On 22/02/2008, The Mangoe <the.mangoe(a)gmail.com> wrote:
But to address your specific comment, I don't
feel compelled to
privilege your taking offense at hiding the images any more than I
feel compelled to privilege their taking offense at the presence of
the images in any form. As I've said a couple of times along the way,
the insistence on including the images in the main article and making
sure they are visible isn't neutral; it's anti-Islamic, or at least
against some very typical forms thereof. It's not that far off from
insisting that it is appropriate to prefer blasphemous depictions of
Jesus in his article.
The refusal to compromise our policy for a particular belief is not
anti-[that belief]. Any other biography article would contain an image
if one were freely available. To suggest that those who wish to
maintain this pattern is anti-Islamic is manipulative and provocative.
--
Oldak Quill (oldakquill(a)gmail.com)