« Monday Meditation: Overexcited Superposition | Main | The Borges Reader by Jorge Luis Borges »
February 14, 2006
My Virtual Community Responds to the Danish Cartoon Debate
One of my great joys is the challenging thoughts and provocations that my friends throw out on their blogs. The Denmark Cartoon riots/ruckus/debate attracted a particularly diverse and deep response. I've collected the best for wider dissemination.
Josiah believes that radical Muslims lack a sense of irony. Mesh calls out the press' indomitable fear in the face of unrest. Elissa parallels the Muslim response to the cartoons with the Christian response to Seurano. Jason thinks that the worldwide, decentralized Muslim response proves that Islam is not a peaceful religion.
With that link-pimping, my street cred should spike nicely.
Post this page to your del.icio.us account
Posted by Noel at 05:35 PM
tagged as:
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://chattablogs.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/29612
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference My Virtual Community Responds to the Danish Cartoon Debate:
Comments
So tilted to the right?
Posted by: glenH at February 15, 2006 12:02 PM
I suppose.
Posted by: Noel at February 15, 2006 12:05 PM
http://greenspot.chattablogs.com/archives/033173.html
on the left,
regards
Posted by: glen at February 15, 2006 06:55 PM
if by "right" you mean correct, then yes. Greenspot didn't say much.
Posted by: Luther at February 15, 2006 09:01 PM
@Luther & @Glen, I fail to see the point in either of your comments. This is not a matter of subjective correctness, leftness, or rightness. I deliberately avoid falsely dichotomizing responses to the issues I discuss on my blog, and I refuse to credit those who do so with my time and attention. Hopefully we can create a discourse that focuses on people and reality, not on the lame dregs of the enlightenment that are trotted out as the du jour of any vaguely political argument.
Glen, I read your post, and disregarding your lazy characterizations of the unnamed people you were reacting against, I thought your summary of the Islamic theology around the Koran and the Prophet accurate and fair. I fail to see how it interacts with the four essays that I cited in my post.
Luther, I singled out your blog because I liked that you gave a long discourse that interacted substantially with the public record of radical Islam, and gave a nice inference from actions to beliefs. I obviously don't agree with you in your last bit regarding your interpretation of Seurano, but granting your subject a fair consideration is what's important in my book.
Posted by: Noel at February 15, 2006 09:19 PM
Noel,
I responded to your post because none of the others asked the "why ?" question. Although I abhor violence, Islam has been insulted. The response from muslims was very predictable.
I cannot say with any real understanding that your "gang" requires any balance. Left or right adds weight to MY obsessive, alarmist nature. I read your blog because politics are not usually the focus. Being a tree hugging lefty, I get more than my daily allowance of political arguement elsewhere.
best regards
Posted by: glen at February 15, 2006 10:30 PM
I guess my dry sarcastic humor didn't come out well on my comment. sorry. maybe I should using little keyboard smiles and stuff...
;-)
Jason
Posted by: Luther at February 16, 2006 10:50 AM
I guess my dry sarcastic humor didn't come out well on my comment. sorry.
maybe I should using little keyboard smiles and stuff...
;-)
Jason
Posted by: Luther at February 16, 2006 12:02 PM
@Glen, thanks for providing some (personal & political) context for your comments. Why is definitely an important question to ask. I don't like to talk about politics directly here, so hopefully you'll continue to find this blog worthwhile (like my upcoming post on Artificial Life!).
@Luther, I got the sarcasm, and that wasn't why I flamed you >:} But the world can always use more smileys!
Sorry for the flames, I just wanted to make a strong point. Back to your normal apolitical programming...
Posted by: Noel at February 16, 2006 05:22 PM