Following the Muslim furore over Katy Perry’s video, it seems that the usual has happened – the video has been edited. So, once again, when faced with unreasonable demands, people cave in, giving these bastards an excuse to do the same again and again. Whatever happened to our backbone? The correct response to demands that we “respect” religious sensibilities is to tell them robustly what to do and where to get off. The crime of blasphemy does not apply to us. So we should not cravenly acquiesce to such demands. Giving in only means more demands.
Petition instigator Shazad Iqbal, said he was “thrilled” with the outcome.
I’m sure he is. His demands were met without a hint of resistance. People gave in cravenly to his screeching about his religion. So he will feel entitled to do the same the next time he comes across “blasphemy” and the people who promoted this video – or You Tube, whoever did the editing – are entirely to blame.
“I feel that the impact we have made and the total number of signatures obtained does convey just how worthy a cause this is, it is a significant step towards the right direction.”
And that direction is the dhimmification of the UK.
You never stop paying the Danegeld – we learn nothing from history, it seems.
Don’t these idiots know that music, video, internet, flying etc. is haram?
The only halal method of flying is on a winged donkey.
Ambivalent about this one,LR. If you ignore what was done and who complained, the principle is sound. Someone collected signatures, someone else took criticism on board and changed something. All voluntary and peaceful, if that was indeed the case. On the other hand I don’t care for religion or the supposed necessity to tiptoe around it, and don’t see why Westerners feel obliged to respect foreign customs. But this seems to have been a civilised resolution of dispute, so no problem.
Yikes!
So if a mugger asks for your wallet and you hand it over and no-one gets hurt that would be alright too?
What is a ‘good’ Muslim doing looking at such a video anyway?
Cowardly appeasement isn’t reasonable accommodation.
They have encouraged more of the same. There should be no accommodation for offence seeking. The correct response should have been that as Perry is not a Muslim, their blasphemy laws do not apply.
Could be similar to mugging if violence was threatened to get a reward. The post mentions signatures ie a petition ie a request. Not entirely uncivilised, although the cause for offence is trivial to my mind – in which case the removal of the amulet sequence is also trivial. But then most political or religious “offences” are trivial, except in the minds of those who are trapped in a theocratic or statist cult system. Agree that we shouldn’t kow-tow to force, and we should see that people who look for reasons to take offence are irrational. But then again, dhimmitude equals servitude which is the case already. Not one man in a thousand would ignore a fixed penaty notice or refuse to give details to an officer or otherwise stand up to the Government. If we don’t disobey our “God” ie the State, we don’t have much room to point at others. So either this incident was peaceful in which case it’s OK, or it isn’t and is morally no different than being threatened with jail for having a smoke indoors
The difference between the “god” of the state and that of the religious is that one is very real and will use violence to make us comply.
Also, I don’t give a flying fuck how many people signed a petition – it doesn’t make them right and it certainly should not be a reason to comply with their demands. Rather more people didn’t sign it.
I think that you make a reasonable point Richard, but the Islamists do have form for turning very nasty if you don’t capitulate instantly to their ceaseless demands for their infantile superstitions to be respected. Where do you suppose that this would have gone if the video had not been edited? Also, what of Channel Four putting a black blob over a Jesus and Mo cartoon just in case, just to be on the safe side.
LR, there’s no difference, just interchange “Government” with “Sharia”. Both are just belivers doing stuff. Both depend on credence of the victims. Imagine a hunter-gatherer receiving an income tax demand, at the same time you or I get a feather with blood on it or some other mumbo-jumbo. Neither man would give a fuck. But reverse it? Both men shit themselves, but it’s the same crap. As fo the petition, it’s a reasonable way to try to get an outcome imo. The main problem with Muslims, as Stonyground says is that their religion excuses violence, but then so do Statists.