Aaron, honestly man, I am disappointed in you. But, hey, it is your site, so do as you see fit. I would have hoped that you wouldn’t assume that the images are “meant to incite anger and intolerance of others.” The images, as I see it, were a test in freedom of expression. I don’t like either one, but I defned their right to exist.

All in all though, I suppose switching it to a link so that each person can make the choice to see it for themselves seems reasonable, but I support putting it right out there. I’m not a hater, and I hope people wouldn’t think so because I posted it. Ultimately, I’ll never know.

The Iranian president, if he were to have a complete and correct philosophy, should have also called for no violence towards the Jews. I think it is ok to put the images out there, but also to simultaneously have a zero-tolerance policy towards violence. Since he wants and suuports violance aimed at the Jews, he is a douchebag (with nukes). But that means that the people who were angered by the Muslim’s negative reaction to the Danish images are douchebags too. You can’t have it both ways.

And to clarify (since this is a touchy subject), I only support the Muslims who verbally expressed their offense at the Danish images. Some Muslims sent death threats to the editors of those newspapers, and obviously I disagree with that wholeheartedly

Peaceful debate is what the Middle East needs to learn. If both sides don’t grow up, alot more inncoent people are going to die needlessly.

to some degree i am playing the devil’s advocate, but to be honest i feel that by posting that image or the danish image, you are propagating hate on the internet- yes, you have the right to do it, but i would hope that you wouldn’t.

josh, your argument is that anyone should be allowed to publish their opinion. i completely agree. so why are you posting these images? are they your opinion? are they necessary for some argument you were making?

and no, i never watched the zappa thing. can’t really watch movies at work, i’ll try and catch it at home sometime.

Stciks and stones will breaks my bones but words will never hurt me. This is okay for children, who use words to get back at each other, but in the adult world, there is more to consider. To call someone a jerk, or a Jew, or a Muslim is okay. But let’s say I called you a pedophile. That could permanently ruin a person’s reputation, and permanently make life considerably more difficult for that person.

So I disagree with slander (saying it) and libel (printing it), but I defend a person’s right to say “I hate Muslims,” or “I hate Jews.” They are providing their opinion, and people should be allowed to have opinions. Opinions are fine, defmation is not. I do not consider either picture defamation.

The empowering part is that even though some shitty group has the right to say their shitty thing, YOU have the right to form a group and say that you think they are wrong.

I’m not saying I agree with either set of pictures, but I agree with the right of either side to put it out there.

Its this exact reason that groups like the KKK and Neo Nazis CAN peacably assemble and have their rallies. Its discusting and people are totally right to protest them and make their dislike of the groups known, but they are none the less allowed to say what they want.

In the context of what this post is about, I hope you understand that it was important to show both sides of the argument. Did you support the Danish images when they were released? Or did you take offense that Muslims were offended because they showed the face of Mohammed? I don’t why they should be offened by that, but they are. If you really believe what you are saying, then I hope you personally took offense with the Danish images.

In a way, you are proving the Iranians right. No one cared when they were offended, but now that the target of the offense is the Jews, people are pissed about it. You can’t be for free speech only part of the time when it happens to suit your interests. All or nothing.

I’m not trying to side with either party. That’s the point. Look at both sides equally.

South Park is a great example. Trey and Matt did the Terry Schiavo case right after she died (like RIGHT after), and then Steve Erwin RIGHT after he died. Yes, those were offensive episodes to many, but the point was not in trying to offend a group of people, just the fact that it is okay to offend people. These are just words. Free speech allows that!! No one said it was nice, but it is COMPLETELY within the boundaries of free speech. Once you make a single concession, then the whole thing will crumble.

Jamie, in my opinion, you should have responded with, “Those images offend ME.” and NOT “I can’t believe YOU think no one would be offended by that.” I shouldn’t have to worry about whether or not someone is offended. I’m sorry if that viewpoint bothers you.

Also, posting a picture of my mother naked is not the same idea. That is a privacy thing. Now, regarding bestiality, in terms of whether or not the content should exist, I say go for it. Certainly not my cup of tea, but I will defend its right to exist. McCrappy is a work friendly site, which means nothing sexual. This post was political in nature which is totally okay. As far as the swastikas, this isn’t my site, but I would defend someone’s right to post them on their own site.

Fortunately, we are taking part in the proper response to being offened: peaceful debate.

Also, did you check out my recent post regarding Frank Zappa? This was a mid to late-eighties interview, and they were asking him about offensive lyrics in songs. Zappa defended the right for offensive lyrics to exist. They said, “Well what about incest? Should songs about incest be allowed to exist?” His answer was, “Yes! We aer talking about WORDS!” I suggest you watch it Jamie, because you’re argument is the same one as Zappa’s opposition on the show. If you do watch it, I think you will see to censor speech in any form is bad thing.

and yeah, offensive is, like, totally hilarious these days, but come on man…… have some judgement. The image suggests that we should make israel a concentration camp.

in the name of free speech should we post a bunch of swastikas on mccrappy? a bunch of hardcore porn? bestiality? bin laden support info? pictures of josh’s mom naked?

How about this for a compromise. Go find a copy of the original Danish image. Put them both in the same post side by side.