[jacquesm]

> did I not condemn the attack, and clearly said that at max they should have been ignored, it was after all only satire.

Yes, and if you had left it at that your stance would be commendable. But you chose to significantly dilute your position in what followed.

[rikacomet]

Dear Jacques, your opinion is not the only one that matters, I hope you remember that. No opinion got diluted, nor yours or mine or whatever you meant by that.

I will say this clearly to you, Muslim people have faith in Prophet Muhammad and his teachings. What are they? You neither have complete knowledge nor intention to get it.

It in-fact, includes the same liberties and rights you seem to be are defending at the moment. Yet from the intensity with which you are responding to my replies to other people as well, makes you look like rather driven by emotions here.

If you could only find out for yourself, and spend the proper effort in finding out what Islam really is (from a genuine Quran) you will realize that what you are simply brushing off as another religion is not what you think it is.

Is it possible for you to be wrong about Islam? Yes or No?

[jacquesm]

The Muslims in my cirle make no attempt to apologize for what happened here and are not adding weaselwords to their condemnations. They realize that actions like these make all muslims look bad, even those that would have nothing to do with any of this.

You are unable for some reason to see that you are indirectly blaming the victim here and you are qualifying your condemnation.

[rikacomet]

And you are unable to see that you are simply starting to touch the line of madly imposing your opinion upon others. and Also doing both side of a conversation.

It is very easy to sit at home and be a arm-chair philosopher, and hope that the people in your circle are the all-there-is of the world.

In your opinion it is not possible for Muslims to have sensitivity about certain topics, that they would not like to be toyed around with. Cause that is against the concept of liberty perhaps?

[jacquesm]

> In your opinion it is not possible for Muslims to have sensitivity about certain topics, that they would not like to be toyed around with.

You can have all the sensitivity you want but that stops at the point where you export your sensitivities to others in the form of either bodily harm or threats to do so.

> Cause that is against the concept of liberty perhaps?

Exactly so.

The liberty to express ones opinion even if that is uncomfortable for the recipient is a very strong right and religion is not exempt from this in France.

In some countries there are laws on the books that will get you punished severely if you should insult some religious entity but France is not one of those and those that chose to live in France should abide by its laws first, and not whatever code their religion imposes on them.

[rikacomet]

And you think that Islam promotes this "bodily harm/threats" ? You sure are a delusional one. I leave you at that, I should have known that you are not here to listen to opinions, or engage in a fair debate.

[jacquesm]

> And you think that Islam promotes this "bodily harm/threats" ?

Classic strawman.

> You sure are a delusional one.

Of course I am, since, obviously I think that Islam promotes 'bodily harm/threats'.

In case you did not understand that paragraph, it was directed at the people who perpetrate those acts, not towards Islam.

Note how you changed what I said by adding your own interpretation and then took issue with the modified version.

That said, just like there are plenty of passages in the bible that call for violence and the most heinous acts to be perpetrated against others so there are such passages in the Qu'ran.

Note that I'm equally upset with those that would use either book (or any other book for that matter) to impose their view of what the world should look like on others. Religious fanatics - fanatics of any kind, really - will use such texts or any other that they can lay their hands on to try to find excuses to act in whatever way they think will further their cause, including threats and violence.

I'm just one shade less upset with those that are apologists for such fanatics.

Islam is definitely not the only religion that has been hijacked in this way, every other religion has its own share of problematic characters. But it is up to those that subscribe to those religions to deal with that and to condemn it in the strongest words possible - without caveats like you have done - to make sure that the would-be fanatics hear loud and clear that they are no longer part of the religion or group they profess to serve.

As long as we have a process of so called radicalization where creepy old men acting in the name of religions to try to brainwash impressionable kids into committing acts of violence we will see more of this.