Too high a price to pay

GIVEN the continuing dreadful outcome, I cannot help but feel that the American man who produced the internet film Innocence of Muslims, which was so grossly insensitive and insulting about the Islamic prophet Mohammed, should be punished.

No one likes their religious beliefs to be scorned. Such insulting reflections and personal bigotry are, at best, deeply hurtful, and, at worst, are an incitement to violence and outright killing.

No nation can afford to allow people to make such hugely derisory, hateful films or programmes. Anyone doing so should know that they will be held to account for such monstrous behaviour.

To have lost, in Benghazi, such a fine man as Christopher Stevens, the US ambassador to Libya, and three other diplomats, is far too high a price to pay for such deliberate abuse of freedom of speech.

Janet Rowntree, Escrick , York

Comments(6)

Matt_S says...
12:43pm Wed 19 Sep 12

In the following image, The Onion has deliberately scorned Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism and Hinduism:
http://www.theonion.
com/articles/no-one-
murdered-because-of-
this-image,29553/

(warning: Not Safe For Work!)

Yet, as far as I'm aware, and as it was intended to prove, it has not provoked violence within those religions. Why? Because they have learnt to accept that they will be challenged and even abused.

Christianity, for example, has had to deal with films such as the Life of Brian. People complained a lot. No one was killed (AFAIK).

The only way Islam will grow up is if more Muslims begin to accept that people will be critical of it, *especially* given that one of the criticisms is that Muslims can't handle criticism or abuse!

(obviously the vast majority of Muslims haven't resorted to violence, but there must surely be greater condemnation of such violence; I believe some Muslim leaders who live in the West have indeed condemned the violence)

ColdAsChristmas says...
7:47pm Wed 19 Sep 12

We are at one on this Matt. I agree that it would have been better if the film had not been put on the Internet but even so there was never any excuse for violence. Unfortunately there are some people (Not all Muslims) who feel they have more right to feel aggrieved than others and want someone to pay a price for it.
Islam is around 630 years behind Christianity as a time line of religion but that should not mean that Islam should be led by Medieval ethics. Indeed, before going back to religion, Islamic academics were considered ahead of the West in scientific knowledge. Abdul Wahhab in the 1700's turned Islam backwards with Islamic religious fundamentalism but that is another story as is Islam out-populating the rest of the world while the West sleeps! Think about it.

Friedrich Hayek says...
8:40pm Wed 19 Sep 12

You're right, Janet. The Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) must never be defamed.

He was a nice guy.

And freedom of expression isn't something worth fighting and dying for.

capt spaulding says...
10:22pm Wed 19 Sep 12

I just want to live an ordinary lifestile without some religious nutcase telling me what i can or cannot do without incurring the wrath of jihad...............
....................
....whats wrong with that.

jorvik says...
3:06pm Wed 26 Sep 12

Friedrich Hayek wrote:
You're right, Janet. The Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) must never be defamed.

He was a nice guy.

And freedom of expression isn't something worth fighting and dying for.
Didn't he marry a 12 year old,sounds a lovely guy

jorvik says...
3:06pm Wed 26 Sep 12

Friedrich Hayek wrote:
You're right, Janet. The Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) must never be defamed.

He was a nice guy.

And freedom of expression isn't something worth fighting and dying for.
Didn't he marry a 12 year old,sounds a lovely guy

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree