Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They are allowed to express rage and nobody bats an eyelash. If Americans do the same they are castigated (not legally...but in the press and such). Imagine what would happen if a massive rally were underway in D.C. where thousands of Americans screamed, "Death to Islam". How would the Muslims react? So, they are allowed to express disdain for us, but not the other way around?
Castigated does not mean you are not allowed to voice your opinion. I can criticize you for burning the Koran, doesn't change the fact taht you still have the right. Americans have the same if not more rights than people living in a Muslim theocracy.
Castigated does not mean you are not allowed to voice your opinion. I can criticize you for burning the Koran, doesn't change the fact taht you still have the right. Americans have the same if not more rights than people living in a Muslim theocracy.
Of course we have more rights. But, you are not getting my main point. I am not talking about laws; I am talking about stuff that happens in society and in the press. Why are Muslims given a pass when they engage in rage, but the slightest provocation by a Westerner causes Muslims to engage in death threats and extremist rallies? Why are they allowed to be more militant in the defense of their religion and identities than we are?
Oh please...I'm quite well aware of the history of the Middle East; the creation of Israel, U.S. support of (and flirting with) dictatorships (the Shah, Saddam, the Saudies, etc..) and the various little tiffs between the disparate ethnic and religious groups there. Yes, the Muslims have gotten the shaft in the past (and the present) at times, but why are they militantly allowed to defend their religion against any perceived slight while Westerners are not?
You seem to be suffering from some bizarre fantasy that there is a single authority somewhere who is "allowing" them to do one thing and "allowing" us to do something different.
No. Nobody is "allowing" anything.
They behave one way, and we behave in a different way. This is because we actually do have different standards.
If you do not like the way they behave, I simply find it strange that you think the proper response it to become exactly like them.
Of course we have more rights. But, you are not getting my main point. I am not talking about laws; I am talking about stuff that happens in society and in the press. Why are Muslims given a pass when they engage in rage, but the slightest provocation by a Westerner causes Muslims to engage in death threats and extremist rallies? Why are they allowed to be more militant in the defense of their religion and identities than we are?
Who is allowing them to be more militant? Muslim clerics? They are allowed to behave in this manner because they live under a theocracy, we on the other hand have separation of church and state, thank god!!
Why are Muslims given a pass when they engage in rage, but the slightest provocation by a Westerner causes Muslims to engage in death threats and extremist rallies? Why are they allowed to be more militant in the defense of their religion and identities than we are?
Who is doing all this magical "allowing" of which you speak?
Speaking of double standards,,,I just heard that the Associated Press announced that they will not publish any images (stills or video) of the pastor's burning. They will cover it in text only, with no descriptions of the actual burning of the books.
Interesting that it's an AP picture of the flag burning.
Also interesting that they didn't feel the same restraint was needed in the case of the pictures published of Abu gharib. (Just in case the argument is made for the 'safety of the troops').
Speaking of double standards,,,I just heard that the Associated Press announced that they will not publish any images (stills or video) of the pastor's burning. They will cover it in text only, with no descriptions of the actual burning of the books.
No idea of what your source on this is, but I do note that General Petraeus did make that request.
You are talking in a circle now. Did we not just get finished acknowledging history?
I am trying to illustrate how backwards and excessively militant they are. I'm not talking in circles.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
