The Instigator
Santa.Shree
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Roboman1723
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Did the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists invite the attack upon themselves?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/25/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 334 times Debate No: 74195
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

Santa.Shree

Pro

There is a difference between mocking a religion and ridiculing it. Using satire as a tool to deliberately push a religion towards the wall and provoking the radical elements within it, is it justifiable? Every righteous individual supports the FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION, but were the cartoons of Muhammad satirical in the strict sense or was there something hidden beneath the repeated attacks towards a particular religion? Did the leaders who attended the PARIS MARCH in support of FREE SPEECH themselves believe in the concerned concept? Or is the French magazine an equal-opportunity offender, a crusader of liberalism and an antagonist of extremism?
Roboman1723

Con

Since you did not lay out a debate format I'm going make my points first and omit the last round so we get equal representation, is this okay?

---

"Did the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists invite the attack upon themselves?"


There is no record of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists ever making a formal request to be attacked.
/debate

---

Let's get to it for real though.

1. "Using satire as a tool to deliberately push a religion towards the wall and provoking the radical elements within it, is it justifiable?"

Does dissenting against a stance or religion justify murder? People all over the planet disagree with eachother and the level of civility in response to the dissention determines the level of functionality of the civilization. Simply put, you can't kill someone for disagreeing with your ideals or society falls apart.

2. "Every righteous individual supports the FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION, but were the cartoons of Muhammad satirical in the strict sense or was there something hidden beneath the repeated attacks towards a particular religion?"

righteous
adjective
1.
(of a person or conduct) morally right or justifiable; virtuous.

2. (informal) very good; excellent.

I bring into question the righteousness of the people who attacked the cartoonists. A righteous person is someone who follows the code of beliefs he is subscribed to. The attackers were Islamic and therefore subscribe to islamic tenants. In the Quran it is forbidden to kill, Qur’an 6:151 says: “and do not kill a soul that God has made sacrosanct, save lawfully.”. Therefore according to western culture and Islamic beliefs these individuals were acting unrighteously and subsequently were the aggressors in the wrong.

3. "Did the leaders who attended the PARIS MARCH in support of FREE SPEECH themselves believe in the concerned concept or is the French magazine an equal-opportunity offender, a crusader of liberalism and an antagonist of extremism?"

Why does this matter at all? The beliefs of the writers are irelevant in this debate.
Debate Round No. 1
Santa.Shree

Pro

Santa.Shree forfeited this round.
Roboman1723

Con

Roboman1723 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Santa.Shree

Pro

Santa.Shree forfeited this round.
Roboman1723

Con

Roboman1723 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Santa.Shree 2 years ago
Santa.Shree
yes, that is what I'm asking here
Posted by lefillegal 2 years ago
lefillegal
Not clear, are you saying the cartoonist brought this upon themselves?
No votes have been placed for this debate.