Steax wrote:Sorry, I don't understand what you're trying to say. My interpretation of your post is... "you can blame a whole religion based on a few lunatics, if many people share that religion." Can you please clarify?
The lunatics derive their social power from the people that share that religion. Take the recent contraception debate in the US- most catholics (I think it was 98%?) have used contraception, despite the church's teachings. The "lunatics" in that case would be the bishops and priests trying to force their anti-contraceptive beliefs on others. Even though most catholics ignore those teachings, those people have real power. Why? Because of how many catholics there are (even if not a single one of them agrees with those bishops- they have, indirectly, granted that political power to those bishops). When you deal with problems, you should focus on the root of problem; in this case, the fact that a popular religion concentrates most of its power in a select handful that interpret their religious teachings more literally than most members, and that those handful of people have undue political power to influence the lives of others that don't share their beliefs. If you only try to "solve" the issue through the bishops, you'll accomplish nothing, because they'll be replaced with more "lunatics"- you're attacking the symptoms, and not the disease, so to speak.
By not opposing the results of their church's wielding of its power, then, as voluntary members, they are tacitly endorsing that action. Or as Dauric said- the "lunatics" are using power granted to them by that community. If the community does not oppose them when they use that power, then they are
Tirian wrote:If anything, the lack of responsibility that I see is from the side that flippantly disregards nearly a millennium of Muslim tradition just because it isn't their tradition. Until I hear more information about Draw Charlemagne Day or Draw Genghis Khan Day, I'll assume that the interest in drawing Mohammad is not about historical visual art but is about pissing off a minority group and feigning moral superiority when they get upset about it. That is an asshat move.
If I remember this very thread, the point is to show that they can't silence the freedom of speech of others through their threats. To show that they will not be able to scare others away from doing something solely because it offends their religion. If there wasn't a large enough group of people willing to do it, then the few who had "legitimate" reasons to do so would be easily singled out and threatened. You can bully a dozen people easily, but not so much 10,000 people.