South Park Gets the Last Laugh on Islam?
Uploader Comments (victimlesscriminal)
Top Comments
-
Wouldn't work, the guy's already in another mental institution called Islam, except the asylum is run by the inmates.
-
Actually, I think it would have been better to declare him insane and lock him up in a nasty mental institution for a while.
I think all religious nutters should be treated thus.
All Comments (79)
-
@BlueMoon858 muhammad was fucking little children
-
@TechnoJosh1 the vietnamese will win
-
ISLAM: International Society of Liars And Murderers. (aka CRIMINALS). Islam means CRIMINALS in english.
-
Fuck the media they are all sponsored by the sneaky Jews. Everyday these dirty rats try to make Islsm look evil but people convert to Islam after researching it lol i invite everyone to read the Quron and embrace Islam, muhammad was sent for ALL humanity so come to ur true religion.
-
9/11 was an inside job. Everyone watch "Terror Storm 2nd Edition". Great video clip
-
i just think he whole thing is ridiculous, south park has shown Muhammad before that episode, in the super friends episode with david blaine, and there were no threats or contraversies
-
Is that Cat Stevens narrating?????
-
The only time it's okay to threaten someone with violence is when you think you can get away with it. Any other time is stupid.
u guys have no life critisizing othr reliogions
angelatic 1 year ago
@angelatic Every religion criticises other religions. Criticism is not the property of the non-religious. It's the property of each person who decides to criticise. If you think that stopping non-superstitious people from criticising you will stop criticism, then just think about the number of sects and divisions within your own religion. It is simply natural to question and analyse arguments. Religion comes off rather badly in the 21st century, as more people think critically than previously.
victimlesscriminal 11 months ago 8
Violence is justified when there is a clear and present danger to your well being, or to the well being of your country/religion/creed/ethnicity/etc
Clear and present danger (roughly) means: Armed individuals are menacing you and threatening you (or country/religion/etc) or are clearly gearing up for such acts.
There is probably a lot more subtlety to suss out in this, but for not it suffices for me.
diraska 1 year ago
@diraska Threatening people or invading a country certainly qualify for violence if absolutely necessary, but are you really sure that you have a reasonable right to be violent if someone attacks your religion/creed/ethnicity? After all, what on Earth does it mean to attack a religion? It is a meme, a concept or set of rules. It is almost meaningless to talk about physically attacking an idea. If individuals, groups or buildings etc are attacked, fine; but an idea? Come on. Think again...
victimlesscriminal 1 year ago 19
@victimlesscriminal
Let us say there was some violent group that was against freedom. Wants to destroy freedom of speech, democracy, all that good stuff. If that were the case, then you think people trying to defend those freedoms would be unjustified?
I am an atheist, so I have no fondness of religion. But, if the only bad thing Hitler was doing was killing Jews then I can't help but think that violence against Hitler would be justified.
My answer was broad so it can encompass many events
diraska 1 year ago
@diraska You say "Let us say there was some violent group that was against freedom...then you think people trying to defend those freedoms would be unjustified?"
Firstly, there is a group, it is called Islam.
Secondly, yes I do think that people who value freedom will want to defend those freedoms.
Thirdly, I believe the desire to defend freedoms would be justifiable at least in the West because of centuries of struggle to achieve our freedoms. The East has a different history.
victimlesscriminal 1 year ago 4