Posted by agent858 on March 17, 2006, at 20:21:11
In reply to Re: cartoons » agent858, posted by AuntieMel on March 17, 2006, at 10:56:19
> My opinion:
> I think the first printing was no big deal - as they said there is freedom of the press.yeah. apparantly the guy who made the cartoons said that he meant them to be a social commentary - he did not mean to offend a lot of people. i think we should be charitable regarding his intentions... i think it was an honest mistake to offend them...
> I think *some* of the reprintings were done with an "in your face" attitide.
yeah. and then once people realised just how offended they were...
they reproduced them over and over. 'these are what is considered so offensive'. i don't think that was necessary. they could have described them rather than reprinting them. no need to repeat the insult.
they could have said 'yeah okay so we did have the right to print them... but with rights come responsibilities surely... the cartoons were intended to be a social commentary... but the message has been lost because lots of people were inadvertantly offended by these... we didn't mean to cause such offence... we are sorry'.
how hard would that have been?
> I do have a problem that in some of the countries, where the protesting was the most loudly expressed, cartoons that are even *more* insulting (by my opinion - I hate to give examples because some of them really are vile) of *other* religions and people are freely printed.yeah. i think the trouble is more that it is considered a major no no to draw pictures / have statues or anything like that of the figure that was depicted. a major violation of their religious beliefs... maybe i'm missing the mark... but maybe even more offensive (to people who are believers) than the virgin mary in a condom???
not too sure...
i guess the mary pictures weren't appearing in newspapers and on tv... up to you whether you go to the exhibition or not...
> I had to do a google search and find them on a European web site.ah. so they are still around then...
yeah... of course they are...
> I wanted, just for my own knowledge, to know if they would have been unsulting if "joe blow" had been depicted.
and a description of them wouldn't have sufficed?
poster:agent858
thread:621154
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20060304/msgs/621442.html