On 5/12/06, Oskar Sigvardsson oskarsigvardsson@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/12/06, Ben McIlwain cydeweys@gmail.com wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Mark Gallagher wrote:
Ben wrote:
I've heard a lot of people claiming that it's offensive but I'm just
not
seeing it. How is it offensive? All of the Christians I personally know who I've pointed it out to thought it was either funny or
annoying,
but not offensive.
Mocking the cross? You can't see what's wrong with that?
I don't worship icons, so no, I really don't see what's wrong with it.
<snip> > Ben McIlwain ("Cyde Weys")
I don't worship icons either. I'm completely atheist, but I would never DREAM of mocking it. It's simple human decency not to mock something that many people love, and worship. It is, at the very least, a massive breach of WP:CIVIL.
And even if I'm not religious and don't get personally offended by mockery of religious symbols, there are many things that if mocked I would get enourmously offended by. For instance, I'm swedish, and if anyone says a cross word about Anna Lindh (our Minister of Foreign Affairs, who were murdered a couple of years ago), I'm gonna punch him out. I'm sure americans say the same thing about, for instance, the people who died on 9/11. I'm sure you have a number of things to that you wouldn't want mocked, but that other people may not care about.
Also, as Mark Gallagher said, there is a HUGE difference between this and the Mohammad Cartoons. Those were for an article on a very notable event that demanded that the images were displayed for context. You were mocking the worlds largest religion, just for fun.
We're talking simple human decency and civility here. You need to apologise.
--Oskar _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
I'm sorry Oskar but I don't see a difference. The muhammed cartoons were offensive because they depicted Muhammed. That's what I've always heard the controversy to be about: any graphic depiction is blasphemous. The cross is as well a religious symbol. in this case, a slightly modified picture is being considered "blasphemous". I think there is a difference between "mocking" and "satire", but it's very slight. Perhaps I'm viewing this all wrong, I don't know. Oh and if anyone is going to reply to this, odds are I won't be able to respond until tuesday, sorry.
-Swatjester