Islamic Entitlement

oh

i said it before and saying it again there are always minorities who gives the wrong messeage.

islam started with other religion existed with it and it has laws and rules about respect to non-muslims and respect their belive and their place of worship.

if you are the type of people who love to judge others because of their minorities and accusing the whole religion which is around for more than 1400 years of being racist and does not accept others who does not follow it then you are wrong. many examples showed non-muslims living in muslims countries in the past and they did  not face problems other people faced when they lived under some other religions.

The big problem is, the extremist voice is much louder than the moderate voice.

Tell me, do you support Sharia law?

OF course I personally see nothing wrong with that.

Of course you are entitled to this opinion.

Of course, you may be correct. I do know the Romans were superior culturally and saw the others they conquered as inferior in culture. And they were correct for the most part.

I don�t agree with everything that woman said but she makes some good points.

I believe you. She isn�t even a Muslim, all I can say is she made good points.

I don't know if anyone has brought up the novel "The Da Vinci Code" during the heated exchanges on the Danish cartoons. I believe that the controversies surrounding this book may be a pretty good indication of how the Christian community (Catholic and Protestant) in general reacts to "blasphemous" material (printed, movies, etc.) differently from the Muslim community, and in a way that may also help to illustrate Locknar's point of "Islamic Entitlement".  

(By the way, I am NOT a Christian. I am an atheist.)

I haven't read the book myself, but from the many many many things that have been written on the novel, I kind of know the plot of the story and I think it can be seen from any angle as extremely "blasphemous" - Jesus, believed to be the Son of God (i.e. God Himself) by most Christians - was depicted as just a flesh and blood human being who had sex a woman and even fathered a child!!!! To put this in context, what the novel is suggesting (despite its fictitious claim) is that the whole Christian faith is built on a lie, and that Jesus had sexual desires like any human being.

If that's not blasphemy, I don't know what that is. 

While there have been a lot of severe criticisms of the novel (mostly on how cr*ppy it really is from a literary point of view, ironically one of its critics is Salman Rushdie ... ) and there have even been calls for boycotting the soon-released movie version of the novel (featuring the much-loved Tom Hanks) by some Christian groups, no one has called for the burning or the banning of the book, let alone the murder of Dan Brown or Tom Hanks.

How do we explain that? We can say maybe Western society has a higher level of tolerance for divergent and even offensive expressions of ideas, or maybe we can say, as suggested by Loknar, that Muslims have this "sense of entitlement" that everyone in the world, Muslims or non-Muslims, has to show the same deference to their religion and their Allah.

Maju wrote;

I'm sure there are many kinds of Muslims but we only see one type of them in the news: the ones that yell and kill for a drawing. We don't see the Muslims saying: "Brothers and sisters have you gone mad? Why all this noise, threats and bloodshed? Is it for a stupid caricature? When are you goig to grow up?"

When I see those inteligent and open Muslims, not just as private people but as organized people that dare to stand up against their own correligionaries for the sake of Humankind and Human Rights, I'll believe that there are factions of Muslims that are acceptable.

My advice is to change the channel.  They are everywhere, you just have to open your eyes and look.

I am in favor of ethanol; hydro-electric and nuclear more than ever.

Technology has a way of catching up to us quickly.

Then the Mid East can corner the market on sand.