South Park email

[The Sisko]

The "All or none" argument is about as weak as you can get on this topic Skinfan13. Using that logic I suppose you'd be all for say, kiddie porn on prime time T.V. How about snuff films?

[Midnight Judges]

If they showed it, I would defend their right to show it. I am also relieved that they did not, because it would have cause senseless violence. That violence would not be South Park's fault, but it would have been violence they could have prevented.

If some of you feel so strongly that they should show it, why don't you get a T-shirt with Muhammed's face on it and wear it around town? You can't tell others to do something you would not do yourself.

[skinfan133]

The "All or none" argument is about as weak as you can get on this topic Skinfan13. Using that logic I suppose you'd be all for say, kiddie porn on prime time T.V. How about snuff films?

you know thats not what i mean; im saying why should ome groups get preferential treatment when others dont?

[Teller]

If they showed it, I would defend their right to show it. I am also relieved that they did not, because it would have cause senseless violence. That violence would not be South Park's fault, but it would have been violence they could have prevented.

If some of you feel so strongly that they should show it, why don't you get a T-shirt with Muhammed's face on it and wear it around town? You can't tell others to do something you would not do yourself.

Then like I said earlier, if that's the case, the solution for Christians who are offended by portrayls of Jesus on South Park is to go out and kill people and burn buildings so it doesn't happen anymore.

I've got no tolerance for thugs who influence what I can or can't see -- as an American adult -- through violence. What's next? And where does it stop?

[PokerPacker]

yusuf, as part of the arguments, you mention allowing adult content/language and other stuff on "public television". frankly, i don't think that should be censored, but rather people should use this new invention called the Vchip that will block out programs of certain ratings. if you don't want kids watching it, set your Vchip. if you don't have a Vchip, (i think most new TVs do) try actually parenting your kids yourself instead of asking the government to do it for you.

your comment on kiddie porn doesn't even apply since that is illegal reguardless of its broadcast.

[Teller]

Every once in a while I have hope for the future of this country. This is one of those times. Nice post PokerPacker. :applause:

[skinfan133]

yusuf, as part of the arguments, you mention allowing adult content/language and other stuff on "public television". frankly, i don't think that should be censored, but rather people should use this new invention called the Vchip that will block out programs of certain ratings. if you don't want kids watching it, set your Vchip. if you don't have a Vchip, (i think most new TVs do) try actually parenting your kids yourself instead of asking the government to do it for you.

your comment on kiddie porn doesn't even apply since that is illegal reguardless of its broadcast.

plus all the pron stuff is available on pay per view, and its illegal for minors. cartoons of mohamed are not illegal, they do not pose a threat to anyone in themselves, only when crazy people begin to kill, ravagae and burn their own countries. imo its a very juvenile response, in america we know all about proper civil unrest and revolution.

[Fergasun]

There wouldn't have been violence if Mohammad was shown.

Riots because of South Park would completely discredit a subset of Muslims.

They depicted Mohammad 5 years ago in the Super-best-friends episode and there were no riots. Has Islam changed so much?

[playoffsplz]

What I found funny about all of this is that South Park already has an episode featuring Muhammad ( UNCENSORED!!!:laugh: ).

The title is "Super Best Friends" for those that want to check it out. It's from season 5.

Edit* Didn't realize this was posted a million times already. Still worth checking out if you don't watch the show regularly.

[Giants13]

After sleeping on this, I am leaning towards agreeing with Bang and Comedy Central. Comedy Central probably did do the responsible thing. Although I am all for sticking my my middle finger up at the extreme Muslims, if CC would have shown the un-edited show, they would have had blood on their hands.

I think the intent of the show still came accross as it brought about the issue on a national stage and hopefully led millions of viewers think about how the extreme Muslims are trying to force their belief on others through terrorism.

I just hope the casual SP fans realize what the true intent of that episode was.

[frommd]

anybody have a link to the scientology episode or have it downloaded? I haven't seen it yet

Don't have a link to the whole episode. But here is one of the great scenes from it.

http://www.videosift.com/story.php?id=747

[Fergasun]

I disagree with people who say "Comedy Central would have blood on their hands". Nothing would happen here in America... and South Park is made for an American audience... and it would just prove the point of the show.

Since when are we supposed to modify our behavior because someone else finds it offensive? Why are we giving in to Islam?

[MisterPinstripe]

yusuf, as part of the arguments, you mention allowing adult content/language and other stuff on "public television". frankly, i don't think that should be censored, but rather people should use this new invention called the Vchip that will block out programs of certain ratings. if you don't want kids watching it, set your Vchip. if you don't have a Vchip, (i think most new TVs do) try actually parenting your kids yourself instead of asking the government to do it for you.

your comment on kiddie porn doesn't even apply since that is illegal reguardless of its broadcast.

The problem I have with this post is you can not blame parents. True, people do not do enough "parenting." But to say NOTHING should be censored and that instead parents should do their jobs is absurd. You can have the best parents in the world, but I believe personally that all people are sinners, and no matter how you are raised, some child is going to turn on the tv and if there is no censor watch porn. Parents can not watch their children constantly. Just my :2cents: on that particular point.

[Teller]

Although I am all for sticking my my middle finger up at the extreme Muslims, if CC would have shown the un-edited show, they would have had blood on their hands.

The ONLY people with blood on their hands are the ****s who kill over a newspaper cartoon. If I killed someone everytime someone insulted or blasphemed Jesus, I'd have quite the body count by now.

[JWB]

Wow this has been an incredible thread with some great posts. I'm really finding myself hard to disagree with anyone, this is a tough topic. I watched the episode and thought it was funny as hell. I didn't really realize that CC was editing out Muhammed because they had to, I thought it was a joke lol. I am really not sure where I stand on this issue, though. I like to laugh at myself alot and although I do support Bush, I love to read all of the funny jokes and quotes and everything. However, some people are not like that and do get offended with things like the Scientology episode and Muhammed's picture.

It is definitely not right that free speech is limited because people hold themselves against South Park, like the scientologists and how some Muslims "may" flip out which I do not believe would happen in the US.

One more thing, I thought SP owned Family Guy and they were actually right in that many of the jokes in Family Guy yield nothing to the actual plot and are easily interchangeable. But does that make it not funny? Because I still laugh.

[Giants13]

The ONLY people with blood on their hands are the ****s who kill over a newspaper cartoon. If I killed someone everytime someone insulted or blasphemed Jesus, I'd have quite the body count by now.

What I meant by blood on their hands is that if they showed it un-enedited, then they would would be indirectly responsible for the Muslims violence. Its a cause and effect thing. No sane person would hold them personally responsible. If I showed something that I know could lead to violence, and it did cause violence, then I would beat myself up over it. All I'm saying is that I think they made a rational decision.

And let me be clear, there is no excuse for violence over a stupid cartoon. These Muslims are 100% responsible for whatever violence they commit.

I would love to see a fanatical Muslim one on one and see how "brave" he would be without hundreds of radicals behind him.

[Teller]

What I meant by blood on their hands is that if they showed it un-enedited, then they would would be indirectly responsible for the Muslims violence. Its a cause and effect thing. No sane person would hold them personally responsible. If I showed something that I know could lead to violence, and it did cause violence, then I would beat myself up over it. All I'm saying is that I think they made a rational decision.

And let me be clear, there is no excuse for violence over a stupid cartoon. These Muslims are 100% responsible for whatever violence they commit.

I would love to see a fanatical Muslim one on one and see how "brave" he would be without hundreds of radicals behind him.

I understand precisely where you're coming from G13, and I think we largely agree. However, IMO, there is no actual causal relationship between images of Mohammed and the execution of innocent civilians. I see things that could potentially offend me almost every day.

When I see an American flag burned, it infurates me more than just about anything else. However, if I choose to go out and commit murder based on those feelings, I am 100% responsible.

The idea that Comedy Central would be in any way responsible is like blaming the kid walking down the street for "tempting" the child molester. I realize that's an extreme example, but this is an extreme case.

(Like I said, I do understand that you're not saying CC would be responsible for the potential violence had they aired the images. I'm taking it a step further and saying they'd have NO responsibility.)

[roadkill]

I understand precisely where you're coming from G13, and I think we largely agree. However, IMO, there is no actual causal relationship between images of Mohammed and the execution of innocent civilians. I see things that could potentially offend me almost every day.

When I see an American flag burned, it infurates me more than just about anything else. However, if I choose to go out and commit murder based on those feelings, I am 100% responsible.

The idea that Comedy Central would be in any way responsible is like blaming the kid walking down the street for "tempting" the child molester. I realize that's an extreme example, but this is an extreme case.

(Like I said, I do understand that you're not saying CC would be responsible for the potential violence had they aired the images. I'm taking it a step further and saying they'd have NO responsibility.)

I am a Muslim and I am not offended by the way Muhammad was portrayed in South Park; however, I am offended by the cartoons in the Danish Newspaper. The thing that infuriates Muslims the most is how the Danish cartoons implied the Muhammad was a terrorist.

The image of Muhammad is mostly forbidden for fear of idol worship. What people have to understand is that when a terrorist says that in the Qur'an it is stated that all who show their interpretation of the image of Muhammad should be killed, this does not mean it is true. It is only their interpretation. There are many passages in the Qur'an that are vague and up for interpretation, just like almost every other Holy Book a religion abides by. Some Christians may say that it states in the Bible that all homosexuals should not be granted civil rights, but that is their interpretation. The Bible may not say that homosexuals are equal to heterosexuals, but it also doesn't say that they should not be granted civil rights. However, I still could say that the Bible condemns homosexuals because no one is really sure if it does. Just my :2cents: . I also do not believe that Muslims would have rioted had Muhammad been shown but who knows? I agree with Comedy Central's decision to censor the image for the safety of whom the image of Muhammad might endanger.

By the way I have tried as hard as possible not to let my love of South park have an effect on my opinion. However I may have to create a new branch of Islam for South Park-lovin Muslims . Oh and I loved the two episodes. Matt and Trey's take on Family Guy was so true. I think my taste for Family Guy has soured as I'm sure it the same has happened for many other people.

[IBleedBurgundy&Gold1369225669]

yusuf, as part of the arguments, you mention allowing adult content/language and other stuff on "public television". frankly, i don't think that should be censored, but rather people should use this new invention called the Vchip that will block out programs of certain ratings. if you don't want kids watching it, set your Vchip. if you don't have a Vchip, (i think most new TVs do) try actually parenting your kids yourself instead of asking the government to do it for you.

your comment on kiddie porn doesn't even apply since that is illegal reguardless of its broadcast.

I have to disagree.Porn is already all over the place.Maybee there's not easy access to it on TV but if any kid has the internet he or she could masterbate till they could masterbate no more. As much as you talk about porrn your not even legally old enough to buy it.:laugh: Not saying I wasn't watching at a young age.lol

[Giants13]

I understand precisely where you're coming from G13, and I think we largely agree. However, IMO, there is no actual causal relationship between images of Mohammed and the execution of innocent civilians. I see things that could potentially offend me almost every day.

When I see an American flag burned, it infurates me more than just about anything else. However, if I choose to go out and commit murder based on those feelings, I am 100% responsible.

The idea that Comedy Central would be in any way responsible is like blaming the kid walking down the street for "tempting" the child molester. I realize that's an extreme example, but this is an extreme case.

(Like I said, I do understand that you're not saying CC would be responsible for the potential violence had they aired the images. I'm taking it a step further and saying they'd have NO responsibility.)

I hear ya Hog, I think we're both in the same ballpark on this. Good exchange of info with this topic.