all religion. I am very thankful that the > people who believe this have superior military > power over those who do not believe this. > > End of story. ^right on
I always have viewed the Middle East as progressively behind the West. Getting worked up over some idiot doing something an ocean away is what I expect out of Christians during the Crusades. So what century is the mentality of the Middle East? I just want to know how long it will be until they grow up.
Black Swan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ^ so we should erase the freedom of speech that > the US is founded on and has suffered to uphold by > rewriting it to say “as long as your opinion isn’t > offensive to either the majority or the misguided > extremists”? I don’t care about religion, but > change our freedoms under threat of foreign acts > of terrrorism? Screw that, and screw you too man. > That acceptance and openmindedness voiced by the > first ammendment (first for a reason) in the US > protected the lives of countless US Muslims in the > wake of 9/11. Had the situation been reversed in > any middle east country that would not have been > the case. I refuse to be threatened into behaving > like the illiterate scum that beheads a worker > trying to provide them with aid. People think the > US is a bunch of pushovers and take for granted > the graces extended to them, and they think the US > should be intimidated by a few Haji’s with IED’s > and machetes because they’re sooo scary. Remember > that when things get real and we’re left without > options the US is the only nation in the world to > have Nuked and firebombed it’s opponents civilian > populations before you lecture us on “the > consequences of provocation”. That’s not what I sad, if you could actually read instead of jump to conclusions you could see that. All I said is that there are consequences to free speech and those consequences should be taken into account prior to exercising that right. Also put all that tough guy bullshit away you aren’t impressing anyone. If you are so convicted then I suggest you call the next thug you see on the street a rat punk and then it will be you that faces the consequence of free speech.