Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Finnish Archbishop Comdemns ....  
User currently offlineEilennaei From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1151 times:

The Lutheran archbishop of Finland Jukka Paarma today comdemns in an open letter addressed to the Islamic elders in Finland "the intentional insulting on things considered holy by other believers-in-God under the blanket of the freedom of speech". "Whenever the [Finnish] Muslims are insulted, the Christians are hurt as well."

23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1140 times:

Oh Lord have mercy. Here we go again.

Now they're all uniting against free speech.


User currently offlineFrequentflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 736 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1127 times:

It is a mistake to bow to undue pressure, and I consider Freedom of Speech to be sacred too. It should be in everyone's Religion.

I for sure disagree with the stance taken by the archbishop.



Take off and live
User currently offlineKiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8554 posts, RR: 13
Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1114 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

with freedom comes responsibility ... unfortunately many people seem to want freedom without responsibility .

I have freedom of speech , so I could for example tell someone that I think their mother is a whore ... however I accept that together with that freedom I have the responsibility not to intentionally insult others or cause unnecessary offence ... so I choose not to do so .

Would everyone here be rushing to defend my freedom of speech if I walked up to someone and insulted their mother then complained when I got punched ? or would they say that I should have known better than to deliberately insult someone like that ?

While I am not religious myself I understand that for those who have a religion it is very precious and personal to them .. if someone goes out of their way to insult it under the guise of freedom of speech then they should not be surprised that they encounter hostility ... although that , of course , does not excuse threats of violence .



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offline11Bravo From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1718 posts, RR: 10
Reply 4, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1090 times:

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 3):
Would everyone here be rushing to defend my freedom of speech if I walked up to someone and insulted their mother then complained when I got punched ? or would they say that I should have known better than to deliberately insult someone like that ?

I would both defend your right to free speech and say that you should have known better.

If someone assaulted you for a verbal insult that is a crime. It is an innapropriate, and illegal, violent response. Insulting someone's mother is foolish and offensive, but being foolish and offensive is allowed in western societies. Physical assaults and threats are not.

I find the name Andrew very offensive because my religion prohibits any name that starts with "A" and ends with "W", and I'm going to beat your ass if we ever meet. Is that okay too?



WhaleJets Rule!
User currently offlineEilennaei From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1080 times:

I'm wondering when and if there are any more statements coming in from Christian religious leaders. It would be interesting to see if any think the publishing of the so called cartoons was an entirely correct and justified thing in the ethical sense.
In the political sense it has been a total disaster, nothing gained, a lot lost. I don't count the neo-Danish movement as a beginning of a significant political union.


User currently offlineAloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8705 posts, RR: 43
Reply 6, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1066 times:

Quoting Eilennaei (Reply 5):
I'm wondering when and if there are any more statements coming in from Christian religious leaders.

No need to wait: the chairman of Germany's Catholic Bishops' Conference, Cardinal Karl Lehmann, has criticised the cartoons for being "problematic since they touched the core of a religion". AFAIK, Lehmann is known to be highly conservative.



[Edited 2006-02-06 17:56:59]


Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineTRVYYZ From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1369 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1052 times:

Quoting Frequentflyer (Reply 2):
It is a mistake to bow to undue pressure, and I consider Freedom of Speech to be sacred too. It should be in everyone's Religion.

I for sure disagree with the stance taken by the archbishop.

I fully agree with the Arch Bishop's Stand.
I also support free speech. I think it is wise to keep Religion out of free speech.

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 3):

Welcome to my respected users list. At least somebody made some sense out of the thousands of posts made during the last weekend on free speech.


User currently offlineEilennaei From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1034 times:

Quoting Aloges (Reply 6):
No need to wait: the chairman of Germany's Catholic Bishops' Conference, Cardinal Karl Lehmann, has criticised the cartoons for being "problematic since they touched the core of a religion". AFAIK, Lehmann is known to be highly conservative.

Thanks for the info!
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,399007,00.html

Der Vorsitzende der Deutschen Bischofskonferenz, Karl Lehmann, äußerte scharfe Kritik an den Karikaturen. "Zu den Grundlagen des Zusammenlebens gehört die Achtung vor dem religiösen Bekenntnis anderer Menschen", sagte der Kardinal dem Blatt.


I think he said rather more as well in the same interview:

K.L. expressed his criticism regarding the caricatures: "A consideration of religious stances of the other people belongs to the basic laws of living together." (Feel free to correct my translation.)

[Edited 2006-02-06 19:18:32]

User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1013 times:

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 3):
Would everyone here be rushing to defend my freedom of speech if I walked up to someone and insulted their mother then complained when I got punched ? or would they say that I should have known better than to deliberately insult someone like that ?

Based on the above scenario, no. Not that you don't have the right to insult someone's mother - you do. But to get punched, is I think, and appropriate response, and not one that would likely result in a permanent infringement of your right to speak freely.

But that isn't what's happening. A better way to put it is this. You walk up to someone and insult their mother. In response, the recipient of the insult burns down your home, and threatens to kill you and your family.

If you complained about this scenario, then yes I'd be defending you.

Quoting TRVYYZ (Reply 7):
I also support free speech. I think it is wise to keep Religion out of free speech.

Once you start excluding religion from free speech, you're on a slipperly slope towards the complete loss of free speech.


User currently offlineEilennaei From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 993 times:

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 9):
But that isn't what's happening. A better way to put it is this. You walk up to someone and insult their mother. In response, the recipient of the insult burns down your home, and threatens to kill you and your family.

Only in this case the parties are anonymous and mostly live on different continents. Exchanges go through the multinational media that filters and distorts the view. It's symptomatic that we see very few people providing a personal Islamic point of view.


User currently offlineL410Turbolet From Czech Republic, joined May 2004, 5696 posts, RR: 18
Reply 11, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 977 times:

Quoting Aloges (Reply 6):
the chairman of Germany's Catholic Bishops' Conference, Cardinal Karl Lehmann, has criticised the cartoons for being "problematic since they touched the core of a religion". AFAIK, Lehmann is known to be highly conservative.

The Archbishop of Prague issued statement declaring that Mohammed's caricatures are "beyond freedom of expression". WTF?

I don't think an old dog is capable to learn new tricks. They just don't burn people on stake anymore.

Quote from a different thread:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 155):
This is the great reunion of clergymen all over the world to reinstroduce religious censorship.

Well said. 100% agree.


User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6432 posts, RR: 54
Reply 12, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 973 times:

This thread came off to a wrong start.

The question is not whether the cartoons are stupid or not. Funny or not. Good satire or not.

The question is:

1. whether we accept individuals to express themselves stupidly, and every individual can then tell them afterwards that they were stupid. Game over.

2. or the state shall control the expression of every individual and transform every stupidity into a criminal act.

In the so called western world #1 is valid, and it is not open for negotiation.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineDoona From Sweden, joined Feb 2005, 3769 posts, RR: 13
Reply 13, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 967 times:

Quoting Eilennaei (Thread starter):
"Whenever the [Finnish] Muslims are insulted, the Christians are hurt as well."

Erm, are there really muslims in Finland?  scratchchin 

Cheers
Mats



Sure, we're concerned for our lives. Just not as concerned as saving 9 bucks on a roundtrip to Ft. Myers.
User currently offlineEilennaei From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 950 times:

Quoting Doona (Reply 13):
Erm, are there really muslims in Finland?

Yes there are, really. Some groups (the Tatars) have been resident from the times of the good old Russian Empire in the early 1800s. They are folks that have kept their culture very well, now with links to their old homeland renewed, and at the same time remained respected members of our society.
The modern days have brought a lot more from different ethnic groups.


User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6432 posts, RR: 54
Reply 15, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 936 times:

Quoting Doona (Reply 13):
Erm, are there really muslims in Finland?
Cheers
Mats

Ha-ha Mats, you know the answer very well.

Finland may have one or two dozen converters, but they have no immigrants.

For those who were born after the Cold War: Finland returned refugees from the Soviet Union back to the Soviet Union. That may have saved Finland from the fate of the three Baltic countries. An unheroic, but clever move.

They could not have different laws for Soviet and other refugees. Therefore of course no Arab refugees went to Finland. If they did, then they would be sent home and hanged.

Some Soviet refugees made it on foot through the woods THROUGH Finland to Sweden, but that's another story.

Then there were the so called "family reunions" of the 80'es and 90'es. But there were no Muslims in Finland to form the base for the family reunions.

That's the historic reason for practically no Muslims in Finland.

We could say that a Finnish bishop that way gets a cheap shot. But until my death I will defend his right to say whatever he wants.

Another thing is what weight we will put on his words. Without knowing the man I would say one percent.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineEilennaei From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 936 times:

Excellent article by the veteran BBC correspondent and World News Editor John Simpson:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4685886.stm

Particularly of interest to the "neo-Danes", I wish to add.


User currently offlineSFOMEX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 914 times:

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 1):
Now they're all uniting against free speech.

Hardly so. The Lutheran Archbishop is only stating what it is obvious from a religious standpoint: mocking or offending a religious belief is hurtful to those who happen to hold that belief. Respecting other’s beliefs is too a value, just as free speech is.

Having said that, he and most western Christian leaders would never endorse censorship or burning embassies down.


User currently offlineKiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8554 posts, RR: 13
Reply 18, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 880 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 9):
Based on the above scenario, no. Not that you don't have the right to insult someone's mother - you do. But to get punched, is I think, and appropriate response,

so you are saying that violence is an appropriate response when you feel insulted ? I disagree with that , just as I disagree with the violent acts being committed by some of the protestors .


I have to say that having read many many opinions ( both on Anet and elsewhere ) on this topic that the whole "freedom of speech" argument seems to mostly being used as a red herring .... most of those arguments seem to quickly fall away into impassioned 'us' vs 'them' threads and the whole incident is being used by both sets of "us" to demonize both sets of "them".

I wonder whether , if the same cartoonist had drawn a cartoon dubbed "Christs Honeymoon" showing Jesus in the act of having sex with Mary Magdalene while she screams "oh God , oh God , oh God" as the caption , the same people who are currently defending his free speech and saying he has nothing to apologise for would still be sticking up for him .... I suspect that many of them would not , and some would in fact themselves be calling for an apology .



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlineEilennaei From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 859 times:

Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 15):
Finland may have one or two dozen converters, but they have no immigrants.

Not letting the facts get into your way, right? Welcome to see for yourself. Converter is usually an electronic device, and we have quite a few of them. Converts as well, I've seen some Finnish-looking women in Muslim dresses.

The main reason behind this outrage is likely:
i) frustration on the immigrant policy in some Western European countries
i) frustration on social conditions and oppressive governments in some Muslim countries.

It's eerily fascinating to witness how the universal human behaviour scheme works similarly on the streets of poor Muslim districts, and a high-tech Internet forum of people with good incomes. Both feel their position shaken, but for different reasons.

[Edited 2006-02-07 10:35:28]

User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 815 times:

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 18):
so you are saying that violence is an appropriate response when you feel insulted ? I disagree with that , just as I disagree with the violent acts being committed by some of the protestors .

What I meant was that the level of response was more or less equal to the offense. Even if slugging someone in response is an overreaction, it is clearly more appropriate to the "offense" than pulling out a gun and shooting the insulter.

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 18):
I have to say that having read many many opinions ( both on Anet and elsewhere ) on this topic that the whole "freedom of speech" argument seems to mostly being used as a red herring .... most of those arguments seem to quickly fall away into impassioned 'us' vs 'them' threads and the whole incident is being used by both sets of "us" to demonize both sets of "them".

Perhaps for some, your analysis is accurate. But for me, freedom speech is anything but a red herring.

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 18):
I wonder whether , if the same cartoonist had drawn a cartoon dubbed "Christs Honeymoon" showing Jesus in the act of having sex with Mary Magdalene while she screams "oh God , oh God , oh God" as the caption , the same people who are currently defending his free speech and saying he has nothing to apologise for would still be sticking up for him ....

I would.


User currently offlineKiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8554 posts, RR: 13
Reply 21, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 793 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 20):
Perhaps for some, your analysis is accurate. But for me, freedom speech is anything but a red herring.

I congratulate you for that attitude , and I am sure that there are many like you ... but I still feel that there are many others who are mouthing the words "freedom of speech" but are just using it as a pretext to bolster their own prejudices

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 20):
Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 18):
so you are saying that violence is an appropriate response when you feel insulted ? I disagree with that , just as I disagree with the violent acts being committed by some of the protestors .

What I meant was that the level of response was more or less equal to the offense. Even if slugging someone in response is an overreaction, it is clearly more appropriate to the "offense" than pulling out a gun and shooting the insulter.

fair enough comment ... the trouble is that once you move away from a position that violence is an unacceptable response to an 'insult' to a position where you say some 'limited' level of violence is appropriate then you are on a slippery slope ... would you also feel that it was acceptable for someone who was very offended hurt by the cartoon to punch the cartoonist ? once you start condoning any form of violence however 'mild' where do you draw the line ?



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlineEilennaei From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 784 times:

Here's an interesting article on the background of the Danish decision to publish:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2006/02/08/denmark/

(You need to click through an ad before you see the contents)


User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 765 times:

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 21):
the trouble is that once you move away from a position that violence is an unacceptable response to an 'insult' to a position where you say some 'limited' level of violence is appropriate then you are on a slippery slope ... would you also feel that it was acceptable for someone who was very offended hurt by the cartoon to punch the cartoonist ? once you start condoning any form of violence however 'mild' where do you draw the line

It's not a question of condoning violence.

I would rather that we live in a world where people don't feel the need to punch someone's light out because of an insult. However, we don't live in that world, and because of this - in most western legal systems - we take into account the circumstances when we punish someone who has overreacted to an insult. You get into a bar fight because someone has verbally offended you, and you beat the insulter up, you are going to get charged at most with misdemeanor assault. You take out an assault rifle and put 18 shots into the offender, your going to go to jail for life or get the needle.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Help Me Finnish Fazer Chocolate Fans! posted Mon Dec 11 2006 07:54:36 by Flyboy36y
A Finnish Song ... posted Sun Aug 6 2006 14:39:18 by ManuCH
Finnish Take On Bird Flu posted Tue Oct 11 2005 00:09:20 by Aloges
Weird Finnish Competitions posted Thu May 12 2005 14:35:27 by Andz
Finnish Names? posted Tue Jan 11 2005 02:09:30 by Yanksn4
Question Regarding Finnish Euro Coins posted Sat Dec 28 2002 23:44:47 by Airsicknessbag
Listen To Finnish Language! posted Wed May 29 2002 21:11:03 by Capt.Picard
Any Finnish People Here? posted Sat Mar 9 2002 20:43:53 by IbizaJet A330
Archbishop Attacks Planned Invasion Of Iraq posted Sat Jul 13 2002 20:07:19 by SAS23
What Do You Think About Finnish People? posted Sun Feb 18 2001 08:25:29 by Nurminen