Comments on: Should you draw Muhammad for sake of free speech? http://blog.fakingnews.com/2010/07/should-you-draw-muhammad-for-sake-of-free-speech/ Pagal's attempts at sanity Tue, 31 Jan 2012 09:18:25 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: anil jain http://blog.fakingnews.com/2010/07/should-you-draw-muhammad-for-sake-of-free-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-1065 anil jain Tue, 17 Jan 2012 08:50:45 +0000 http://blog.fakingnews.com/?p=49#comment-1065 hii pagal patrakar u r great hii pagal patrakar
u r great

]]> By: Ravi Nagar http://blog.fakingnews.com/2010/07/should-you-draw-muhammad-for-sake-of-free-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-1058 Ravi Nagar Fri, 02 Dec 2011 14:55:08 +0000 http://blog.fakingnews.com/?p=49#comment-1058 "The organizer(s), who later dumped the campaign, surely knew that it would offend many Muslims, but they didn’t start the page just to offend them." NO!!! it was not dumped..it went on and I have many of the drawings with me downloaded from that page!! “The organizer(s), who later dumped the campaign, surely knew that it would offend many Muslims, but they didn’t start the page just to offend them.”

NO!!! it was not dumped..it went on and I have many of the drawings with me downloaded from that page!!

]]> By: Neeraj http://blog.fakingnews.com/2010/07/should-you-draw-muhammad-for-sake-of-free-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-1055 Neeraj Thu, 17 Nov 2011 07:20:04 +0000 http://blog.fakingnews.com/?p=49#comment-1055 Great and Valuable article. Great appreciation to writing such a good articles Great and Valuable article.
Great appreciation to writing such a good articles

]]> By: asjad http://blog.fakingnews.com/2010/07/should-you-draw-muhammad-for-sake-of-free-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-1053 asjad Sat, 29 Oct 2011 09:12:20 +0000 http://blog.fakingnews.com/?p=49#comment-1053 There is no absolute theory that can be followed when it comes to freedom of speech. all the above points mentioned through which you have based and supported your argument are not absolute, accepted by everybody and comprehensive in its coverage.people have different attachments and beliefs you can say they r wrong if they fall in love with a wall and dislike anyone peeing on it.When a magazine publishes an article it knows very well about its target audience and although its a moral duty to print the facts they must ensure that a part of their audience dont get offended. You being an atheist presented your opinion which i respect but need not agree a 100 percent. The point i am trying to make here is that there are different scales to measure different things... and here you are making mistake of not just comparing two different things... but two different segments using the same scale. Unless you have read the Holy Quran, Hadeeth, The Holy Bhagwad Geeta, and all other Holy Hindu Scripts how should i find you qualified enough to talk about religious tolerance and argue on such a topic?? JUst because you have a lovely sense of humor and flow doesnt mean you can use them talking about fields which you yourself claim to be unattached to. (just like you mocked Arundhati Roy when she was talking about kashmir and its people, and just like you talked about Bihar with confidence having been there and knowing the real scenario). Please take out sometime out of your busy schedule, read the scripts. search the spiritual part in you and then if you don't agree with it i welcome you again to the FN blog and will read your blogs related to such topics with the same excitement and zeal as i read your other satires. BTW I do like your flow.... :) There is no absolute theory that can be followed when it comes to freedom of speech. all the above points mentioned through which you have based and supported your argument are not absolute, accepted by everybody and comprehensive in its coverage.people have different attachments and beliefs you can say they r wrong if they fall in love with a wall and dislike anyone peeing on it.When a magazine publishes an article it knows very well about its target audience and although its a moral duty to print the facts they must ensure that a part of their audience dont get offended.

You being an atheist presented your opinion which i respect but need not agree a 100 percent.

The point i am trying to make here is that there are different scales to measure different things… and here you are making mistake of not just comparing two different things… but two different segments using the same scale.

Unless you have read the Holy Quran, Hadeeth, The Holy Bhagwad Geeta, and all other Holy Hindu Scripts how should i find you qualified enough to talk about religious tolerance and argue on such a topic?? JUst because you have a lovely sense of humor and flow doesnt mean you can use them talking about fields which you yourself claim to be unattached to. (just like you mocked Arundhati Roy when she was talking about kashmir and its people, and just like you talked about Bihar with confidence having been there and knowing the real scenario).

Please take out sometime out of your busy schedule, read the scripts. search the spiritual part in you and then if you don’t agree with it i welcome you again to the FN blog and will read your blogs related to such topics with the same excitement and zeal as i read your other satires.

BTW I do like your flow…. :)

]]> By: VeGeTA http://blog.fakingnews.com/2010/07/should-you-draw-muhammad-for-sake-of-free-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-1031 VeGeTA Wed, 13 Apr 2011 11:44:41 +0000 http://blog.fakingnews.com/?p=49#comment-1031 Immature post i must say... "Say, if I draw an image of Prophet Muhammad, which is a favorable depiction showing him as a compassionate human being, how can it fall into any of the above category? Maybe drawing images of prophet is an anti-social act in an Islamic society, but how can it be so in a secular society?" Secular as I know it, means you treat all religions with equal "Respect" and does not mean that you just make loose statements,comments or anything which leads to hurting of sentiments of a particular religion...Religion is a sensitive issue in itself...Please don't misguide people.... Immature post i must say…
“Say, if I draw an image of Prophet Muhammad, which is a favorable depiction showing him as a compassionate human being, how can it fall into any of the above category? Maybe drawing images of prophet is an anti-social act in an Islamic society, but how can it be so in a secular society?”
Secular as I know it, means you treat all religions with equal “Respect” and does not mean that you just make loose statements,comments or anything which leads to hurting of sentiments of a particular religion…Religion is a sensitive issue in itself…Please don’t misguide people….

]]> By: Harry http://blog.fakingnews.com/2010/07/should-you-draw-muhammad-for-sake-of-free-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-1023 Harry Tue, 08 Feb 2011 02:02:10 +0000 http://blog.fakingnews.com/?p=49#comment-1023 Re: that times article , i wonder how the indians might have felt while whiteheads rode through their country colonising them ;), simply put if a bunch of indian (real asian) warlords had ravaged through the american plains and occupied guys like these would have gone extinct for the better :P Re: that times article , i wonder how the indians might have felt while whiteheads rode through their country colonising them ;) , simply put if a bunch of indian (real asian) warlords had ravaged through the american plains and occupied guys like these would have gone extinct for the better :P

]]> By: truthfinder http://blog.fakingnews.com/2010/07/should-you-draw-muhammad-for-sake-of-free-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-959 truthfinder Tue, 30 Nov 2010 10:13:31 +0000 http://blog.fakingnews.com/?p=49#comment-959 Which religion you are talking that shape society, economy, politics & relationship? Which religion you are talking that shape society, economy, politics & relationship?

]]> By: Pagal Patrakar http://blog.fakingnews.com/2010/07/should-you-draw-muhammad-for-sake-of-free-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-158 Pagal Patrakar Sun, 26 Sep 2010 09:59:23 +0000 http://blog.fakingnews.com/?p=49#comment-158 Thanks :) And I agree that there would always be some "gray area" while interpreting actions which I termed (after borrowing from Noam Chomsky) as "hurting sentiments with foreknowledge but without specific intent". But I am hopeless optimist, and I hope things would become better in our society. :) Thanks :)
And I agree that there would always be some “gray area” while interpreting actions which I termed (after borrowing from Noam Chomsky) as “hurting sentiments with foreknowledge but without specific intent”.
But I am hopeless optimist, and I hope things would become better in our society. :)

]]> By: Sajjad http://blog.fakingnews.com/2010/07/should-you-draw-muhammad-for-sake-of-free-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-157 Sajjad Sun, 26 Sep 2010 09:50:59 +0000 http://blog.fakingnews.com/?p=49#comment-157 On a side note, I am a big fan of your site and quite enjoy the articles there !! :) On a side note, I am a big fan of your site and quite enjoy the articles there !! :)

]]> By: Sajjad http://blog.fakingnews.com/2010/07/should-you-draw-muhammad-for-sake-of-free-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-155 Sajjad Sun, 26 Sep 2010 09:42:53 +0000 http://blog.fakingnews.com/?p=49#comment-155 I see, and I can almost agree with you as well even if we disreagrd the analogies, however can anybody judge the intentions given the fact of foreknowledge on the part of person who made the comment? It would be very difficult to give the benefit of doubt to such people. The only options that seem to be there are either the incident was idiotioc where the person did not care for the consequences or it was outright malevolent. Take the recent case of the "divine encroacher" controversy. Whether Sagarika is liberal or not, whether the Ayodha judgement is prounounced in favour of a temple or not, the comment was a total lack of judgement (and incorrect as well because even if there is an encroachment it is because of the followers and not due to the followed). Even as a Muslim I can see that it would hurt the sentiment of not only devout Hindus but other as well and the author did well to recant the same. I see, and I can almost agree with you as well even if we disreagrd the analogies, however can anybody judge the intentions given the fact of foreknowledge on the part of person who made the comment? It would be very difficult to give the benefit of doubt to such people. The only options that seem to be there are either the incident was idiotioc where the person did not care for the consequences or it was outright malevolent. Take the recent case of the “divine encroacher” controversy. Whether Sagarika is liberal or not, whether the Ayodha judgement is prounounced in favour of a temple or not, the comment was a total lack of judgement (and incorrect as well because even if there is an encroachment it is because of the followers and not due to the followed). Even as a Muslim I can see that it would hurt the sentiment of not only devout Hindus but other as well and the author did well to recant the same.

]]>