Does Denmark have civil law that bans making humour of religion?
116259
Denmark doesnt knows how to respect each others...\nof course NOT !!
345915
No, but I think religion should be a personal practice and have NOTHING to do with the government at all. Until that happens, yes it should be repressed from all governmental function.
397466
This called tradition... and then you can't omit everything, because that means anti-religion not just secularism.\n\nhaving some symbols that came from christianity or islam or judiasm or buddhism is not matter...but the matter is that you don't discriminate others or you establish a specific religion over others. or you restrain one or more.\n\nbut I agree, there are many things that makes no sense should be omitted like the necessity for oath or swearing in court... but you know it became tradition...\nthe year, hard to change and harmful to change it.
192860
Its matter of respect thats all....\n\nAs the prophet Muhammad p.b.u.h asked us to beleive and reaspct all others religions and thier prophets ... \n\nislam asked us to not be funny at any religion or their prophets so how about our prophet .\n\nso whom did thes funny cartoon ..they didnt show respect for about 1 billion and half muslim...even they know how our prophet means to us .\n\nand there is diffrent between clear ur opinion by free of speach and make funny of somthing u know already its will HURT others . \n\nSO WHY THERE AT THEIR COUNTRY ANY ONE MAKE FUNNY OF THE HOLOCAUST THEY STOP HIM ??? and they send him to jail as they did for alots b4 .\n\nand this what GAT_WAY meant and im sure he didnt try saying it just to make respect for this issue ..bcs some got hurt from it ... but seem alots dont show respect for others as we do for others .\n\nSo its matter of respect and not hurt any one feelings . but think whom did thats he meant to hurt us .. \n\nand i agree with whom said thats not all the denmarkens making funny .. and im sure many of them ,agree its not good and thats hurt others ...but some littel of them have hate for islam and muslims so they do thes things ... and im sure they have thats hate just without any reason more than thats they just hate muslims and dont understand what islam its ...\n\nand by the way ,we dont care if they like us or hate us ... we care just for one thing THATS SHOW RESPECT TO OUR RELIGION AS WE DO FOR THEM AND THIER RELIGIONS & BELIVES .
56569
Yemenis Scholars Condemns Denmark Abuses against Prophet\n\nSANA'A -- Yemen Scholars Association and Yemeni Journalists Syndicate (YJS) strongly condemned the publication of cartoons which depict Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in an insulting way by a Danish newspaper, according to a report by the Yemen News Agency (Saba) Monday.\n\nThe YJS asked the Danish Journalists Syndicate to promptly interfere to solve this sensitive case and attacks against Islam under the pretext of freedom of expression.\n\nhttp://www.yobserver.com
167971
1) Muslims are angry that while any criticism/joking about jews is often labeled anti-Semitic and quickly censored (it's illegal to question any aspect of the Holocaust in many European countries), the same countries are defending these cartoons as "freedom of speech".\n\n2) Many Muslims incorrectly believe that the Danish press, like theirs, is controlled by the state. Therefore, they see the cartoons as being sponsored and encouraged by the Danish government.\n\nPersonally, I disagree with them, and believe that \nAs for Christian outrage, look what NBC did with Will & Grace (Cruci-fixin), as well as how "The Book of Daniel" got axed.\n\nWe need to educate these people about the concepts of freedom, that people may say stuff you don't like, that's no reason to burn stuff.
644376
"If you can't say something nice, don't say anything"? \n\nSee now that should be a religion.
377915
Absolutely.  It's funny that Christians call it persecution when they are forced to obey the law.  No other religion gets to put up their commandments in the courthouses, but block the Christian 10 commandments suddenly it's persecution!\n\nOur country was not founded on any god, it was founded on the Constitution.  The consitution has an amendment barring Congress from making any law that respects the establishment of religion.\n\n[edit] for the person below who mistakenly thinks the constitution allows establishement of religion:\n\n"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."\n\ncongress cannot do anything that even touches on establishement of religion.
150611
the constitution has provision to keep the government out of the church... but this regulates only the government's role in religion, this does not address the attitude that is tolerance and mass attitudes toward a particular religion-- of course hate crimes are illegal but beyond that the government is to stay out of faith, this may be more apparant in the writings of the founders than the constitution
158156
yes they aren't funny at all.\nit seems the only reason af publishing them, is this situation:\n\nhere they are:\nhttp://www.di2.nu/files/Muhammed_Cartoons_Jyllands_Posten.html
982597
Turkey doesn't allow freedom of religious expression or association. To join the EU they would have to agree to abide by the EU charter which mandates such freedom. Article 301 basically makes it illegal to convert from Islam to another faith.
1082459
They've banned major religious symbols in general, I believe, in places such as public schools and government buildings. So a Jewish man can't wear a kippah, Christians can't wear giant crosses, etc. And I think it's to help prevent discrimination in the work place, but I disagree.
777437
I certainly can, in our civil society religion shouldn't matter.  In fact however, it does and I prefer to know not so much the religion but how devout the politician is--the more devout, the less I like them because the more likely they are to let their religion color their decisions.  I don't want anybody forcing their religion or the implicit results of their religion on me.
926659
Yes.You are christian.You are not supposed to have a sense of humour
85824
The problem is in Danish government which is don't has any politic man who can prevent this tension in relation between 1,000,000,000 muslim and Danish people .\nsecond point is who draw this carton has no enough knowledge in history because if you knew who is Mouhammed you will respect him . \nthird point the problem in freedom because everything in this world has limit no one in this world can talk in everything so you have to respect muslim as the muslim people respect you but the strange thing is how  is this come from Danish people because they are a nice  people . \nhow is the drawer do something like this drew carton about somebody who they didn't know ?Now this is my message to the West: \n\n\n\nThere exists a cultural vagueness in the West. This vagueness results from the presence of two different concepts. The first is a great Western concept that we respect, appraise, and need. That concept is freedom of speech. This is a great humane and civilized concept. On the other hand, there is the great Islamic concept of dignifying Allah’s Messenger (SAWS). The problem arises due to the lack of understanding of the Islamic Civilization and the Western Civilization regarding these two concepts. The non-Muslims cannot value the rank of dignifying the Prophet (SAWS). On the other hand, due to the below-average quality of practical application of freedom of speech, Muslims have a vague understanding of the concept of respecting freedom of speech. \n\n\n\nAccordingly, what is required now? We do not want to refuse the concept of freedom of speech, absolutely not. However, the West should alter the freedom of speech so that it does not collide with the very important Islamic value of dignifying the Prophet (SAWS). Here lies the vagueness and ambiguity. The West understands very well the freedom of speech (which we appreciate) but it does not understand Islamic values, such as dignifying the Prophet (SAWS) and other Islamic sanctities. This is where the Western cultural vagueness lies.\n\n\n\nI clearly say to the West, you have a problem. You cannot comprehend how much the Muslims love Prophet Muhammad (SAWS). You are still unable to understand this point. If you had really encompassed its significance, you would never have accepted what happened. The West, in general, governments and people, does not apprehend that Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) is dearer to us than our parents, dearer to me than my father and dearer than my mother. I am sure that any Muslim woman listening to me now, be her religious or not, will swear on that fact. Just ask, what does Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) mean to you? It is not even necessary to do that because it is so evident, but you may conduct surveys for yourselves, and you will realize how true what I am saying is. Ask any youth, be he heedless or pious; ask any Muslim anywhere, in Bangladesh, Pakistan, Yemen or in Egypt. Ask any Muslim in any village regardless of how religious he is, be he an obedient Muslim or not, a drug user or not, successful in his life or a failure, old or young, ask them, what does Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) mean to you?\n\n\n\nO West, I affirm that Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) is dearer to all Muslims than their own parents. O West, Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) is dearer to us, Muslims, than our children and grandchildren. O West, Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) is dearer to us than our money, dearer to us than our own selves. He is dearer to us than our own countries. O Egyptian, who is dearer to you, Egypt or Allah’s Prophet? O Saudi, who is dearer to you, Saudi Arabia or Allah’s Prophet? O Yemeni, O Moroccan, O Algerian, who is dearer to you, your country or Allah’s Messenger (SAWS)? O West, comprehend that meaning, Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) is dearer to Muslims than their children and their own selves.\n\n\n\nWe can never forget the hadith that I repeatedly mentioned during the episodes of “On the Path of the Beloved”. O West, listen to this hadith[11] as it form
700895
Yes and no (although Mosque and state would be more appropriate).  I would say it's more of a hybrid.\n\nBangladesh's originial constitution of 1971 established it as a secular republic.  Since then, two successive military governments have ammended the constitution to make Islam the state religion.  None of the 3 democraticaly elected governments rolled back these ammendments.\n\nIn practice, most laws are secular.  There are some notable exceptions including:\n     1. Difficulty in obtaining alcohol.  Only select clubs, hotels, and associations may legally serve it (you can also buy it in the Airport duty free).  In reality, it's readily available in the black market, and not enforced for private occasions.\n     2. Certain portions of the Islamic code apply for inheritance.   Individuals have the right to opt out.  Religious minorities are exempt.\n     3. The blasphemy law is enforced on occasion (highly politicized).  Interestingly, it's a carry over of British common law from the colonial days, but I mention it since it is currently use to suppress publications deemed un-Islamic.  The courts have the right to overturn judgements and have done so.
891162
The important thing is not whether religions or Gods are right.  It is that people have the freedom to believe and worship what and how they wish.\n\nSadly most religions then spoil this freedom by trying to preach and dictate to those who do not share their beliefs.   The day cannot be far away when this practice may be made unlawful.\n\nIn the UK there is a law of harassment which could conceivably be used against persistent religious pushers.