I got told to shut the fuck up.  There is a subgroup of atheists who are angry and hateful and attack all religious people, including their allies.  They are the only atheists I cannot support.

Sounds like a novel, play, or painting, or other aspects of “culture.”

shudder.

When I hear the word culture, I reach for my gun.

You, though, apparently believe you can read my mind, which you clearly can’t.  You are the one acting on illogical faith here – you know nothing about my religion, but you’ve convinced yourself that hating the imaginary beliefs you’ve projected on me is somehow reasonable.  It’s really just hatred wanting a target, isn’t it?

Would you tell Malcom X to be more placating to racists? Like it or not, this is a civil rights issue and while you may disagree with some approaches we are still talking about freedom of speech.

No one is advocating making religion illegal or violence against the religious.  

Why should we treat religion any different than we would those who believe in bigfoot or alien anal probes?

Thank goodness nobody’s indulging in insulting, stereotypical hypotheses in THIS thread!

Where did THAT come from?!?!?

[update: original comment removed.]

Look – I have an idea – why don’t we judge people on their actions, how they treat others, whether they bring something good to our collective table of man kind. Religion is not going away tomorrow. It’s just not. I don’t know if it will ever go away.  Lots of folks acting on a belief in a creator actively made the world a better place.  Not all religious people are extremist who are morons. 

As someone else pointed out on another thread – suppose someone came into my neighbourhood, pretends to be a Blood, and goes around insulting Crips (the gangs in my neighbourhood are not actually the Bloods and Crips, but whatever).
Yes, the fact that gang warfare erupts is bad.

That doesn’t mean people investigating the background and motivations of the creep behind the false flag operation are “missing the story” or “condoning gang violence”.  They’re focused on a different aspect of the story than you are, that’s all.

The interesting question is which is more effective: hacking ala Flame, or good old fashioned propaganda like the Israelis are good at. I was impressed during the 2009 bombing of Gaza. 

And beyond that – is there a reason propaganda needs to be so badly done on purpose? It always seems to be. Is it just that it doesn’t matter, and volume does matter? Or is it an attempt to dissemble? It does seem to work: YouTubers are quick to call fake on all manner of stunt videos, but who watches black propaganda in the first place?

So please, enough about how talking about the filmmakers is “excusing” the death of the ambassador or any violence by rioters.  First of all, the ambassador’s death probably has nothing whatsoever to do with this film or protests thereof, so that’s just a non-sequitir.  Second of all, enough with the sentiment that talking about the filmmakers is “excusing the rioters.”  You don’t have to approve of political violence to see that there might be something fishy here and want to talk about it.  Finally, enough with the “Muslims are stupid dirty animals that riot over a stupid movies.”  It’s not clear that the riots about the “film”, especially considering all the weirdness going on around this.

Without meaning to put words in his mouth, no, it’s not “OK”, but just because it’s not “OK” doesn’t mean it won’t happen.

A pedestrian who steps out in front of a car running a red light may have the right of way, but they still get hit by the car.

You may be legally allowed to say something, but that doesn’t mean it won’t evoke a response from people, physical or otherwise.

Welcome to the real world.