Why the world must support Macron

[stvdv]

What a world we live in. Prime Ministers and Presidents playing still in kindergarten making drawings and threatening to nuke each other for it

a) Charlie Hebdo now published a cartoon of Erdogan (00:00-00:30)
b) China now also portrays Muhammad; I am curious if Erdogan and Pakistan PM tell China the truth like they did with France (05:54-06:54)
@stvdvRF

 

[stvdv]

Another attack in France today, in Lyon. A priest got shot and is in critical condition now.

A Greek Orthodox priest has been seriously wounded in a shooting in the French city of Lyon, officials say.

The gunman fled the scene, sparking a manhunt. A suspect resembling witness descriptions was later taken into custody.

The motive for the attack remains unclear. Authorities have opened an investigation of attempted murder.

 

[Estro Felino]

Maybe we should write Macron that he should not say stupid things like "we have the right to blaspheme". Of course he can blaspheme, but then he should not complain if France gets nuked one day, by someone who has had enough of this belittling act of Macron. I don't say nuking another country is good, I just say that if you hit someone in the face (or trample on their soul) then you should not complain if they hit you back.

People abuse Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion. These Freedoms are nice, but not when they are abused.

I deeply respect your views but I would like others to empathize with us Europeans and our philosophical and anthropological history.
Our Freedoms are the result of very slow and gradual improvements and process. Of Humanism, Renaissance, Enlightenment...which have made people free to judge. I can quote Kant when he said that Enlightenment is the man's exit from the state of silence that he imposed onto himself.
I said silence, actually the word is Unmündigkeit that is the impossibility to speak freely because other authorities (religious, political) speak at his place.

So the freedom to criticize religions is a conquest.
The freedom to speak out.
From a moral point of view I perfectly agree with you that blaspheming is not that respectful...and would be preferable not to do it.

From a juridic point of view I do agree with Macron. He defends the values of the French Republic, which are the values of my Republic too..since we have both Napoleonic juridic systems.
So juridically, it is a right that these magazines or newspapers possess.

 

[stvdv]

So the freedom to criticize religions is a conquest.

The freedom to speak out.
From a moral point of view I perfectly agree with you that blaspheming is not that respectful...and would be preferable not to do it.

There is a huge difference between criticizing religions and being critical, as in "not blindly accept things", and blaspheming (the red part). It can be compared with the RF Rules. Criticize ideas all you want, just don't insult or show contempt. That is what I meant. RF Rules are quite useful

Blasphemy is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence to a deity, or sacred objects, or toward something considered sacred or inviolable

@stvdvRF

 

[stvdv]

From a juridic point of view I do agree with Macron. He defends the values of the French Republic, which are the values of my Republic too..since we have both Napoleonic juridic systems.
So juridically, it is a right that these magazines or newspapers have.

I am not such a fan of lawyers, because they are good in twisting facts in such a way that criminals go free on technicalities. That is when you use the system in an Adharmic way IMO. If truth finding is not the goal, but you resort to cheating you go the wrong way, and then I rather stay far from it.

So, moral decision should trump juridical decision, but I can see that this is quite challenging sometimes.
@stvdvRF

 

[stvdv]

I deeply respect your views but I would like others to empathize with us Europeans and our philosophical and anthropological history.
Our Freedoms are the result of very slow and gradual improvements and process. Of Humanism, Renaissance, Enlightenment...which have made people free to judge. I can quote Kant when he said that Enlightenment is the man's exit from the state of silence that he imposed onto himself.
I said silence, actually the word is Unmündigkeit that is the impossibility to speak freely because other authorities (religious, politucal) speak at his place.

This is how I see it. Macron and all the French people and all (non-)Muslims should be free to draw Muhammad. They should not be free to Blaspheme (as in 'real' insult and 'real' contempt). Drawing Muhammad is not Blasphemy, unless you are a Muslim who believes it to be Blasphemy. But if this Muslim believes this (even if 2 billion of them believe this), that is still their belief, so it's not a fact. At best these Muslims can say "for me it is Blasphemy, so I don't draw Muhammad".

It would be much wiser if Macron not says "we have the right to blaspheme" but instead says:
"Drawing (Muhammad) is not blasphemous for me, but I don't impose my definition on Muslims and I would appreciate the same respect from Muslims"

Note: In India drawing your Guru, Master, Prophet, Avatar, Poorna Avatar is cosidered good sadhana in the age of Kali Yuga. But India does not impose this on Muslims/others. Why should Muslims be free to impose it on others? This is PROOF that these Muslims are wrong, and hypocritical or lack vision.
@stvdvRF

 

[Estro Felino]

There is a huge difference between criticizing religions and being critical, as in "not blindly accept things", and blaspheming (the red part). It can be compared with the RF Rules. Criticize ideas all you want, just don't insult or show contempt. That is what I meant. RF Rules are quite useful

Yes ...indeed ...but the context of press is different. If you don't like a newspaper or a magazine, don't buy it.
But you can't prevent others from reading it.

In our juridic tradition only persons cannot be defamed or insulted. But religions are not persons...or even dead people like Julius Caesar....they are not persons any more.

So, moral decision should trump juridical decision, but I can see that this is quite challenging sometimes.

The law in our secular system is amoral (meaning independent from morals)...that is why one thing can be condemned morally but not juridically.

 

[stvdv]

Yes ...indeed ...but the context of press is different. If you don't like a newspaper or a magazine, don't buy it.
But you can't prevent others from reading it.

Yes, I totally agree.
All should be free to draw whatever they want
But if you visit a Muslim don't give him your Muhammad drawing as a birthday present
@stvdvRF

 

[Estro Felino]

Yes, I totally agree.
All should be free to draw whatever they want
But if you visit a Muslim don't give him your Muhammad drawing as a birthday present

I think this is essential. Religions are a private personal matter, so while bringing up religion with your friend or colleague, respect is essential.

 

[stvdv]

I think this is essential. Religions are a private personal matter, so while bringing up religion with your friend or colleague, respect is essential.

That is an important point many religious people, esp. Muslims tend to oversee, hence all the troubles in the world. When these people would understand the simple words "Freedom of Religion" they would know that you can't ask of others to obey by your religious Laws.

So, Macron is fully right here. And this is even far worse than most people want to see or admit.

Terrorist attacks is not the proper word anymore IMO, Islam/Muslim attack fits the description better it seems, because the majority of the Muslim World stand behind these attacks, because, instead of condemning the attacks, they only shout that "France should obey our blasphemy rules"

ETA: I am happy to read the thread of @danieldemol showing there are a few Muslims speaking out now; I hope 2000 million follow soon
@stvdvRF

 

[Estro Felino]

Terrorist attacks is not the proper word anymore IMO, Islam/Muslim attack fits the description better it seems, because the majority of the Muslim World stand behind these attacks, because, instead of condemning the attacks, they only shout that "France should obey our blasphemy rules"
@stvdvRF

There are double standards going on here.
We do not tell those countries to abolish blasphemy laws.
They do tell us to forbid criticism of religion.
Also because I have the right to criticize Christianity in my country. I have the right to use harsh words to condemn the Vatican. And the Pope.
The secular law of my country protects me.

I do not understand why they want a special treatment. There is a juridic principle callec Lex eadem omnibus= The law is equal for all.

 

[stvdv]

There are double standards going on here.
We do not tell those countries to abolish blasphemy laws.
They do tell us to forbid criticism of religion.

Yes, that is hypocritical. They go one step further though, they forbid us to draw Muhammad (even if there is no intention to criticize).

Hinduism encourage drawing the picture of the Master, so also Muhammad, because by drawing Muhammad you increase Love in you. Love is clearly missing in these Muslims shouting to kill those who draw Muhammad.

I suggest a minor change in this Blasphemy Law, being "all are encouraged to draw Muhammad to develop Love in themselves"

 

[stvdv]

Also because I have the right to criticize Christianity in my country. I have the right to use harsh words to condemn the Vatican. And the Pope.

That would violate RF Rules though

I do not understand why they want a special treatment. There is a juridic principle callec Lex eadem omnibus= The law is equal for all.

They must all have read "Animal Farm" from George Orwell "All are equal, but pigs are more equal". That book is a gem.