I know this is really irrelevant for the message of this video, however just for clarification. I noticed that Denmark is placed among the secular countries on the world map at 2:13, if you define secular as meaning that there is a separation between state and religion, Denmark is not a secular country. We have a state religion and it plays an active role in our government though the Church Ministry (kirkeministeriet).
@Nominandum1 You've basically narrowed it down to four Countries: Africa, China, Singapore and South America... So tell me, which of these four communist/3rd World countries were you referring to when you claimed they don't have strict laws against homosexuality and religion? If my memory of History serves me correct, NEITHER of those four countries allow those acts.
@Nominandum1 Don't try that bs on me! Your last two comments told it just the way I assumed you intended for it to be said. And you do me this one favor.... Don't EVER compare muslims to my person!
@Nominandum1 Exactly my point! Your name speaks volumes about you. This is a prime example of why I hate muslims. You call a muslims corrupt way "politically correct", yet, here you are spewing hatred about my religion, my sexual orientation, as well as referring to my Country as a "third world country"?! Let me tell you something; and this goes for all Muslims and people like you. You don't like how people choose to live their lives elsewhere, DON'T GET INVOLVED WITH THEIR COUNTRY!
@CA00MUSIC For starters, I'm not religious. Only been to church 5 times my entire life. My mother vowed she'd never put her children through what she endured while attending Catholic school in her childhood! I'll admit this right out; I, like everyone else in this World, am prejudiced. I also have legitimate reason for my prejudice (unlike kkk and muslim 'extremists'). Btw, you come off as a typical 'WASP Christian' who try to make ppl believe they're pure and never knew how to hate!
With all that I've seen and learned, Muslims, in my eyes, are no different from the Ku Klux Klan. I stay as far away from those types as possible! I have no use, nor interest in the likes of them.
maybe we should not let them in the country to crash airplanes into buildings in the first place..all this crap started when the flood gates of imigration of groups that refuse to adopt the american way of life..they want to be a COLONY OF THEIR FORMER COUNTRY i fear the future holds violence when we do battle for who will run america..americans or followers of islam
Free speech is essential. People don't always have the right answers and all the facts when they speak -- but who does? This free exchange of ideas help us all to learn from each other and coexist as a world community.
@gogolplex74 you fucking idiots copy/paste that bullshit so many times, it's getting to be annoying. all of those things you listed are all covered under free speech. I may not agree with it, but people have a right to express such views.
@gogolplex74 If you're not intentionally grossly over simplifying things and trying to make a joke at the same time, than you're really just not intelligent enough to understand this matter. If in your head you define "attack" as the scrutiny of the public forum or just plain criticism than there's your problem.
@gogolplex74 It doesn't contradict itself, it just clashes with freedom from hate speech. Freedom of speech shouldn't include slander against certain groups. But, if honest discourse is prevented, that is a problem. This does happen and that is a problem. You shouldn't "attack" people as much as discuss what they do. It is not racist to discuss black incarceration. Nor sexist to discuss brain differences. So long as you aren't simply spreading baseless claims.
Personly I'm sexist when it comes to certain jobs such as police and army but this is my own opinion and no one should be condemned for expressing their own personal view no matter what it is. These are the words of a boy which is 15.
If a man wants to be racist or sexist fair enough, allow him, don't put him in jail for expressing his own opinion.Don't police have better things to do.
@gregoryebbs Depend. If you physically act racist or sexist- lock them up. If you are those things but don't talk about it- no action. If you are those thing and talk openly about them- allow criticism and debate.
It's sick how a man is arrested for 4 years because he wrote something racist on facebook but a murder would only last for 20 years of jail, I fought Britain was known for it's free speech, apparently not.
They are about sexual fetishes, regardless of sexuality.
While I don't mind sexual fetishes (as long as everyone involved gives informed consent), even though I find some distasteful, I do not think they should be going about in a public parade with it.
I am not exactly against laws about public indecency (though I may be critical about the details of many of them).
@MastermindX Example, Sweden spends about 18% of everyones tax money, on mass-imigration. Then we place them all in one spot where only about 10% have jobs. then we let them just stay there in the geto we created and they just live on tax money.
that's the money I mean.
Only 15% of the people coming to Sweden, needs the hellp. The rest come to be like parasites. That's why I think we should trow them out, (If they dont do good) And spend the money on the starving kids, that die every second.
Is it not also free speech to voice your opinion against DMD? The argument of 100% free speech is very intricate indeed. The "free" world does not in fact have 100% free speech as it is. If for example, free speech were to conflict with national security, do you honestly think that free speech would be granted? I appreciate your defense of free speech but honestly DMD is not the correct way to change the opinions of people.
@dartplayer170 Of course you are free to voice your opinion and have a civilized discussion about it. What we are against is that you kill people and burn embassies to prove your point.
Also, yeah, freedom is more important than security. As Ben Franklin put it: “Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”
I don't kill anyone or burn embassies to prove my point. Sorry, but that is blatantly incorrect and based purely on assumption.
I am not arguing about whether freedom is more important than security. I am just stating that the people in charge view security as more important. This was demonstrated after 9/11 in many ways.
My view is that free speech is a good thing. Violence is a bad thing. If using your right to free speech invokes violence, the people using the violence should be arrested. Violence should not be tolerated, the people using it will have to learn that it is not ok but free speech is ok. And hopefully they will learn the difference because of the "draw mohammad days".
@flight1100 we don't know. in norway people are not allowed to state what values their country stands for lest they be accused of islamophobia, racism, or right-wing extremism.
@flight1100 Nope. There is no seperation of church and state in Norway. Though the issue is being debated. I hope they do eventually secularize the nation.
Haha. You haven't the bravery to put your own life on the line, yet you jump at the opportunity to put others' lives at risk. You are mistaking noninflammatory protest for worthless and effect-less protest. You're trying to say that an ideologically violent protest that could very well spur people to violence is worth it for the sake of your "right" to free speech. By protesting in such a cowardly way, you're contributing to the fire. You are being rash. Acting too fast, and thinking too little.
"You're trying to say that an ideologically violent protest that could very well spur people to violence is worth it for the sake of your "right" to free speech."
Yes, that is what he's saying. And I agree with him.
"By protesting in such a cowardly way, you're contributing to the fire. You are being rash."
What other form of protest would you recommend? I'll sign a petition to Viacom, but I don't think it's going to help.
@JayneWones Who is really the coward? The one who raises his voice against injustice? Or the one who says we should remain silent and bow our heads in front of injustice to avoid angering the ones perpetuating it and driving them to violence?
There is one basic constitutional fact that sums it all up very neatly without an minute video that took many times that to produce Americans have the freedom to say whatever we want, but we do not have the right to not be offended. In a free society no one has that right nor should they.
Between gay pride parades and DMD i think there's a little bit of a difference, because gay people eventually seek to be accepted by and be a part of the mainstream community which maybe are "hurt" by the parade itself but DMD is about the freedom of speech in our community without the need of a radical change in the Muslim community. I don't think anybody is upset because Muslims don't draw Mohamed the issue is with non Muslim in non Muslim countries drawing Mohamed.
Great vid. Islam must be challenged and revealed as the intellectual dead end and failure it is. The most ridiculous, comical and dangerous religion in the galaxy...as far as we know.....
@CorporalNym You have completely missed the point of the video; its not about challenging or ridiculing islam its about challenging then oppression of free speech that many extremists are attempting to force upon people. There is a massive difference in this; you have to realise that the vast majority of muslims are peaceful and basically indistinguishable to non-muslims. Its the minority that have misconceptions about islam; often taught by people who want to twist them to their own means.
@goonerh1 disagree. ISlam IS the problem and Islam is Muslims. One cannot read the Quran believe it is from a god, accept its tenets and be moderate. Islam IS the problem.
@CorporalNym You have no idea about islam other than what you get fed down your throat do you. Have you looked it up, looked at what the majority believe in it, heres a start:
ht tp://ww w.jannah.org/articles/misc.ht ml
Many religions have issues of violence in their text and in their past; the worlds most dominant religion, christianity, picking just two examples allows slavery and caused the crusades.
You've got to be fair here i'm not saying islam is perfect but its not as bad as you think
@TheRationalizer The point is if we decline our option to draw mohammed because we are afraid of the consequences then when do we draw the line?
Should we give in to terrorism and say that you can have this much control over what we do; then this gives encouragement, it makes it acceptable. To be honest i don't think we can have much impact on western-islamic relations but still i believe that people need to put down a marker and say when we don't think something is acceptable.
GothAtFunk took a good approach in encouraging people to draw a stick man and to label to "Muhammad" - this would could a lot less fuss because you can see that no offence is intended. It is a step towards teaching people "it's just a picture!"
@TheRationalizer I could agree with that, although i wouldn't have a problem with any non-insulting image. I just think the aim is to say we just want to get along, we don't have a problem with islam but equally we're not going to lie down to extremists whether they're muslim, christian, athiest or part-rabbit.
Maybe include pictures of other religious figures would also make it seem less targeted and agressive
You don't need to lie down to extremists. Draw images which have no implication of offence at all, such as a plain stick man. If everyone did that then the *extreme* fringe would have so little support that the backlash would be completely insignificant.
There's a difference between having the right to insult my mother, and coming up to me in the street and doing so :)
We already censor ourselves over completely innocuous terms like 'retard' or 'gay' used in a contexts which have nothing to do with the mentally challenged or homosexuals. We do this simply to avoid offending someone or for fear of appearing insensitive. Is it really such a surprise that we should be so easily cowed by threats of violence, when we so readily curb our tongues simply out of politeness?
@AburKadabur I'm not sure if i understand you correctly but are you comparing the right of free speech, to criticise, to judge and to pass comment on something with the right to turn words like gay into insults?
I don't call people gay as an insult because a) its not insulting, its just a sexual orientation and b) i'm not a twat. Its nothing to do with curbing my tongue out of politeness.
I would hope that you could understand the difference between these 'insults' and the topic of this video.
Or maybe not necessarily the state government, but the social structure of the religion itself is a social contract, a sort of government. It is simply a matter of what one government guarantees for its constituents conflicting with what a different government guarantees for its constituents. One of them has to fail to deliver. As for 'god given' rights, there is no such thing. It all comes down to which government is stronger. Which one has more POWER with which to ENFORCE its social contract.
What's really going on here can be seen when you define what a right is. And a right is the opposite of a freedom. If YOU have a right, someone ELSE has a restriction on freedom, enforced by a social contract (a government). And what's going on is contradictions between governments. Western governments uphold freedom to mock (Islam); Islamic governments uphold a right of its Muslim constituents to not have Islam mocked, even in foreign lands. The result can only be a war between the governments.
Post #2: ...everyone else. I think its un-American to be against someones rights. I personally don't give a fuck what they do, but I do think they deserve their rights.
If someone was withholding your rights or tried taking them away, wouldn't you standup and say fuck you? I especially hate censorship of music and television, who cares if you make some soccer mom gets upset cause they heard FUCK in a song?
Post #1: I'm completely against censorship. And with the whole gay pride thing, my mom was once saying she didn't think that it should be done at public places. Because as she said something like "what they do in there bedroom is none of my business and its done in family orientated events and such." I argued that its not like they are out there to say hey I like to fuck the same sex if they didn't do anything and sat down they would never receive there rights. They are saying treat me like...
couple things mentioned that I did not find... clear in this video: 1:58-2:10 "I am not a anti-theist, I am not a posed to PRIVATE religious beliefs. I am a member of a secular society, I believe I have the right to live without others imposing there religious BELIEFS on me"
"private" tends to be ok...HOWEVER some muslims do things "in private" and it could be very violent abuses to their wife etc...
When "imposing" any "belief" isn't that was legislature does? Religion effects the votes.
@LampPlaceThing But by all means vote against religious people's stance on (i.e.) "gay marriage" but do NOT say that is unconstitutional or what not, to do so with religious zeal.
Keep in mind it is not separation from religious people/ideals from state, it is the CHURCH organization such as in Britain "the House of Lords" etc.
You've skipped the actual arguments. I'm not against offending muslims, I'm against strategies that, long term, mean more extremists. You've focused on the "desensitising" effect of DMD, and that fine, but you've omitted consideration of knock on effects of pissing off moderates by addressing "muslims" rather than "extremists" i.e. increasing the food source of extremists and cutting off the ONE avenue to bring long term change in Islam. Saying "muslims" and not "extremists" is totally needless.
@C0nc0rdance Yes there's a disconnect between our points and that's the whole point. You've assumed that we (Me, Landon,... - We're not making the same points though) don't get your rationale for DMD. But there's a multitude of effects of DMD and you've concentrated on the one we already understand and agree to. However, DMD and your rationale for it, appear to be addressed to "muslims" rather than "extremists" - this has another effect, a bad one. and an unnecessary one for your rationale.
Isn't that kind of like saying you're worried that rosa parks sitting at the front of the bus will result in more crosses being lit on black preacher's lawns? Maybe she should just hold a polite sign or something...
@bradmanthethird No. These analogies are false. Pissing off racist white people is totally fine. No non-racist would be offended at that. And likewise, pissing off homophobic people with a gay pride parade is totally fine with me, no non-homophobe would be pissed at that. But freedom loving muslims are being pissed off with DMD because it, and it's rationale, is falsely addressed to them. Normally, I wouldn't care about this either, but it's needless, and we need them.
If they truly want to live in a free society than they'll be on the side of the free, regardless their other messages, not the ones who monger fear and hatred.
@bradmanthethird No argument there. I don't think pissing them off will push them to extremism though, but it will stop them allying themselves with us. It will give extremists an extra recruitment tool for those borderline extremists. And it will breed general resentment against us - pushing more borderline muslims into extremism. Most importantly it will cut off any chance of us starting a movement with moderate muslims in fighting the extremism in their midst...
@coolman9999uk That's garbage. You have no idea what secular Muslims think. If Muslims are pissed off because we don't follow Islamic religious law then they are not moderates.
@coolman9999uk I wish someone would give me a working definition of a so called moderate muslim. Is it a muslim who does not support terrorism but wants to deny me my freedom of speech OR is it a muslim who considers freedom of speech a none negotiable human right OR something else. This is very important.
@SissingPyd I can't define it, but I have a game designer friend, extremely liberal, almost a hippy, dutch, non-muslim fiancee, no pork, rejects the bits of Islam that contradict peaceful interpretations. Another mutual friend, conservative, muslim bf, again cherry picks like many Christians. My ex, british, non-muslim bf (me), cherry picks, actually agnostic. All satisfying your second point, all pissed to varying degrees at the generalisation. All know extremists in their families. All silent.
@coolman9999uk Well, if they have extremists in their families and remain silent, what does that make them?
Go listen to what Pat Condell has to say about the silent so-called majority of moderate muslims. They may not be terrorists themselves but they harbour people with terrorists inclinations that’s worse! Do you agree.
@SissingPyd I saw it. Yes, they're not using their power correctly. You could even say they're complicit, but whilst some muslims are knowingly complicit (i.e. not moderate), many more are inadvertently complicit- for a many complex reasons, too much for here but ones rooted in fear, social barriers, and ignorance. They need a kick up the bum- a movement like ours and there are ways we can administer it.
But this isn't it, the simple fact here is, the generalisations here are false.
7:40 however, its very easy to distort beliefs and stereotype people based on those who are the front runners of that "group". People tend to classify everything some a certain group of people do to everyone in that group, and even people not in that group.
Why can't people understand that you do NOT have a right to not be offended.
If someone says something that "offends" you then either calm down and debate them, or ignore them. If you see something on TV that offends you, change the channel. If a song on the radio offends you, turn to another station.
Grow up. Lots of things offend me, but I respect the rights of others to free speech too damn much to want to censor them.
Here Here ! I agree, we must be OUT, we must confront and challenge unsustainable concepts and ideas. I care not if I offend someone with a distorted world view who seeks to force that view on me. If I "offend' a flat-earther by demonstrating that the world is indeed round, that is simply too bad for them.
Islam is using the oldest trick in the book, fear, to protect their distorted world view and I for one say I will no longer fear them or anyone who seeks to condem me to hell. I Fear No God
@Pottsdie I want people to understand, that there is in fact no race division between the humans on this planet. I would also like to point out, for a homo sapiens sapiens, you don't seem as sapiens, as you think you are.
Seriously? An "I know you are but what am I" Retort? Seriously? That's the best that little piece of meat inside your skull could come up with?
What you said totally misses THE POINT. THE POINT is that muslims choose their beliefs, while people do not choose their genes. THE POINT is that the comparison for ridiculing irrational beliefs and ridiculing what you are born as is a false analogy. What you said isn't wrong, it just had nothing to do with THE POINT. Go Preach elsewhere.
@Pottsdie Most religious people had the same influence in choosing their religion, as they had a choice in choosing their genes. They had no influence in it. Religion is passed down upon the next generation via their parents and environment. Children are being raised and indoctrinated with religion, by the same people who gave them their genes.
Nope. I was born and raised in a strict religious upbringing myself. All it takes is some critical thinking and intellectual honesty to make it to adulthood as a fully functioning free thinker. People choose to remain willfully ignorant of the flaws of their belief systems.
@Pottsdie "...willfully ignorant..." I've heard this phrase many times over, and the more I hear it, the more I wonder what people think the brain is capable of. What is a "fully functioning free thinker."? Is there such a thing as free will, or do we live in a universe of cause and effect? I used to have no structure to my thinking, then I found ideology that gave me some. Then I discovered that the structure had bias. Should I support the structure? Institutions end up serving themselves.
Once we label exercising judgment about One's Own Speech as censorship, we're talking SHIT. Okay?
Censorship is the forcible silencing of somebody ELSE's speech.
I don't need to protect my free speech by posting plans for nuclear weapons and give myself a childish pat on the back how I won't be silenced by the bullies and bad guys.
Same with media outfits-they're exercising Their Own Judgment.
This debate has turned into a protest over OTHERS who won't say what you want them to say.
Could those 13% be people who aren`t able to make a decision of their own because of some medical condition like alzheimers, mental disability etc...?
Something really annoys me...it says in the chart that 13% are non religious and 3% are atheists...well?...Anyone knows what the difference is? I hate it when things are badly explained or blurred...anyone got an answer for me?
@74Charm Religion does not always equate theism, I guess. There can also be atheistic religions. So I think it refers to non-religious theists; theists who are not affiliated to organized religion and/or have their own spiritual beliefs? Whereas atheists have neither theism or religion.
@74Charm Yeah, something like that I guess. Those people who have meaningless and dull definitions of god like 'energy' and 'the universe' and whatever they want it to mean. They'll find something to worship and they'll label it god, for no good reason really. "Spiritual" is a meaningless label to me.
Good video. There is only one thing in it that I have a problem with, that is the gay pride, not that I think they should not be alowed to have their gay pride parades, but I think the idea of gay pride or gay rights is idiotic, just as the idea of womans rights is. The only rights anyone should be fighting for is equal rights under the law, regardless of them being gay or straight, black or white, male or female.
When someone does something that insults islam, and someone else dies because it, the real killers are the ones who granted islam any privilege in the first place - and those are all of us who buys oil, and finance this retarded stoneage belief.
I disagree that these civil rights marches, gay pride parades and other forms of mobs are needed in order to push for special rights.
All of these things have been fought through the courts and through the legal system until laws were changed. Mobs pushing for their views to be mandated is not peaceful or democratic, it's extortion and mob rule.
Roe V Wade, ending of prohibition and desegregation of schools were all court battles. We aren't free anymore, we live in a police state anyways.
I noticed that too, seeing as i'm Norwegian... It's a constitutional monarch technically, but so is the UK. Maybe because of the confirmation tradition (don't know what you'd call it in English) where most people do (or did) it through the Church. Even though i pretty much know no religious people my age at all the stats still say 85% Christian.
Offense isn't given, it's taken. If you are offended, it's YOUR problem. However, all rights come with [unofficial] responsibilities. It's just politeness, which would be nice for everyone to engage in once in a while...
@knightd00b I totally agree, and when I talk about politeness I don't mean that I want anything in the law about it. Strangely enough, there are things which are nice to do but don't work when laid out in the black and white of the law. Freedom of speech for *everyone* is the only real answer.
Agreed, Conc0rdance, but many people here on Youtube don't limit themselves to such a protest but make broad general statements about "Islam" in and depict it as a flavour of fascism. (Thunderf00t, to my unpleasant surprise, is no exception.) We should show extremists that we are laughing at them and they have no power over us. But we should be dragged into a discourse where we wrongfully depict 1/3 of the world population (including my very nice neighbours) as bigoted, militant and insane.
@Dutchmaster81 even if you take that only 1 % of the world wide muslim population has been radicalized and are violent, that is 11 million people. Which is still a great number. How does the fact that you have neighbors stop anyone fom speaking their minds?
@knightd00b My point is: make the distinction. A sizable minority of muslims has some crazy ideas. True. Adress them as such. But if you deny that Islam in general can change and become more secular (like Christianity has), then indeed it is less likely to happen and you force an entire group into a corner. This will work in favour of 'radicalisation', not against it.
@Dutchmaster81 I am just arguing for virtually blanket free speech basically. I do think that if you lie about someone, they should be able to take you to civil court for slander. I think you need the freedom to bash, tease and disagree with any religious view and I also think that any person should face the same jail time for any person they accuse of a crime is threatened with if it is found that they are false charges.
Burning the United States flag means nothing more to me than burning some old bed sheets. I'm aflagist; I pledge allegiance to no flags. I am highly offended by the killing of people.
@pmack169 So your saying if a Muslim Imam in Afganistan burned a bible you would see Christian mobs beheading 12 random Muslims in the United States or something similar to that? Sorry, your incorrect. TF is right, there is a difference. In 2009 the U.S. Military burned bibles sent by a Christian group to Afganistan because they feared the reaction of just having bibles in Afganistan. The leaders of the religion of peace have a level of oppression the Christian right could only dream of.
@fortyone0 "Military burned bibles sent by a Christian group to Afganistan because they feared the reaction of just having bibles in Afganistan."
The military burns all paper materials and records as a matter of course. The bibles were sent to Afghanistan by a church, without the permission of the military. They were then confiscated, as the soldiers were ordered not to proselytize. The bibles were then burned, because that is what happens to all of the materials considered to be refuse AFAIK
@Ebzhent Sure but thats not how the Christian group is going to see it. Their not going to be happy. But you won't see them engage in any violent protests against anybody. When Christians are upset they often complain and try to appeal to government but often when Muslims feel something has offended their religion they get violent. And part of that is the dogma that justifies violence as an appropriate response to blasphemy.
The fact of the matter is is that it is evident that some people are only participating in these events because they want to provoke. Provocation is a legally recognised partial defence and in some cases, the person provoking is also at some fault. If Barack Obama were to encourage the burning of UK flags, some people would object due to risk of a war or endangerment to lives. Does this mean that the UK poses a threat to free speech as many people put it? No.
@JohnSmith88823, so it's not the action that's indictable, but the motive? Who's the arbiter of what's provocative to whom and who is and is not allowed to take that action based on what info that proves their intent? Do I get to legally decide what others are allowed to do based on how prone I am to violently react? And why do you think the religious recourse is *only* violence? Perhaps you didn't intend to make your statement absolute.
I didn't say that it was completely justified, you are evidently displaying gross ineptitude in both this subject and your ability to comprehend and respond to basic English. Do a bit of research. In the UK, there are legally recognised defences, one of which includes provocation. A judge determines the facts of the case and generally, a jury decides guilt. Are you a judge? Are you currently part of a jury? No.
Say, just for the sake of argument, have you ever unlawfully assaulted anyone, whether provoked or not? If so, then are you not a hypocrite? If not, then do you think any of your parents or their parents have? Why do you not contest against that, if you answer yes to the above question? Do you think that any person related to your ancestry has ever unlawfully assaulted anyone? Why do not make a video about that? Why do you not speak out about that?
who drew the cartoon in there?
thebigbamb 2 weeks ago
5:44 is also scary
Green01123Gold 1 month ago
2:08 inspires hope
Green01123Gold 1 month ago
1:14 scary shit
Green01123Gold 1 month ago
I know this is really irrelevant for the message of this video, however just for clarification. I noticed that Denmark is placed among the secular countries on the world map at 2:13, if you define secular as meaning that there is a separation between state and religion, Denmark is not a secular country. We have a state religion and it plays an active role in our government though the Church Ministry (kirkeministeriet).
THC1989 1 month ago
AL QUAEDA
UnseenAGT 1 month ago
couldn't have said it better.
iranmoz 2 months ago
@Nominandum1 You've basically narrowed it down to four Countries: Africa, China, Singapore and South America... So tell me, which of these four communist/3rd World countries were you referring to when you claimed they don't have strict laws against homosexuality and religion? If my memory of History serves me correct, NEITHER of those four countries allow those acts.
xoticLezPride 2 months ago
@xoticLezPride I meant homosexuality and FREEDOM of religion!
xoticLezPride 2 months ago
@xoticLezPride Africa and South America aren't countries FYI - they are continents.
IKillBabyKittensLOL 2 months ago in playlist More videos from C0nc0rdance
@Nominandum1 Don't try that bs on me! Your last two comments told it just the way I assumed you intended for it to be said. And you do me this one favor.... Don't EVER compare muslims to my person!
xoticLezPride 2 months ago
@Nominandum1 Exactly my point! Your name speaks volumes about you. This is a prime example of why I hate muslims. You call a muslims corrupt way "politically correct", yet, here you are spewing hatred about my religion, my sexual orientation, as well as referring to my Country as a "third world country"?! Let me tell you something; and this goes for all Muslims and people like you. You don't like how people choose to live their lives elsewhere, DON'T GET INVOLVED WITH THEIR COUNTRY!
xoticLezPride 2 months ago
@CA00MUSIC For starters, I'm not religious. Only been to church 5 times my entire life. My mother vowed she'd never put her children through what she endured while attending Catholic school in her childhood! I'll admit this right out; I, like everyone else in this World, am prejudiced. I also have legitimate reason for my prejudice (unlike kkk and muslim 'extremists'). Btw, you come off as a typical 'WASP Christian' who try to make ppl believe they're pure and never knew how to hate!
xoticLezPride 2 months ago
With all that I've seen and learned, Muslims, in my eyes, are no different from the Ku Klux Klan. I stay as far away from those types as possible! I have no use, nor interest in the likes of them.
xoticLezPride 3 months ago
maybe we should not let them in the country to crash airplanes into buildings in the first place..all this crap started when the flood gates of imigration of groups that refuse to adopt the american way of life..they want to be a COLONY OF THEIR FORMER COUNTRY i fear the future holds violence when we do battle for who will run america..americans or followers of islam
loxleymendoza 4 months ago
If you love freedom of speech so much, why is it crime to promote facism?
gogolplex74 4 months ago
@TeesByTruthSurge Creepy.
axe863 4 months ago
hello testing free speech
Tr0ll10000 4 months ago
Free speech is essential. People don't always have the right answers and all the facts when they speak -- but who does? This free exchange of ideas help us all to learn from each other and coexist as a world community.
eastariel 5 months ago
Fuck Allah and Jesus , lol. I like animals , they dont go in for religion :)
VitalApparatuz 5 months ago
freedom of speech is bullshit that contradicts itself
When they attack Black people, they call it racism.
When they attack Jewish people, they call it antisemitism.
When they attack women, they call it sexism.
When they attack homosexuality, they call it intolerance.
When they attack ur country, they call it treason.
When they attack a religious sect, they call it hate.
But, when they attack christians or muslims they call it freedom of speech???!!!
gogolplex74 6 months ago
@gogolplex74 Someone does not understand what's freedom of speech...
MastermindX 6 months ago
@gogolplex74 you fucking idiots copy/paste that bullshit so many times, it's getting to be annoying. all of those things you listed are all covered under free speech. I may not agree with it, but people have a right to express such views.
Drgamedood 6 months ago
@gogolplex74 If you're not intentionally grossly over simplifying things and trying to make a joke at the same time, than you're really just not intelligent enough to understand this matter. If in your head you define "attack" as the scrutiny of the public forum or just plain criticism than there's your problem.
TechGriffin 5 months ago
@gogolplex74 It doesn't contradict itself, it just clashes with freedom from hate speech. Freedom of speech shouldn't include slander against certain groups. But, if honest discourse is prevented, that is a problem. This does happen and that is a problem. You shouldn't "attack" people as much as discuss what they do. It is not racist to discuss black incarceration. Nor sexist to discuss brain differences. So long as you aren't simply spreading baseless claims.
jgonsalk 4 months ago
@gogolplex74 "But, when they attack christians or muslims they call it freedom of speech???!!!"
That's because christians and muslims are absurd aberrations, not counted among other decent societal participants.
fdasherv 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@fdasherv and you are racist
gogolplex74 4 months ago
@fdasherv so fuck you
gogolplex74 4 months ago
Good point made.
heymodi 6 months ago
What is the worst religion when it comes to violence? Think carefully!
gregoryebbs 6 months ago
Personly I'm sexist when it comes to certain jobs such as police and army but this is my own opinion and no one should be condemned for expressing their own personal view no matter what it is. These are the words of a boy which is 15.
gregoryebbs 6 months ago
@gregoryebbs Yeah. Obviously only women should should serve in the armed forces. :/
IKillBabyKittensLOL 6 months ago
If a man wants to be racist or sexist fair enough, allow him, don't put him in jail for expressing his own opinion.Don't police have better things to do.
gregoryebbs 6 months ago
@gregoryebbs Depend. If you physically act racist or sexist- lock them up. If you are those things but don't talk about it- no action. If you are those thing and talk openly about them- allow criticism and debate.
IKillBabyKittensLOL 6 months ago
It's sick how a man is arrested for 4 years because he wrote something racist on facebook but a murder would only last for 20 years of jail, I fought Britain was known for it's free speech, apparently not.
gregoryebbs 6 months ago
@gregoryebbs Depends on what he said.
IKillBabyKittensLOL 6 months ago
Gay pride parades aren't about homosexuality.
They are about sexual fetishes, regardless of sexuality.
While I don't mind sexual fetishes (as long as everyone involved gives informed consent), even though I find some distasteful, I do not think they should be going about in a public parade with it.
I am not exactly against laws about public indecency (though I may be critical about the details of many of them).
ZarlanTheGreen 6 months ago
Kick our all muslims and spend the money on starving kids. These muslims can spend there own money.
Unles you come to take a joob.
chrstilen5 6 months ago
@chrstilen5 What money?
MastermindX 6 months ago
@MastermindX Example, Sweden spends about 18% of everyones tax money, on mass-imigration. Then we place them all in one spot where only about 10% have jobs. then we let them just stay there in the geto we created and they just live on tax money.
that's the money I mean.
Only 15% of the people coming to Sweden, needs the hellp. The rest come to be like parasites. That's why I think we should trow them out, (If they dont do good) And spend the money on the starving kids, that die every second.
chrstilen5 6 months ago
@chrstilen5 lol Sweden.
MastermindX 6 months ago
@MastermindX Yeah, just remember. the rest of Europe is not far of.
chrstilen5 6 months ago
@MastermindX Are you gonna cal me a rasist now? For loving kids? ;D
chrstilen5 6 months ago
We live in a country with a secular government (at least it's supposed) in the US, but this is not a secular society as you stated in this video.
Macabre215 6 months ago
This is an excellent video. My own contribution to DMD2 in May was, frankly, insipid but I hope I made a point.
GodPatrol 6 months ago
Is it not also free speech to voice your opinion against DMD? The argument of 100% free speech is very intricate indeed. The "free" world does not in fact have 100% free speech as it is. If for example, free speech were to conflict with national security, do you honestly think that free speech would be granted? I appreciate your defense of free speech but honestly DMD is not the correct way to change the opinions of people.
dartplayer170 6 months ago
@dartplayer170 Of course you are free to voice your opinion and have a civilized discussion about it. What we are against is that you kill people and burn embassies to prove your point.
Also, yeah, freedom is more important than security. As Ben Franklin put it: “Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”
MastermindX 6 months ago
@MastermindX
I don't kill anyone or burn embassies to prove my point. Sorry, but that is blatantly incorrect and based purely on assumption.
I am not arguing about whether freedom is more important than security. I am just stating that the people in charge view security as more important. This was demonstrated after 9/11 in many ways.
dartplayer170 6 months ago
Just one thing. The statue at the end was of Budai. Not the buddha.
Drgamedood 7 months ago
My view is that free speech is a good thing. Violence is a bad thing. If using your right to free speech invokes violence, the people using the violence should be arrested. Violence should not be tolerated, the people using it will have to learn that it is not ok but free speech is ok. And hopefully they will learn the difference because of the "draw mohammad days".
Sp33dyish 7 months ago
"I'm going to keep this very brief"
*looks down"
>8 minutes 50 seconds long
Zantaer 7 months ago
Norway isn't secular ?
flight1100 7 months ago
@flight1100 we don't know. in norway people are not allowed to state what values their country stands for lest they be accused of islamophobia, racism, or right-wing extremism.
topperheartramada 7 months ago
@flight1100 Nope. There is no seperation of church and state in Norway. Though the issue is being debated. I hope they do eventually secularize the nation.
Drgamedood 7 months ago
Haha. You haven't the bravery to put your own life on the line, yet you jump at the opportunity to put others' lives at risk. You are mistaking noninflammatory protest for worthless and effect-less protest. You're trying to say that an ideologically violent protest that could very well spur people to violence is worth it for the sake of your "right" to free speech. By protesting in such a cowardly way, you're contributing to the fire. You are being rash. Acting too fast, and thinking too little.
JayneWones 7 months ago
@JayneWones
"You're trying to say that an ideologically violent protest that could very well spur people to violence is worth it for the sake of your "right" to free speech."
Yes, that is what he's saying. And I agree with him.
"By protesting in such a cowardly way, you're contributing to the fire. You are being rash."
What other form of protest would you recommend? I'll sign a petition to Viacom, but I don't think it's going to help.
airandfingers 7 months ago
@JayneWones Who is really the coward? The one who raises his voice against injustice? Or the one who says we should remain silent and bow our heads in front of injustice to avoid angering the ones perpetuating it and driving them to violence?
MastermindX 6 months ago
You live in Texas? Awesome! I share a state with the two most awesome Youtubers ever.
evilotakuneko 7 months ago
@TeesByTruthSurge That's pretty.
BuddhaBebop 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
For anybody who believes,we have freedom of speech in Britain,should seriously
watch this video....
Check out the "official crown court papers" from the court case that lead
to me being the 1st ever british poet to be given a "5 year rap & poetry ban" (Video on my page)
"Donhonki" "First ever crown court BANNED british rap-poet" (2009-2014) #SuperInjunction
donhonki1 7 months ago
We all ready do thing for the joos.
dirtyer76 8 months ago
Well said. Love your vids C0nc0rdance.
brewerbrian420 8 months ago 13
There is one basic constitutional fact that sums it all up very neatly without an minute video that took many times that to produce Americans have the freedom to say whatever we want, but we do not have the right to not be offended. In a free society no one has that right nor should they.
MrLuluapples 8 months ago
Between gay pride parades and DMD i think there's a little bit of a difference, because gay people eventually seek to be accepted by and be a part of the mainstream community which maybe are "hurt" by the parade itself but DMD is about the freedom of speech in our community without the need of a radical change in the Muslim community. I don't think anybody is upset because Muslims don't draw Mohamed the issue is with non Muslim in non Muslim countries drawing Mohamed.
SintherX 8 months ago
@SintherX Gays don't use Violence :)
AntifaSwedenx 8 months ago
Great vid. Islam must be challenged and revealed as the intellectual dead end and failure it is. The most ridiculous, comical and dangerous religion in the galaxy...as far as we know.....
CorporalNym 8 months ago
@CorporalNym You have completely missed the point of the video; its not about challenging or ridiculing islam its about challenging then oppression of free speech that many extremists are attempting to force upon people. There is a massive difference in this; you have to realise that the vast majority of muslims are peaceful and basically indistinguishable to non-muslims. Its the minority that have misconceptions about islam; often taught by people who want to twist them to their own means.
goonerh1 8 months ago
@goonerh1 disagree. ISlam IS the problem and Islam is Muslims. One cannot read the Quran believe it is from a god, accept its tenets and be moderate. Islam IS the problem.
CorporalNym 8 months ago
@CorporalNym You have no idea about islam other than what you get fed down your throat do you. Have you looked it up, looked at what the majority believe in it, heres a start:
ht tp://ww w.jannah.org/articles/misc.ht ml
Many religions have issues of violence in their text and in their past; the worlds most dominant religion, christianity, picking just two examples allows slavery and caused the crusades.
You've got to be fair here i'm not saying islam is perfect but its not as bad as you think
goonerh1 8 months ago
Comment removed
CorporalNym 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@goonerh1 I know more about Islam than you do. You think it is real
CorporalNym 8 months ago
Free speech is very important, as any apostate can tell you.
Laughingblades 8 months ago
I disagree!
Should I be able to draw mo coming out of a pig's anus? Yes
If I think doing so would result in irrational twats killing innocent people should I exercise my right? FUCK NO!
TheRationalizer 8 months ago
@TheRationalizer The point is if we decline our option to draw mohammed because we are afraid of the consequences then when do we draw the line?
Should we give in to terrorism and say that you can have this much control over what we do; then this gives encouragement, it makes it acceptable. To be honest i don't think we can have much impact on western-islamic relations but still i believe that people need to put down a marker and say when we don't think something is acceptable.
goonerh1 8 months ago
@goonerh1
GothAtFunk took a good approach in encouraging people to draw a stick man and to label to "Muhammad" - this would could a lot less fuss because you can see that no offence is intended. It is a step towards teaching people "it's just a picture!"
TheRationalizer 8 months ago
@TheRationalizer Muslim demands are increasing: Sharia Banks are reality in UK. Sharia private courts are part from the lives of "secular" UK...
If "we" try to stop this, we will get Physically attacked and Silenced
AntifaSwedenx 8 months ago
@AntifaSwedenx
What does that have to do with drawing a picture of Muhammad as a turd being excreted from a pig's anus?
TheRationalizer 8 months ago
@TheRationalizer I could agree with that, although i wouldn't have a problem with any non-insulting image. I just think the aim is to say we just want to get along, we don't have a problem with islam but equally we're not going to lie down to extremists whether they're muslim, christian, athiest or part-rabbit.
Maybe include pictures of other religious figures would also make it seem less targeted and agressive
goonerh1 8 months ago
@goonerh1
You don't need to lie down to extremists. Draw images which have no implication of offence at all, such as a plain stick man. If everyone did that then the *extreme* fringe would have so little support that the backlash would be completely insignificant.
There's a difference between having the right to insult my mother, and coming up to me in the street and doing so :)
TheRationalizer 8 months ago
2:09 what does it say next to Norway? How is Norway not secular?
tanekki 8 months ago
@tanekki It's VERY Christian.
KingObould 8 months ago
Dude, you've echoed my sentiment exactly! Thanks for posting!
Cheers, eh!
metalskinstudios 8 months ago
We already censor ourselves over completely innocuous terms like 'retard' or 'gay' used in a contexts which have nothing to do with the mentally challenged or homosexuals. We do this simply to avoid offending someone or for fear of appearing insensitive. Is it really such a surprise that we should be so easily cowed by threats of violence, when we so readily curb our tongues simply out of politeness?
AburKadabur 8 months ago
@AburKadabur I'm not sure if i understand you correctly but are you comparing the right of free speech, to criticise, to judge and to pass comment on something with the right to turn words like gay into insults?
I don't call people gay as an insult because a) its not insulting, its just a sexual orientation and b) i'm not a twat. Its nothing to do with curbing my tongue out of politeness.
I would hope that you could understand the difference between these 'insults' and the topic of this video.
goonerh1 8 months ago
Very well said. At last, a clear eloquent statement of why DMD is a necessity!
SissingPyd 8 months ago
Or maybe not necessarily the state government, but the social structure of the religion itself is a social contract, a sort of government. It is simply a matter of what one government guarantees for its constituents conflicting with what a different government guarantees for its constituents. One of them has to fail to deliver. As for 'god given' rights, there is no such thing. It all comes down to which government is stronger. Which one has more POWER with which to ENFORCE its social contract.
medexamtoolsdotcom 8 months ago
What's really going on here can be seen when you define what a right is. And a right is the opposite of a freedom. If YOU have a right, someone ELSE has a restriction on freedom, enforced by a social contract (a government). And what's going on is contradictions between governments. Western governments uphold freedom to mock (Islam); Islamic governments uphold a right of its Muslim constituents to not have Islam mocked, even in foreign lands. The result can only be a war between the governments.
medexamtoolsdotcom 8 months ago
I actually drew Buddha, Jesus, Abraham and Mohammed on DMD2011...
I felt I had too much freetime and too few people to offend
Solensherre 8 months ago
You captured the spirit of DMD perfectly.
warjikin 8 months ago
did you realy read about Mohammad and Islam I.suggest you do !
hisham5128 8 months ago
Post #2: ...everyone else. I think its un-American to be against someones rights. I personally don't give a fuck what they do, but I do think they deserve their rights.
If someone was withholding your rights or tried taking them away, wouldn't you standup and say fuck you? I especially hate censorship of music and television, who cares if you make some soccer mom gets upset cause they heard FUCK in a song?
wargex 8 months ago
Post #1: I'm completely against censorship. And with the whole gay pride thing, my mom was once saying she didn't think that it should be done at public places. Because as she said something like "what they do in there bedroom is none of my business and its done in family orientated events and such." I argued that its not like they are out there to say hey I like to fuck the same sex if they didn't do anything and sat down they would never receive there rights. They are saying treat me like...
wargex 8 months ago
couple things mentioned that I did not find... clear in this video: 1:58-2:10 "I am not a anti-theist, I am not a posed to PRIVATE religious beliefs. I am a member of a secular society, I believe I have the right to live without others imposing there religious BELIEFS on me"
"private" tends to be ok...HOWEVER some muslims do things "in private" and it could be very violent abuses to their wife etc...
When "imposing" any "belief" isn't that was legislature does? Religion effects the votes.
LampPlaceThing 8 months ago
@LampPlaceThing But by all means vote against religious people's stance on (i.e.) "gay marriage" but do NOT say that is unconstitutional or what not, to do so with religious zeal.
Keep in mind it is not separation from religious people/ideals from state, it is the CHURCH organization such as in Britain "the House of Lords" etc.
LampPlaceThing 8 months ago
You've skipped the actual arguments. I'm not against offending muslims, I'm against strategies that, long term, mean more extremists. You've focused on the "desensitising" effect of DMD, and that fine, but you've omitted consideration of knock on effects of pissing off moderates by addressing "muslims" rather than "extremists" i.e. increasing the food source of extremists and cutting off the ONE avenue to bring long term change in Islam. Saying "muslims" and not "extremists" is totally needless.
coolman9999uk 8 months ago
@coolman9999uk
Did you actually watch the video? None of these arguments apply to anything I said.
C0nc0rdance 8 months ago 26
@C0nc0rdance Yes there's a disconnect between our points and that's the whole point. You've assumed that we (Me, Landon,... - We're not making the same points though) don't get your rationale for DMD. But there's a multitude of effects of DMD and you've concentrated on the one we already understand and agree to. However, DMD and your rationale for it, appear to be addressed to "muslims" rather than "extremists" - this has another effect, a bad one. and an unnecessary one for your rationale.
coolman9999uk 8 months ago
@coolman9999uk
Isn't that kind of like saying you're worried that rosa parks sitting at the front of the bus will result in more crosses being lit on black preacher's lawns? Maybe she should just hold a polite sign or something...
bradmanthethird 8 months ago 2
@bradmanthethird No. These analogies are false. Pissing off racist white people is totally fine. No non-racist would be offended at that. And likewise, pissing off homophobic people with a gay pride parade is totally fine with me, no non-homophobe would be pissed at that. But freedom loving muslims are being pissed off with DMD because it, and it's rationale, is falsely addressed to them. Normally, I wouldn't care about this either, but it's needless, and we need them.
coolman9999uk 8 months ago
@coolman9999uk
If they truly want to live in a free society than they'll be on the side of the free, regardless their other messages, not the ones who monger fear and hatred.
bradmanthethird 8 months ago
@bradmanthethird No argument there. I don't think pissing them off will push them to extremism though, but it will stop them allying themselves with us. It will give extremists an extra recruitment tool for those borderline extremists. And it will breed general resentment against us - pushing more borderline muslims into extremism. Most importantly it will cut off any chance of us starting a movement with moderate muslims in fighting the extremism in their midst...
Why not just be specific?
coolman9999uk 8 months ago
@coolman9999uk That's garbage. You have no idea what secular Muslims think. If Muslims are pissed off because we don't follow Islamic religious law then they are not moderates.
shirehorse9 8 months ago
@shirehorse9 Yes, of course those muslims are not moderates. Did I say they were?
coolman9999uk 8 months ago
@coolman9999uk I wish someone would give me a working definition of a so called moderate muslim. Is it a muslim who does not support terrorism but wants to deny me my freedom of speech OR is it a muslim who considers freedom of speech a none negotiable human right OR something else. This is very important.
SissingPyd 8 months ago
@SissingPyd I can't define it, but I have a game designer friend, extremely liberal, almost a hippy, dutch, non-muslim fiancee, no pork, rejects the bits of Islam that contradict peaceful interpretations. Another mutual friend, conservative, muslim bf, again cherry picks like many Christians. My ex, british, non-muslim bf (me), cherry picks, actually agnostic. All satisfying your second point, all pissed to varying degrees at the generalisation. All know extremists in their families. All silent.
coolman9999uk 8 months ago
@coolman9999uk Well, if they have extremists in their families and remain silent, what does that make them?
Go listen to what Pat Condell has to say about the silent so-called majority of moderate muslims. They may not be terrorists themselves but they harbour people with terrorists inclinations that’s worse! Do you agree.
SissingPyd 8 months ago
@SissingPyd I saw it. Yes, they're not using their power correctly. You could even say they're complicit, but whilst some muslims are knowingly complicit (i.e. not moderate), many more are inadvertently complicit- for a many complex reasons, too much for here but ones rooted in fear, social barriers, and ignorance. They need a kick up the bum- a movement like ours and there are ways we can administer it.
But this isn't it, the simple fact here is, the generalisations here are false.
coolman9999uk 8 months ago
Comment removed
coolman9999uk 8 months ago
One fuck would not be given about Islam if they didn't sit on 3/4 of the world oil.
GreatGungHolio 8 months ago
You're as free to spew your verbal bullshit as I am to call you out on said bullshit.
I fail to see the problem with such a system.
KachuaOnWoW 8 months ago
7:40 however, its very easy to distort beliefs and stereotype people based on those who are the front runners of that "group". People tend to classify everything some a certain group of people do to everyone in that group, and even people not in that group.
MrBigEnchilada 8 months ago
Why can't people understand that you do NOT have a right to not be offended.
If someone says something that "offends" you then either calm down and debate them, or ignore them. If you see something on TV that offends you, change the channel. If a song on the radio offends you, turn to another station.
Grow up. Lots of things offend me, but I respect the rights of others to free speech too damn much to want to censor them.
OatSharpener 8 months ago
Here Here ! I agree, we must be OUT, we must confront and challenge unsustainable concepts and ideas. I care not if I offend someone with a distorted world view who seeks to force that view on me. If I "offend' a flat-earther by demonstrating that the world is indeed round, that is simply too bad for them.
Islam is using the oldest trick in the book, fear, to protect their distorted world view and I for one say I will no longer fear them or anyone who seeks to condem me to hell. I Fear No God
NoFearOfGod 8 months ago
Very clearly & eloquently said.
eumenidis 8 months ago
Dude, Concordance, we should hang out some time!
GretnaBlast 8 months ago
"Islam is not a race"
Black, Brown Asian or White aren't races either.
THERE ARE NO HUMAN SUBSPECIES
we are all "homo sapiens sapiens"
ArsonistInUrFirewall 8 months ago
@ArsonistInUrFirewall
Thank you for that idealistic retort that totally missed the point. Observe, as the rest of us proceed to not give a shit.
You are not as smart as you think you are.
Pottsdie 8 months ago
@Pottsdie I want people to understand, that there is in fact no race division between the humans on this planet. I would also like to point out, for a homo sapiens sapiens, you don't seem as sapiens, as you think you are.
ArsonistInUrFirewall 8 months ago
@Pottsdie
Seriously? An "I know you are but what am I" Retort? Seriously? That's the best that little piece of meat inside your skull could come up with?
What you said totally misses THE POINT. THE POINT is that muslims choose their beliefs, while people do not choose their genes. THE POINT is that the comparison for ridiculing irrational beliefs and ridiculing what you are born as is a false analogy. What you said isn't wrong, it just had nothing to do with THE POINT. Go Preach elsewhere.
Pottsdie 8 months ago
@Pottsdie Most religious people had the same influence in choosing their religion, as they had a choice in choosing their genes. They had no influence in it. Religion is passed down upon the next generation via their parents and environment. Children are being raised and indoctrinated with religion, by the same people who gave them their genes.
havoc873 8 months ago
Comment removed
Pottsdie 8 months ago
@havoc873
Nope. I was born and raised in a strict religious upbringing myself. All it takes is some critical thinking and intellectual honesty to make it to adulthood as a fully functioning free thinker. People choose to remain willfully ignorant of the flaws of their belief systems.
Pottsdie 8 months ago
@Pottsdie "...willfully ignorant..." I've heard this phrase many times over, and the more I hear it, the more I wonder what people think the brain is capable of. What is a "fully functioning free thinker."? Is there such a thing as free will, or do we live in a universe of cause and effect? I used to have no structure to my thinking, then I found ideology that gave me some. Then I discovered that the structure had bias. Should I support the structure? Institutions end up serving themselves.
RichardRoy2 8 months ago
In the pieshaped diagram in the beginning atheist and non-believer is seperated. Wtf? Just write 16% Atheist/Agnostic
andrewemme94 8 months ago
Once we label exercising judgment about One's Own Speech as censorship, we're talking SHIT. Okay?
Censorship is the forcible silencing of somebody ELSE's speech.
I don't need to protect my free speech by posting plans for nuclear weapons and give myself a childish pat on the back how I won't be silenced by the bullies and bad guys.
Same with media outfits-they're exercising Their Own Judgment.
This debate has turned into a protest over OTHERS who won't say what you want them to say.
geodgereturns 8 months ago
Could those 13% be people who aren`t able to make a decision of their own because of some medical condition like alzheimers, mental disability etc...?
74Charm 8 months ago
Something really annoys me...it says in the chart that 13% are non religious and 3% are atheists...well?...Anyone knows what the difference is? I hate it when things are badly explained or blurred...anyone got an answer for me?
74Charm 8 months ago
@74Charm Religion does not always equate theism, I guess. There can also be atheistic religions. So I think it refers to non-religious theists; theists who are not affiliated to organized religion and/or have their own spiritual beliefs? Whereas atheists have neither theism or religion.
viridismonasteriense 8 months ago
@viridismonasteriense Thanks for replying. I assume you mean spiritual "waves" like new age.
74Charm 8 months ago
@74Charm Yeah, something like that I guess. Those people who have meaningless and dull definitions of god like 'energy' and 'the universe' and whatever they want it to mean. They'll find something to worship and they'll label it god, for no good reason really. "Spiritual" is a meaningless label to me.
viridismonasteriense 8 months ago
@viridismonasteriense I agree
74Charm 8 months ago
A Jihad on your anus - bend over please.
callmeshane303 8 months ago
Good video. There is only one thing in it that I have a problem with, that is the gay pride, not that I think they should not be alowed to have their gay pride parades, but I think the idea of gay pride or gay rights is idiotic, just as the idea of womans rights is. The only rights anyone should be fighting for is equal rights under the law, regardless of them being gay or straight, black or white, male or female.
TheRenekruse 8 months ago
Who cares about burning flags.
"Flags are symbols. And symbols are for the symbol minded". ~The Great George Carlin.
Krazed2Kraze 8 months ago
yes, free speech is offensive. it also entails giving wikileaks the right to say and publish whatever the fuck they want. i'm totally for both.
nactan 8 months ago 13
When someone does something that insults islam, and someone else dies because it, the real killers are the ones who granted islam any privilege in the first place - and those are all of us who buys oil, and finance this retarded stoneage belief.
bocckoka 8 months ago
Your pie chart at 0:56 showed atheists and non-religious as different groupings.
What's the difference between these two groups?
naganokumas 8 months ago
I disagree that these civil rights marches, gay pride parades and other forms of mobs are needed in order to push for special rights.
All of these things have been fought through the courts and through the legal system until laws were changed. Mobs pushing for their views to be mandated is not peaceful or democratic, it's extortion and mob rule.
Roe V Wade, ending of prohibition and desegregation of schools were all court battles. We aren't free anymore, we live in a police state anyways.
knightd00b 8 months ago
2:16 Norway isn't secular?
rv186rs 8 months ago
@rv186rs
I noticed that too, seeing as i'm Norwegian... It's a constitutional monarch technically, but so is the UK. Maybe because of the confirmation tradition (don't know what you'd call it in English) where most people do (or did) it through the Church. Even though i pretty much know no religious people my age at all the stats still say 85% Christian.
DasUberCow 8 months ago
@DasUberCow Well those are all the same as Sweden and we pass as secular there, must be some separation of church and state issue..
rv186rs 8 months ago
Offense isn't given, it's taken. If you are offended, it's YOUR problem. However, all rights come with [unofficial] responsibilities. It's just politeness, which would be nice for everyone to engage in once in a while...
chazmeistro 8 months ago
@chazmeistro Polite Speech does not need to be protected. That's why there needs to be a right to free speech.
knightd00b 8 months ago
@knightd00b I totally agree, and when I talk about politeness I don't mean that I want anything in the law about it. Strangely enough, there are things which are nice to do but don't work when laid out in the black and white of the law. Freedom of speech for *everyone* is the only real answer.
chazmeistro 8 months ago
Agreed, Conc0rdance, but many people here on Youtube don't limit themselves to such a protest but make broad general statements about "Islam" in and depict it as a flavour of fascism. (Thunderf00t, to my unpleasant surprise, is no exception.) We should show extremists that we are laughing at them and they have no power over us. But we should be dragged into a discourse where we wrongfully depict 1/3 of the world population (including my very nice neighbours) as bigoted, militant and insane.
Dutchmaster81 8 months ago
@Dutchmaster81 even if you take that only 1 % of the world wide muslim population has been radicalized and are violent, that is 11 million people. Which is still a great number. How does the fact that you have neighbors stop anyone fom speaking their minds?
knightd00b 8 months ago
@knightd00b My point is: make the distinction. A sizable minority of muslims has some crazy ideas. True. Adress them as such. But if you deny that Islam in general can change and become more secular (like Christianity has), then indeed it is less likely to happen and you force an entire group into a corner. This will work in favour of 'radicalisation', not against it.
Dutchmaster81 8 months ago
@Dutchmaster81 I am just arguing for virtually blanket free speech basically. I do think that if you lie about someone, they should be able to take you to civil court for slander. I think you need the freedom to bash, tease and disagree with any religious view and I also think that any person should face the same jail time for any person they accuse of a crime is threatened with if it is found that they are false charges.
knightd00b 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The "Islamic Golden Age" is a myth.
shirehorse9 8 months ago
Burning the United States flag means nothing more to me than burning some old bed sheets. I'm aflagist; I pledge allegiance to no flags. I am highly offended by the killing of people.
thisisaguy 8 months ago
@thisisaguy I am not an Athenian, I am not a Greek, I am a citizen of the world.
SocialDissimulation 8 months ago
@SocialDissimulation Absolutely beautiful quote!
thisisaguy 8 months ago
lmao @ draw buda day
MiguelGasRa 8 months ago
The liberal nightmare of Political Correctness is the biggest threat to free speech in Ameriica.
216trixie 8 months ago
@pmack169 So your saying if a Muslim Imam in Afganistan burned a bible you would see Christian mobs beheading 12 random Muslims in the United States or something similar to that? Sorry, your incorrect. TF is right, there is a difference. In 2009 the U.S. Military burned bibles sent by a Christian group to Afganistan because they feared the reaction of just having bibles in Afganistan. The leaders of the religion of peace have a level of oppression the Christian right could only dream of.
fortyone0 8 months ago
@fortyone0 "Military burned bibles sent by a Christian group to Afganistan because they feared the reaction of just having bibles in Afganistan."
The military burns all paper materials and records as a matter of course. The bibles were sent to Afghanistan by a church, without the permission of the military. They were then confiscated, as the soldiers were ordered not to proselytize. The bibles were then burned, because that is what happens to all of the materials considered to be refuse AFAIK
Ebzhent 8 months ago
@Ebzhent Sure but thats not how the Christian group is going to see it. Their not going to be happy. But you won't see them engage in any violent protests against anybody. When Christians are upset they often complain and try to appeal to government but often when Muslims feel something has offended their religion they get violent. And part of that is the dogma that justifies violence as an appropriate response to blasphemy.
fortyone0 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You don't have any right to not be offended. You do have a right not to be harassed, threatened etc.
Fred121212 8 months ago 2
Best most clearly put defense of the DMD protest I've seen yet. Good job! Favorited.
renegade4dio 8 months ago
I fight for your right to burn that flag. Go ahead.
InPursuitOfALife 8 months ago
@DarkMatter2525
The fact of the matter is is that it is evident that some people are only participating in these events because they want to provoke. Provocation is a legally recognised partial defence and in some cases, the person provoking is also at some fault. If Barack Obama were to encourage the burning of UK flags, some people would object due to risk of a war or endangerment to lives. Does this mean that the UK poses a threat to free speech as many people put it? No.
JohnSmith88823 8 months ago
@JohnSmith88823, so it's not the action that's indictable, but the motive? Who's the arbiter of what's provocative to whom and who is and is not allowed to take that action based on what info that proves their intent? Do I get to legally decide what others are allowed to do based on how prone I am to violently react? And why do you think the religious recourse is *only* violence? Perhaps you didn't intend to make your statement absolute.
DarkMatter2525 8 months ago
@DarkMatter2525
@JohnSmith88823
I didn't say that it was completely justified, you are evidently displaying gross ineptitude in both this subject and your ability to comprehend and respond to basic English. Do a bit of research. In the UK, there are legally recognised defences, one of which includes provocation. A judge determines the facts of the case and generally, a jury decides guilt. Are you a judge? Are you currently part of a jury? No.
JohnSmith88823 8 months ago
@DarkMatter2525
Say, just for the sake of argument, have you ever unlawfully assaulted anyone, whether provoked or not? If so, then are you not a hypocrite? If not, then do you think any of your parents or their parents have? Why do you not contest against that, if you answer yes to the above question? Do you think that any person related to your ancestry has ever unlawfully assaulted anyone? Why do not make a video about that? Why do you not speak out about that?
JohnSmith88823 8 months ago
I WILL speak my mind.
If anyones feelings are hurt, well...
Fuck their feelings.
gullf1sk 8 months ago