Not some, almost all. That’s what a consensus is. It’s based on Hadiths that are centuries old. It isn’t a new belief, it isn’t a minority belief, on pure weight of numbers it’s not just offending “somebody” it’s offending a whole religion.No, it's an opinion of some muslims that it's offensive.
It is purely just their opinion.
You could say that it is fact that anything you can think of is offensive because somebody is offended.
They’ve backtracked. There is literally a vote on the commons record stating which Tory MP’s voted against animal rights in the Brexit bill.Well he's been made to look a bit of a fool with his brexit means worse animal welfare rubbish on this thread so he's going to double down on this, even though it is, of course, also bollocks.
Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
Not some, almost all. That’s what a consensus is. It’s based on Hadiths that are centuries old. It isn’t a new belief, it isn’t a minority belief, on pure weight of numbers it’s not just offending “somebody” it’s offending a whole religion.
If you're going off weight of numbers then less than 50% of the global population would be offended. Meaning its more inoffensive than offensive.Not some, almost all. That’s what a consensus is. It’s based on Hadiths that are centuries old. It isn’t a new belief, it isn’t a minority belief, on pure weight of numbers it’s not just offending “somebody” it’s offending a whole religion.
That’s assuming that that the remaining 50% don’t find it offensive. Jews for instance have very similar beliefs on images of god. Images of Buddha can be very offensive to certain Buddhist demographics even though it’s widely used by Buddhist themselves in temples. A lot of other religions have sympathy to Islam on the subject. Some people who have no belief whatsoever just think that it’s unnecessary to go out your way to offend belief systems and people who follow that belief. I suspect of you really wanted to do a head count of people who are offended I suspect that the opposite of what you assume is true is true.If you're going off weight of numbers then less than 50% of the global population would be offended. Meaning its more inoffensive than offensive.
Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
So are you saying that Muslims don’t have the right to be offended?Yes, it isn't offending everybody is it? Therefore it's an opinion.
Does that mean it's fact that people can't eat bacon too?
They’ve backtracked. There is literally a vote on the commons record stating which Tory MP’s voted against animal rights in the Brexit bill.
Yet they voted for the Northern Ireland protocol. Which coincidentally they’re also backtracking on.No they didn't. They voted against adding it as an amendment to the Brexit bill. Context and nuance are important.
Not to Tony.No they didn't. They voted against adding it as an amendment to the Brexit bill. Context and nuance are important.
Not to Tony.
Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
Don't you ever get tired being you? I get tired after exchanging around 3 messages with you.That’s assuming that that the remaining 50% don’t find it offensive. Jews for instance have very similar beliefs on images of god. Images of Buddha can be very offensive to certain Buddhist demographics even though it’s widely used by Buddhist themselves in temples. A lot of other religions have sympathy to Islam on the subject. Some people who have no belief whatsoever just think that it’s unnecessary to go out your way to offend belief systems and people who follow that belief. I suspect of you really wanted to do a head count of people who are offended I suspect that the opposite of what you assume is true is true.
Grendulls back with his sexualised fantasies.He probably thinks nuance is nonse
Argue the point not the person.Don't you ever get tired being you? I get tired after exchanging around 3 messages with you.
Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
So are you saying that Muslims don’t have the right to be offended?
Fuck me that bacon argument is as about a stupid argument you could make. For the simple reason that for it to be an equivalent you’d have to force feed bacon to a Muslim. Which of course would be offensive.
You have no point. Your animal welfare brexit hyperbole was nonsense. We were already ahead of most the EU, now we'll go yet further ahead.Argue the point not the person.
Some people on here clearly think that they’re not offensive full stop. The only actual point I’ve made is that that they’re offensive to Islam as a general consensus so therefore they are offensive. Some have tried to downplay that to some as if it’s a minority of Muslims when it’s clearly a consensus. Someone has then tried to say that only a lesser percentage of the world is offended so it can’t be a fact when in actual fact Christianity is a minority when it comes religions that aren’t offended by imagery, even then certain sects of Christianity are also offended by imagery. There is actually a word for it, aniconism.Tony, unless I've missed something then nobody has said that it's not a fact that some (probably most) muslims are offended; but it's not a fact that the cartoons are offensive, full stop i.e. to all people. Like many arguments on this forum, the nuance of the argument seems to get lost and folks just go round in circles until one gives up!
Of course offence is given. If I choose to call you a c**t (I wouldn’t by the way) I’d be doing that with the intent of offending. It’s like Grendull with his homo erotic fantasist put downs. He’s not doing that as a compliment, he’s doing it in an attempt to offend me (presumably because he’s homophobic so thinks it’s a useful tool to offend someone). Luckily I’m not homophobic so I’m not offended. He’s giving it but I’m not taking it (no pun intended).You have no point. Your animal welfare brexit hyperbole was nonsense. We were already ahead of most the EU, now we'll go yet further ahead.
You also refuse to accept that offense is taken, not given. Nothing is offensive as fact, especially not this, and i suspect you wouldn't be so keen to defend other religions for whatever reason. You will however continue to flog this dead horse and we'll go round in circles until the end of time. So as I said, its tiring and also pointless.
Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
But I can choose to ignore you calling me a c**t and get over it or I could come to your place of work and demand you get fired for calling me a c**t. Which is what these people are doing. I of course wouldn't do that, I think people that attempt to have other people fired are lower than a snakes belly.Of course offence is given. If I choose to call you a c**t (I wouldn’t by the way) I’d be doing that with the intent of offending. It’s like Grendull with his homo erotic fantasist put downs. He’s not doing that as a compliment, he’s doing it in an attempt to offend me (presumably because he’s homophobic so thinks it’s a useful tool to offend someone). Luckily I’m not homophobic so I’m not offended. He’s giving it but I’m not taking it (no pun intended).
That’s assuming that that the remaining 50% don’t find it offensive. Jews for instance have very similar beliefs on images of god. Images of Buddha can be very offensive to certain Buddhist demographics even though it’s widely used by Buddhist themselves in temples. A lot of other religions have sympathy to Islam on the subject. Some people who have no belief whatsoever just think that it’s unnecessary to go out your way to offend belief systems and people who follow that belief. I suspect of you really wanted to do a head count of people who are offended I suspect that the opposite of what you assume is true is true.
Which is fair enough. Doesn’t mean that people don’t have the right to be offended or that the intent was to offend in the first place.But I can choose to ignore you calling me a c**t and get over it or I could come to your place of work and demand you get fired for calling me a c**t. Which is what these people are doing. I of course wouldn't do that, I think people that attempt to have other people fired are lower than a snakes belly.
Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
So you’re inventing imaginary situations and imaginary responses to those imaginary situations. Clever stuff. What’s it proving exactly except you detachment from reality?I guess if most Muslims in the world would be offended by a cartoon of Mickey Mouse the Tonester would be advocating a boycott of Disneyland
Scary thing is all you'd have to do is take that picture of Mickey Mouse and write Muhammed above it with an arrow pointing at Mickey and you'd have the lynch mob turn up at your work place. With the full backing of certain forum members too.I guess if most Muslims in the world would be offended by a cartoon of Mickey Mouse the Tonester would be advocating a boycott of Disneyland
People get respect, ideas don’t.
So you’re inventing imaginary situations and imaginary responses to those imaginary situations. Clever stuff. What’s it proving exactly except you detachment from reality?
People get respect, ideas don’t.
I mean if people didn't have any ideas then why would you respect them?
Sorry but that was nowhere near as clever as you thought it would be.
So are you saying that Muslims don’t have the right to be offended?
Fuck me that bacon argument is as about a stupid argument you could make. For the simple reason that for it to be an equivalent you’d have to force feed bacon to a Muslim. Which of course would be offensive.
This reminds me of an RE lesson I used to do with Year 7 - Belief, Fact or Opinion?
10 statements to sort.
Tricky to define the difference between a belief and an opinion but it used to really kick off over the statement:
'Murder is wrong'.
Loads of kids had it down as a fact. I reserved my strongest disapproval for kids who thought it an opinion!
It was a gteat lesson!
I mean if people didn't have any ideas then why would you respect them?
Sorry but that was nowhere near as clever as you thought it would be.
No, it's an opinion of some muslims that it's offensive.
It is purely just their opinion.
I'm not getting involved in the argument itself, but I think you were missing the point slightly here.
It is of course their opinion if they find it offensive... but it's also fine to say it's a fact some Muslims find it offensive.
Like you can say it's a fact some people think Biamou is amazing, and it's a fact some people think Biamou is shit. It's individual opinions, but you can make factual statements about those opinions.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?