Charlie Hebdo

[Jamie123]

OK - I take this back - I've found the thread on this topic now on General Discussion

 

(For what it's worth this was my original post:

 

I was interested to see that nobody has yet posted anything on this part of the forum about the terrorist attack in Paris, or its bloody aftermath (murder of police, the seige, shooting of hostages, and finally of the terrorists themselves).

 

There's been little else in the newspapers here in England for the past week.

 

Two possibilities spring to mind:

• Events in Europe don't impinge much on this community, which (with a few exceptions such as Funkytown) tends to centre on the USA.

• The original attack was precipitated by people "criticizing other people's religion", something the LDS (in theory at least) consider bad, and consequently there is an unstated feeling that these cartoonists (to some extent at least) "had it coming", but since no one would be heartless enough to say this outloud, silence has been regarded as golden.

Any thoughts?

 

My thoughts are mostly with those mourning the loss of friends and family - many of whom were just ordinary people who had nothing to do with any religious satirizing. As for the magazine staff, they must have known they were poking a hornets' nest. The French have made heroes of them for paying the ultimate sacrifice for free speech. I agree - freedoms were never won without cost - but I also wonder if there's something to be said for "discretion" being "the better part of valour".)

Edited January 13, 2015 by Jamie123

[Vort]

• People come onto LDS.net to talk about LDS matters and light topics, not usually to talk about world topics or heavy news items that dominate the headlines.
• The Charlie Hedbo disaster leads to a conflict in the minds of many Mormons. On the one hand, it's undisguised murder, as reprehensible as tongue can tell. On the other hand, few Mormons will be willing to proclaim "Je suis Charlie Hedbo" any more than they would say "Je suis Vladimir Putin" or "Je suis Playboy magazine". So how does one convey sorrow and outrage for the murder without implicitly providing solidarity for the cause in which the murdered were engaged and, truth be told, for which they were murdered?

But Americans are famously self-interested. I am sure your point about the terrorism taking place overseas does indeed play some part in explaining why a mostly American discussion list such as this one has scarcely any mention of the event.

[Jamie123]

Thanks for the reply Vort - it's good to hear from you :)

 

The Charlie Hedbo disaster leads to a conflict in the minds of many Mormons. On the one hand, it's undisguised murder, as reprehensible as tongue can tell. On the other hand, few Mormons will be willing to proclaim "Je suis Charlie Hedbo" any more than they would say "Je suis Vladimir Putin" or "Je suis Playboy magazine". So how does one convey sorrow and outrage for the murder without implicitly providing solidarity for the cause in which the murdered were engaged and, truth be told, for which they were murdered?

 

 

This is sort-of what I was driving at in my second point. Sometimes saying that someone has been wronged (or even misquoted) while at the same time not appearing to support what that person stands/stood for is often a very narrow bridge to cross.

 

You can of course quote Voltaire about something like "you are wrong but I defend to the death your right to say it" (I forget the exact quote) - but that gets old very quickly.

Edited January 13, 2015 by Jamie123

[estradling75]

Thanks for the reply Vort - it's good to hear from you :)

 

 

This is sort-of what I was driving at in my second point. Sometimes saying that someone has been wronged (or even misquoted) while at the same time not appearing to support what that person stands/stood for is often a very narrow bridge to cross.

 

You can of course quote Voltaire about something like "you are wrong but I defend to the death your right to say it" (I forget the exact quote) - but that gets old very quickly.

 

 

It gets old.... and people do not believe it anyways.

 

Even the most carefully phrased rebuke of the murders will draw down accusations that we embrace everything about the victims... Even if we didn't really care for the victims actions or cause 

[FunkyTown]

If you want to know if people in the LDS community agree violence against those who mock or criticize religion, look at the huge backlash against the South Park creators.

Obviously, they're still walking around. Matt Parker and Trey Stone have not been shot despite writing 'The Book of Mormon: The Musical'.

In the end, God wins. Their mocking doesn't mean anything.

Edited January 13, 2015 by FunkyTown

[Just_A_Guy]

Jamie123, it's good to hear from you!

[Jamie123]

If you want to know if people in the LDS community agree violence against those who mock or criticize religion, look at the huge backlash against the South Park creators.

Obviously, they're still walking around. Matt Parker and Trey Stone have not been shot despite writing 'The Book of Mormon: The Musical'.

In the end, God wins. Their mocking doesn't mean anything.

 

LOL - I don't think anyone has ever confused Mormons with Islamic terrorists! (Well, not in the past century anyhow!)

 

On the other hand though, one of the South Park creators (I can't remember if it was Parker or Stone) has said he has an admiration for Mormonism, and considers it to be one of the better religions. If you ever saw the episode "All About the Mormons" - although it's mocking of Smith, it portrays the modern Mormons quite positively. In the end it is Stan who is made to look petty for trying to undermine them.

Edited January 13, 2015 by Jamie123

[Jamie123]

Jamie123, it's good to hear from you!

Good to hear from you too! Holidays went well I hope?

[Guest]

Maybe it's like 2 bullies beating each other up on the school yard.  It's interesting to see but not interesting enough to talk about unless you can pin an agenda to it.  Maybe.

 

What's really sad to me about all of this is that all the talk surrounds the Muslim religion instead of the culture of that region that is more the problem.  It's like talking about Jews - there's the Jewish culture and there's the Jewish religion... two different things... so that people - like my husband even - tend to condemn the Muslim religion instead of the culture of the Muslims in that region.  It leads to stupid cartoon caricatures insulting the deeply held faith of billions of people.

 

I see it differently than my husband because I experience the same thing with Filipino Catholics.  There are some really wacky stuff Filipino Catholics do in the name of the religion that is more a product of the culture than the religion.  When you live in the predominantly Catholic Philippines and has not experienced life outside it, it's hard to separate the culture from the religion.

[Just_A_Guy]

Good to hear from you too! Holidays went well I hope?

 

Indeed; thanks.

 

I keep hearing about how Parker & Stone are positive towards Mormonism, and how The Book of Mormon Musical is actually a love letter to Mormons.

 

I'm skeptical.  The fact is that Broadway has in fact written a bona fide love letter to a religious group.  It was entitled Fiddler on the Roof, and it was nothing like The Book of Mormon Musical.

 

It strikes me that Parker and Stone are out for nothing so much as cheap laughs--and while they build to a warm-fuzzy ending, the fact is that they've spent the preceding two hours laughing at us; not with us.

Edited January 13, 2015 by Just_A_Guy

[Vort]

The very idea that Stone and Parker's work is meant affectionately is itself laughable. They can justify themselves however they see fit, but you're a fool to believe them.

[Guest]

Indeed; thanks.

 

I keep hearing about how Parker & Stone are positive towards Mormonism, and how The Book of Mormon Musical is actually a love letter to Mormons.

 

I'm skeptical.  The fact is that Broadway has in fact written a bona fide love letter to a religious group.  It was entitled Fiddler on the Roof, and it was nothing like The Book of Mormon Musical.

 

It strikes me that Parker and Stone are out for nothing so much as cheap laughs--and while they build to a warm-fuzzy ending, the fact is that they've spent the preceding two hours laughing at us; not with us.

 

 

The very idea that Stone and Parker's work is meant affectionately is itself laughable. They can justify themselves however they see fit, but you're a fool to believe them.

 

But then, what else can we expect from Parker and Stone?  We all know they make their living out of these types of comical satire.  Their claim of this being a "love letter to Mormons" coming from this duo has to be viewed in the context of satire - not only is the musical a satire, their claim that it's a love letter is also a satire..  This would be much much different if it came from Pat Robinson.  Now that, we can take seriously and try to engage in a discussion.

[PolarVortex]

If you want to read a love letter to Mormons, may I suggest the book To Mormons, With Love by Chrisy Ross.  The Kindle edition is less than $4.

 

It's about a nice non-LDS lady who moves into a deeply LDS part of Utah and watches worlds collide.  I thought it was very funny, and I learned a lot about Utah Mormons.

 

(DIsclaimer: I am not the author of this book and do not receive any money from book sales.)

[mirkwood]

 

Any thoughts?

 

 

 

These type of attacks will come to America. 

[Latter-Day Marriage]

I liked what this blogger said...

http://thewhitestonelds.blogspot.ca/2015/01/dear-charlie-hebdo.html

[The Folk Prophet]

it portrays the modern Mormons quite positively.

 

This, of course, is only true if you believe that making millions of people look like nothing more than extremely naive and gullible dupes who are, nevertheless, nice, is portraying them positively.

[Traveler]

OK - I take this back - I've found the thread on this topic now on General Discussion

 

(For what it's worth this was my original post:

 

I was interested to see that nobody has yet posted anything on this part of the forum about the terrorist attack in Paris, or its bloody aftermath (murder of police, the seige, shooting of hostages, and finally of the terrorists themselves).

 

There's been little else in the newspapers here in England for the past week.

 

Two possibilities spring to mind:

• Events in Europe don't impinge much on this community, which (with a few exceptions such as Funkytown) tends to centre on the USA.

• The original attack was precipitated by people "criticizing other people's religion", something the LDS (in theory at least) consider bad, and consequently there is an unstated feeling that these cartoonists (to some extent at least) "had it coming", but since no one would be heartless enough to say this outloud, silence has been regarded as golden.

Any thoughts?

 

My thoughts are mostly with those mourning the loss of friends and family - many of whom were just ordinary people who had nothing to do with any religious satirizing. As for the magazine staff, they must have known they were poking a hornets' nest. The French have made heroes of them for paying the ultimate sacrifice for free speech. I agree - freedoms were never won without cost - but I also wonder if there's something to be said for "discretion" being "the better part of valour".)

 

Brigham Young once said that it takes a fool be be offended when no offense was intended but it takes a much bigger fool to be offended when offense was intended.  Most of us realize that making fun of things sacred to others is never a wise thing to do.  But to my Muslim friends that think something ought to be done to those that offend sacred things.  The circulation of the magazine prior to the attack was around 60 thousand.  The last I heard - over 2 million copies of the most recent publication have been sold. Sometimes it is not wise to draw attention to things one may believe ought to be left alone.  The whole incident is so wrong on so many levels - it is hard to believe that G-d had any hand in such events - one way or the other; to bring about such a unneeded mess and anger on so many levels. 

Edited January 29, 2015 by Traveler