Just like 'Innocence of Muslims' if someone makes a movie on Jews or gays...

India
September 25, 2012 3:30am CST
How would the people in the West respond if a Muslim makes a movie similar to 'innocence of Muslims' in the name of freedom of speech? Would such a person be labelled as a racist or close to lunatic? Or what if a white makes a movie similar to 'innocence of Muslims' on the blacks? If we think it's okay to make such a film on the Muslims, then it should be okay to make such film on Jews, gays, blacks etc. But if such a movie is not proper to be made on Jews, gays, blacks, then shouldn't it be improper to make such a movie on Muslims/Mohammad? What do you think?
3 people like this
18 responses
@matersfish (6306)
• United States
25 Sep 12
I've seen multiple movies--legitimate Hollywood big-budget movies--put other races and "types" in a bad light. I remember American History X and how, at least until the arc and penance, just showed a bunch of Neo-Nazis acting incredibly racist toward black people. I don't think black people rioted. I've seen and heard multiple instances where Christianity is shat upon in every way imaginable. And maybe Christians in other parts of the world get up in arms and riot, but I don't see it happening in America. To hell with what one considers "proper" or "improper" in terms of movie making. One's reaction is what tells the tale. If a person cannot be insulted without resorting to violence and murder, then it's not the movie's fault. Anything would set them off -- which explains the brutality displayed toward women in some regions as well. Shouldn't of burned the bread, b1tch! Now take this acid. Don't like a movie? Don't watch it. Don't like the fact that someone would dare make it? Tough sh1t. Grin and bear it. Or, if it better suits you, burn sh1t, beat sh1t, kill sh1t. Whatever. People tend to unravel as far as the rope allows. Some countries offer far more slack. How would people in the West respond? Well, you see it. We have a lot of Muslims too, none of whom acted a fool about it.
3 people like this
@cynthiann (18602)
• Jamaica
25 Sep 12
Well said and you said it all so eloquently and clearly. There is nothing more to add
@vandana7 (98527)
• India
25 Sep 12
I would differ slightly. If movies do not make an impression and leave lasting impression, then there would be no need for parental guidance, or warnings of gruesome scenes at times, isn't it? We each differ in what we feel. Some of those things are painful reminders of past horrors. Imagine what Serbian muslims must be feeling. That was pretty recent genocide attempt, was it not? Are you trying to say that after going through what they did, they would be happy to see their beliefs being dissected like this? Moreover, there have been a series of attacks in the middle east. First Afghanistan, and then Iraq. This is bound to make them feel as if they as a group are being targeted. Nothing they seem to say or do is right anyway. They are more likely to become offensive because of their fears like the cornered cat. So I do feel there should be ban of such movies.
@vandana7 (98527)
• India
25 Sep 12
matersfish, are you equating your grief over your uncle's demise or what happened to your father with the fear that re-runs in the mind of a person who has seen the genocide like situation? To me that genocide type of fear wakes the person several times in the night. The loss of your uncle or fear of losing your father would not. To me those two types of fears sadnesses or whatever you would like to call them are NOT COMPARABLE. In one, the person can become paranoid, while in the other, people would be calmer.
@laydee (12798)
• Philippines
25 Sep 12
I think there's some point here, however, I don't think we'd react by killing people and blaming everyone just because they're Americans (since the film-maker made the film in America). I think they're not really just angry about Mohammad, they're just blowing everything out of proportions. My Muslim friends are angry and have comments about the movie, but they're not throwing rocks at every American they see. It's a pure excuse for someone to be saying that their religion is great. Have a great mylot experience ahead!
1 person likes this
• India
26 Sep 12
The kind of reaction that came about, I guess, would not be appreciated by any rational person. My point is actually to ask whether the other side of the world are also doing this 'selective' application of tolerance of some sort. Suppose when I speak ill of Islam I am applauded, but when I speak ill of gays I am hounded. Now if this kind of thing is what tolerance is then tolerance is selectively applied. If we have to be fair to all then even when I speak ill of gays, white, blacks, Christians, Jews, Muslims or whatever, we have to show same amount of tolerance. This principles applies to us all, Muslims or otherwise.
1 person likes this
• India
28 Sep 12
I kind of agree with your observation. Of course, even hunting down someone who is directly responsible is not the most appropriate way to respond. One can create good videos to respond to the kind of distorted version that is being circulated. I no way would justify the violent reaction. That is bad...and this is what the Egypt president's also echoed.
@Rollo1 (16679)
• Boston, Massachusetts
25 Sep 12
Well, to begin with, I thought the movie was an insult to Mohammed? It was about a religious leader, not about anyone who is Muslim. Besides, Muslim is not a a race, it's a religion. There are Muslims of different races, not all are Arab. So, there is no comparison to a movie with racial overtones. Secondly, there have been plenty of movies that mock Jesus and Christians. Everyone from Martin Scorsese to Monty Python has made a movie that mocks Christianity. On television it is much worse. They are afraid to mock Islam on television, though. Know why? Because the Muslims are the only ones who will rise up in acts of violence and kill people because they don't like a movie or a television show. We know that Jews and blacks and Christians don't rise up and threaten to kill everyone in sight because someone made a movie. The problem isn't the movie. People are responsible for their actions. If you murder someone because you're unhappy, it's still murder. This is the USA where we have the right to freedom of speech and that includes speech other people will find offensive. There's no point to protecting speech everyone will like. It's time for everyone to grow up and stop acting like children having a temper tantrum and it's time for us to stop caring that they threaten to act like uncivilized ruffians.
1 person likes this
• Philippines
28 Sep 12
I agree. The problem isn't the video. The problem has more to do with how it was reacted to. And it doesn't just happen in the United States. There are many videos and movies that mock different religions; but instead of lashing out, the adherents of the other religions just take it in stride and move on. Throwing temper tantrums over religious issues is just immature. It will lead nowhere. Worse still, it takes away the opportunity for intelligent dialogue.
@aerous (13434)
• Philippines
26 Sep 12
The western people did not do as what people in Libya, do. Because western people and other asian people who is not muslim is educated enough to respect the freedom of one person to express his/her grievances or anything that same with it...
1 person likes this
@aabuda (1722)
• Philippines
25 Sep 12
It is so unfair that with the film that they think a great disrespect to Allah or Mohammad, an innocent lives was lost such as the US Ambassador to Lebanon. Is it fair to act that way? I mean, to kill someone? Would you do it for your religion? Would you hurt innocent lives? Is that the teachings of Allah? of Islam?
1 person likes this
• India
26 Sep 12
It's unfair to kill a US ambassador as a sign of angry reaction to the film. The reaction can never be justified. But do you think the making of the film is justified?
• Philippines
25 Sep 12
Hello Headhunter, the problem was that this video wasn't supposed to be about Muhammed. though i don't think we should repeat of what the others mistake because they were immature to react from this movie. I think it was a bit of retaliation because of sensitivity in religion and probably because of how some innocent muslims were dragged to the mistakes of these terrorist. they don't know what to rationalize anymore that they went into this. but i believed sadly that this is still due freedom of expression.
1 person likes this
• India
28 Sep 12
Thanks for commenting. I think people should also respect the sentiment of other religion. Speaking in an honest way to criticise is different from making a mockery of other religion. I think the video falls into the category of mocking other's belief. Had it been a serious critical engagement, no issue. We all need to debate. But my view is 'no' to mockery.
@sharra1 (6340)
• Australia
1 Oct 12
First of all most people do not approve of the film but they are outraged about the violence that came in response to it. There was no justification for attacking the American embassy and killing the ambassador, or killing anyone else. If someone, anyone, made a movie against gays they would protest but you would not see violence, just outrage. Maybe that is because gays are used to being picked on by lots of people. As for other persecuted groups would they react by smashing, killing and destroying? I doubt it. They are smart enough to know that it is the person who made the movie and not a whole country who would be the target. They would condemn it but they would not go around killing people just because they were white or straight or non Jewish. That is the difference. We do not condemn millions for the act of one or two men. All the groups you mention have a history of persecution and they have risen above it. No one understands the violence of the Muslim reaction. I live in Australia and police in my country were attacked by violent youth over this film. In my view their violence is just an excuse to riot, they like to do it, maybe they have too much testosterone. However, there is NO excuse for murdering people over a film. As to us non Muslims it makes us even more suspicious of Muslims because it gives all Muslims a bad name. Just as bike gang violence gives all motor bike riders a bad name even though they have nothing to do with the violence. The world wide violence gives people the impressions that Muslims are violent and dangerous. It is not true but the actions of a few can affect the many.
@sharra1 (6340)
• Australia
2 Oct 12
Before the Muslim world starts attacking embassies over a stupid film they should look at their own world. In Afghanistan how many of the innocents are killed by Americans and how many by their own people? The torture and murder of young girls who just want an education is horrific and their is no justification for it. Yet it happens all the time in Afghanistan. They are terrified that women will gain an education and discover that life does not have to be brutal as theirs is. They want their women to be kept at the level of animals so they can be controlled. That is something that will always prejudice me against Muslims. Saudi Arabia is not so brutal but they still treat their women as sub humans. I will never accept any religion that treats women as anything except equals which is why I do not accept any religion in this world as they all treat women as inferior. As to free speech it is just that, people have the right to say anything they feel no matter how much people hate them for it. It happens in my country as well and the person who expresses views that we hate has to accept the condemnation for what they said but it is not a justification to murder or war. However, to kill someone who just happens to be from the same country as the person you hate is simple murder and nothing can condone it. You talk about Muslim children but what justification is there in killing children just because they want an education.
@sharra1 (6340)
• Australia
2 Oct 12
Yes I know about America trading with Germany and England was pro German and anti Jewish as well. The Americans had no intention of fighting Germany and did not get involved in the war until after Japan bombed pearl harbour. Then they decided they had to get involved in both conflicts. The thing about the camps was that they all approved of killing Jewish people so they kept quiet about it. Just as they know about the killings in Africa and do nothing about it. As far as I am aware only humans kill their own kind. Animals kill for food, not fun and they take care of the welfare of each member of their group. Humans kill for all sorts of reasons but rarely good ones. The problem with any law is that it sees the world as two opposites when in fact the world is many shades of grey and it is almost impossible to make a law that works for everyone. America has some very strange ideas. I wonder how they reconcile their right to free speech with the laws for defamation of character. If there is true free speech then how can anyone sue for defamation? It probably depends on how much money and power the person has. The poor get hounded and can do nothing while the rich sue and win by paying lawyers a lot of money. It is all about money after all, they do not really care about people.
@vandana7 (98527)
• India
2 Oct 12
Sharra..I agree some atrocities happen everywhere. It is difficult to monitor such things. As I was mentioning about female infanticides. But more often than not, people these days try to justify wars blaming the practices in religion or other atrocities commited by ruling parties. Did you know that America was trading with Hitler's Germany before Second World War, having a fair knowledge about the Jewish extermination camps. It is only when the interests were affected that America stepped in. Anything seditious and inciteful is something I dont expect civilized people to talk without being 100 percent certain about what they are talking. Therefore, that may not have been what was considered when Freedom of Speech laws were drafted. In Hindi there is a nice quotation - "Aisi baani boliye, man ka aapa khoy, auran ko sheetal kare, aap hi sheetal hoy". Which means, use words in such fashion that your words express no ego, and they have a calming influence on others and they calm you too. That is Kabir for you. He was uneducated weaver. :) We humans are the only animals that can communicate in so many ways, right? But why is it that we use to create hatred and wars and killings?
1 person likes this
@TheCatLady (4691)
• Israel
1 Oct 12
There are many really vulgar movies about other religions. Have you seen or heard of Jesus the Doucebag? Just the title alone is disrespectful to Christians. Freedom of speech and freedom of expression. If it is offensive, don't watch it. If you want to watch the movie it's on YouTube.
@lampar (7584)
• United States
25 Sep 12
Unfortunately for you, there are already many disrespectful trailers and movies that are insulting to the Christians, Jewishes, Catholics and Buddhists in relation to their prophets and divines. You still can't see massive terror and violence unleashed by them on innocent people and US foreign outposts. 'Freedom Of Speech' should be treated as what it actually is, it means speech that can please and also irk in the eye and ear of everyone including the faithfuls. Of course in the context of freedom of speech, movie or trailer that despise gay, black, Jew or etc... is perfectly legitimate and proper as they fall within the definition of freedom. The movie may be offesive to certain interest group's sense of sight, or even sense of hearing, it doesn't prevent them from avoiding viewing the movie or is not equate as calling for massive violent protest and rise up with terrorism.
• India
26 Sep 12
I agree with the idea about your freedom of speech. But I want to also qualify and say that things which we know are lies and wrong should not be intentionally added in the name of freedom of speech. There are things that we can debate about; but there are things that we know is a lie, a blatant lie. And such kind of thing can be sued in the court in any civilized society. So freedom of speech is not unlimited. Of course this does not mean that even if one has lied, the response can be violent. Two wrongs do not make one right.
@lampar (7584)
• United States
26 Sep 12
Freedom by definition has no limitation , if it does, it is not true freedom except limited/partial freedom. Unfortunately, freedom can be abused to certain extent by ill intended group of people or individual, that is just part of the off set one need to live with in a society where freedom is valued and defended. If you are offended by a 14 minutes flick, dialogue, statement or article, you do have the right to sue and demand justice, but you don't have the right to use terror or violent as a reaction to a 'lie', so to speak. As a true person of faith, i will be more angry and outrage over a video that show the beheading of an innocent person, or call to terrorize a nation of people than raging over a parody that poke fun on a religion personality base on a historical fact rather than lie. Violence and terror can not be used to justify the perceived wrong of an individual as far as freedom is involved, there is no two wrong here, except a bad overreacted masses that insist on the use of violence to stiffle freedom.
@lampar (7584)
• United States
6 Oct 12
If someone make a movie about Jew or Gay, which there are already plenty out there for you to watch with the aim to humiliate them, you can rest assure Gays and Jews will not react in a violent way, begin to go out terrorizing the whole community of people, or burn US embassies and murder ambassador even many of the story told in the movie are not true.
@vandana7 (98527)
• India
25 Sep 12
I think it should not have been made.
@cynthiann (18602)
• Jamaica
25 Sep 12
@the Lamb: I did not realise that it was just a video on youtube Than you - I am going to try and find it on youtube and see it for myself.
@vandana7 (98527)
• India
25 Sep 12
Ok..I stand corrected. :)
@Fulltank (2882)
• Philippines
25 Sep 12
I don't think that the American people will make a fuzz out of it compared to Islam countries. Though many would complain, I think the Western people were liberal enough to these kinds of entertainment. But, here in my country, any mockery towards anyone's religion would surely entail a huge fuzz by its supporters. Unlike the Western culture, we are not as open-minded as them and we take religion seriously.
• United States
25 Sep 12
Lots of folks here in the u.s. take religion very seriously, but the only time I feel I have to "fight" is when I have no answers to a claim, so my faith gets shaky. This doesn't actually happen to me. I do feel my God is real and powerful and truth will stand in the 'end' and all else fall. Why should I have to kill and burn homes, etc for such a God?
• Philippines
25 Sep 12
Indeed, You really see the difference of people who can speak their right from the ones who are totally brainwashed by their own religion. i think it's okay to take religion seriously, but you don't have to react the way those other people did, that's just not right. those killings doesn't just add up or justified
• United States
26 Sep 12
just a thought,, this world there is always one that has say over the other. we have movies we watch about everything and some movies even speak of the country they live in like the movie roots..a good movie ..but can lead in other directions, some about the president even our own and war movies...but yet it is just movies,, entertainment to watch not to be taken serious..just like a book one writes just to amuse like love stories,fiction and no fiction..I think some may not be mature and take things in a wrong direction...then yet I think was this done to start trouble to begin with...?? even the news sometimes get things twisted just to get attention for what people want to hear..whites , blacks , red, yellow, and whatever color on the outside...we all are people...what is wrong with this world?? the people cannot get along...I love my country the U.S.A. because I was born here and raised that way....I am sure people talk about our country also and made films..I think mature people would know it is just a movie.....
@Jatelo2 (166)
• Nairobi, Kenya
26 Sep 12
Definitely those in the West wouldn't have killed and burnt things in the name of defending faith.Why are some people so insecure with their beliefs that they have to resort to violence anytime their faith is criticized?
1 person likes this
• United States
25 Sep 12
People really need to chill out nowadays. To have people lose their live over a You Tube movie is just pathetic. Instead of violence, those people should just make movies to respond back.
• India
26 Sep 12
I agree that people should have made movies which are of better quality to respond back. the rich sheiks in the middle east donate hefty sum of money to top universities in the world, so why can't they make video that would be a fitting reply to the mockery.
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
26 Sep 12
People make all kinds of movies about groups of people, fact and fictional movies. Usually it is just make believe stories and no one should be offended because it is just entertainment. Sometimes elements of truth are also mixed in, but no one should be offended by the truth. It is what it is.
@elmiko (6630)
• United States
25 Sep 12
this is where the double standard comes in. hollywood as a whole probably wouldn't allow such a movie like that to be made about the jews. you saw what happened to mel gibson and his anti-jewish rant and he hasn't been able to find work ever since. then jewish donors turn around and donate for a film called the the Innocence of muhammad. still, the biggest majority of jews are mad about the making of the Innocence of muhammad. if you made a movie making fun of the blacks then democratic politicians and the liberal media would come out calling the film a disgrace. you can't make a film making fun of the gays because now there promoting gay marriage. nbc has a gay agenda trying to endorse the new normal which promotes gay marriage. its like hollywood is trying to force gay marriage and burn the normalcy of it in everyone's brain. still, i'm not against gay marriage but i still don't endorse it nor do i approve of it. i do still think gays should have the right to marry though as who am i to tell or say that gays should not get married. its not my life its theirs. my point is the double standard should be done away with altogether.
@artemeis (4194)
• China
25 Sep 12
For the record, I think it is a fact that the West has by far reacted much more decently compared to those reactions from the Middle East and Pakistan. At least, there's no killing of consulate workers or uninvolved innocent people. No discrimination. However, it is sad to see that the other region so far could not level up and I have to say that this is probably why differences exist. Blame it on repressive culture, system, education and no offense, religion. We can see how violent and brutal they can be with their own where petty crimes can result in amputating a part of a body, extra marital affairs are solely the fault of the women and punished by public stoning. I believe you know the answer but I don't think the violent party will ever be able to catch up with the West or if they ever want to be when they believe that all else is an enemy to their religion and their people.
• Philippines
26 Sep 12
Respect the word it should be.First of all we should respect the others, of what they believe or point of views. And the movie innocence of Muslim doesn't fall into freedom of speech rather it fall as a crime and racist. The movie disrespect the Islams. And for me what they reacted is natural because they disrespect my religion or my god. The US government should do move about it to prevent more crime.We cant blame them to react that way. We should understand them instead of judge them more.