Depiction of Muhammad?
- Thread starter Gunjack65
- Start date
Recommended Videos
They threaten because it works. Each time someone backs down they gain more power.
The Muslim extremists may think that they are winning a war of terror, but they are cultivating an anglo world to despise them just as much as they purport to despise us. And we have bigger guns. The world hasn't seen total war conducted with modern weapons in almost sixty years, "With great power comes great responsibility" and all that. The muslim extremists are trying very very hard to break that streak.
Unfortunately, as a race, we can no longer afford a total war. Two first world countries would devastate the planet, and a first world country vs a 3rd would be a premeditated genocide on a scale that would take the human psyche generations to recover from, if it didn't incite something bigger.
My point is, I think everyone loses here. You can't escalate, even when the other guy is obviously willing to, but there is only so long you can turn the other cheek. I think we are about at the point now where anti-muslim zealots will begin to inflict civillian casualties on a large scale. There have been small scale domestic incidents, and at least one thwarted "one man war" that I know about. This will only vindicate the extremists and draw more to their cause and then we're probably past the point of no return.
They are playing a very dangerous game, for all of us.
The Muslim extremists may think that they are winning a war of terror, but they are cultivating an anglo world to despise them just as much as they purport to despise us. And we have bigger guns. The world hasn't seen total war conducted with modern weapons in almost sixty years, "With great power comes great responsibility" and all that. The muslim extremists are trying very very hard to break that streak.
Unfortunately, as a race, we can no longer afford a total war. Two first world countries would devastate the planet, and a first world country vs a 3rd would be a premeditated genocide on a scale that would take the human psyche generations to recover from, if it didn't incite something bigger.
My point is, I think everyone loses here. You can't escalate, even when the other guy is obviously willing to, but there is only so long you can turn the other cheek. I think we are about at the point now where anti-muslim zealots will begin to inflict civillian casualties on a large scale. There have been small scale domestic incidents, and at least one thwarted "one man war" that I know about. This will only vindicate the extremists and draw more to their cause and then we're probably past the point of no return.
They are playing a very dangerous game, for all of us.
I'm personally sickened by anyone who would censor for reasons like these.
The thing is, terrorists have never been a true threat. Only to very small groups compared to the vast numbers we have. Don't forget that the most successful terrorist act ever launched against the United States involved box cutters.
The only way terrorists even hope to have power is in their name: to scare people into taking backwards actions out of fear.
South Park made a point of how ludicrous the extremist Muslim populace was in it's determination to force the world at large to adhere to THEIR religion's laws. There's a scene in episode 200-201 where Jesus suddenly starts snorting coke. No Christian had a problem with this, or at least not to the point where they couldn't take a joke or have some thick skin. But oh, even MENTION their precious prophet (a prophet, mind you, which is still merely a man) and there are death threats and flag-burning.
And the reason for that is extremism and theocratic dictatorships. Under these nations, the laws in their Quran are the laws of the land, and reinforced under penalty of death. To BLASPHEME is to lose citizenship and even face execution. Under this environment, they are taught that their way of life is the only way of life, and that anyone who disobeys the "will of Allah" is an infidel, who's head will be repeatedly split open by an angel's hammer and stung over and over again by an incredibly venomous scorpion in the grave.
Point being, you can't blame or change these people until their environment allows for the slightest semblance of free-thought, but it also proves why theocracies don't work, and why separation of church and state is essential in modern government. And why making exceptions to freedom of speech, expression and religion for any reason is non-negotiable. If we allows fears of their reprisal to scare us into surrendering ANY of our freedoms, then we have allowed terrorism to do exactly what it has intended.
The fact is, no amount of security or safety is worth ANY of our freedoms being infringed upon. We must be uncompromising, we must stand firm by what we believe. For the cowardice of Comedy Central, I feel "Draw Muhammad Day" was an ideal statement to the theocratic Muslim world. We told them, "nobody is immune to satire or criticism; DEAL with it, better yourselves, or don't cry when we exercise out rights".
I think it was another man who seems to despise Jews just as much as the Muslims who once held aloft a sword and said "They may take our lives, but they'll never take OUR FREEDOM!"
I don't like that guy much personally, but there are few truths truer than that line.
The thing is, terrorists have never been a true threat. Only to very small groups compared to the vast numbers we have. Don't forget that the most successful terrorist act ever launched against the United States involved box cutters.
The only way terrorists even hope to have power is in their name: to scare people into taking backwards actions out of fear.
South Park made a point of how ludicrous the extremist Muslim populace was in it's determination to force the world at large to adhere to THEIR religion's laws. There's a scene in episode 200-201 where Jesus suddenly starts snorting coke. No Christian had a problem with this, or at least not to the point where they couldn't take a joke or have some thick skin. But oh, even MENTION their precious prophet (a prophet, mind you, which is still merely a man) and there are death threats and flag-burning.
And the reason for that is extremism and theocratic dictatorships. Under these nations, the laws in their Quran are the laws of the land, and reinforced under penalty of death. To BLASPHEME is to lose citizenship and even face execution. Under this environment, they are taught that their way of life is the only way of life, and that anyone who disobeys the "will of Allah" is an infidel, who's head will be repeatedly split open by an angel's hammer and stung over and over again by an incredibly venomous scorpion in the grave.
Point being, you can't blame or change these people until their environment allows for the slightest semblance of free-thought, but it also proves why theocracies don't work, and why separation of church and state is essential in modern government. And why making exceptions to freedom of speech, expression and religion for any reason is non-negotiable. If we allows fears of their reprisal to scare us into surrendering ANY of our freedoms, then we have allowed terrorism to do exactly what it has intended.
The fact is, no amount of security or safety is worth ANY of our freedoms being infringed upon. We must be uncompromising, we must stand firm by what we believe. For the cowardice of Comedy Central, I feel "Draw Muhammad Day" was an ideal statement to the theocratic Muslim world. We told them, "nobody is immune to satire or criticism; DEAL with it, better yourselves, or don't cry when we exercise out rights".
I think it was another man who seems to despise Jews just as much as the Muslims who once held aloft a sword and said "They may take our lives, but they'll never take OUR FREEDOM!"
I don't like that guy much personally, but there are few truths truer than that line.
So it's okay to depict Muhammed nowadays because we have freedom of speech? Sounds like all that research served you well.
What the heck does the U.S. Constitution have to do with it? What does "okay" even mean?
There are millions of Christians who fume at the sort of culture that allows that, and lament how far their civilization has fallen from the days of yore. But most of them belong to liberal societies, and the insulting depiction of their savior was created by fellow members of that society, rather than foreigners who have had troops in their countries for several hundred years.
There's no magic border line that reads "You have to be at least this religious to go batshit insane over nothing." And there's noting unique about Muslims' sense of humor. What there is, is a constant state of politicized hypersensitivity, equating perceived disrespect on the part of 'West' with the almost uninterrupted progress of imperialist emasculation of the Muslim world by military and economic means. And hardcore Muslims are just as upset at the way their religious and cultural preferences get treated in their societies as many Christians are about school prayer. (Can't you go six hours without praying? Yes, but that's not the point.) And regarding the aforementioned disrespect, it's not about cartoonists' jokes so much as decades of outright slander on Arabs by Hollywood and popular culture at large. And before anyone brings up Russians and Germans, how many Russians and Germans were killed by Americans and American-made weapons today?
What the heck does the U.S. Constitution have to do with it? What does "okay" even mean?
Yeah, right.
There are millions of Christians who fume at the sort of culture that allows that, and lament how far their civilization has fallen from the days of yore. But most of them belong to liberal societies, and the insulting depiction of their savior was created by fellow members of that society, rather than foreigners who have had troops in their countries for several hundred years.
There's no magic border line that reads "You have to be at least this religious to go batshit insane over nothing." And there's noting unique about Muslims' sense of humor. What there is, is a constant state of politicized hypersensitivity, equating perceived disrespect on the part of 'West' with the almost uninterrupted progress of imperialist emasculation of the Muslim world by military and economic means. And hardcore Muslims are just as upset at the way their religious and cultural preferences get treated in their societies as many Christians are about school prayer. (Can't you go six hours without praying? Yes, but that's not the point.) And regarding the aforementioned disrespect, it's not about cartoonists' jokes so much as decades of outright slander on Arabs by Hollywood and popular culture at large. And before anyone brings up Russians and Germans, how many Russians and Germans were killed by Americans and American-made weapons today?
It wasn't the creators of Southpark, or rather creative creators, like the writers, who wanted it censored, it was the whole bloody network. The director was saddened by the fact that they were not allowed to show Muhammad, despite him appearing in other episodes. (Remember the Super Best Friends?)Gunjack65 said:
At any rate, Muhammad should be allowed to be shown.
Except the word is from another character system so it doesnt really matter how you spell it. Much like Quran/Koran.katsumoto03 said:
Originally I planned to be a bit confrotationalist about this issue and just show a completely non-offensive picture of Mohammed. just of him, standing/sitting without any implications of negativity towards the image... But one search of google images later and I see that... well... there is a severe lack of decent portrays of the Prophet of the muslim faith... I now understand why there is such an outcry from the islamic community... For shame Human race... For shame...
But you know what I did find one and If I wasn't fearless about this then I wouldn't be who I am!
THERE he is doing nothing wrong. He is sitting and talking to Gabriel... Nothing bad about this image.
So in short. YES These lame, rude and slightly offensive drawings of Mohamed suck ass. You may get angry at that.
However this peaceful and neutral image of him just sitting is nothing! So anyone offended by that may... In the words of Christ "Suck my ass"
But you know what I did find one and If I wasn't fearless about this then I wouldn't be who I am!
THERE he is doing nothing wrong. He is sitting and talking to Gabriel... Nothing bad about this image.
So in short. YES These lame, rude and slightly offensive drawings of Mohamed suck ass. You may get angry at that.
However this peaceful and neutral image of him just sitting is nothing! So anyone offended by that may... In the words of Christ "Suck my ass"
Hey look, its Mohammed. ------------> \('_')/
Now that I got that of my chest, to be honest I just ignore the whole situation, im not going to ask Islam to explain why we cant depict Mohammed as I just don't question religion as the responses you get usually make my sigh.
Now that I got that of my chest, to be honest I just ignore the whole situation, im not going to ask Islam to explain why we cant depict Mohammed as I just don't question religion as the responses you get usually make my sigh.
Emphasis added.Nieroshai said:
I find this position to be, as written, extremely offensive.
Rights should not be only allowed only based on the rights of others.
Either EVERYONE has rights or NOBODY has rights. It's not "if I get it, you can have it too", because that so easily becomes "if I don't get it, YOU can't have it either!"
Of course, as I mentioned at the beginning, you might not have meant to say this, but the way that it is written... offensive to the extreme to any supporter of free speech.
Yeah. Because the cartoonists who parodied the prophet didn't receive death threats. And an embassy wasn't blown up. And australian tourists weren't murdered.fare777 said:
Oh, wait.
Yes they were.
All as a reaction to a FUCKING CARTOON!!!
The reason people don't slag Islam, while they are allowed to slag anything else, is because of genuine, and justified, fear.
Not of Muslims in general, obv. Just the psychos. Although, the vast majority of Muslim leaders didn't condemn these actions.
Just saying.
Two points,katsumoto03 said:
Only adherants of a religion have to obey that religion's laws. That is the very baseline of not just freedom of speech, but religious freedom. By forcing others to boey your laws, you are forceing them to adhere to your religion.
Its not polite to depict Mohammed, any more than it is polite to Christians to see the messaih dunked in piss. But the answer is to lobby and protest peacefully. Although I will note, whenever Christians protest against this sort of thing, it's taken to be a sign of a coming theocracy. By way of comparission, I do not believe you should depict Christ in such a way, but I firmly believe that you should be allowed to. That is, probably the most reasonable tact for the Muslim community to take.
Now as to the continued claims of steriotypes, the studio was threatened by a group, called, if I recall, revolution Muslim, the threat was of physical harm or even death. At no point in this thread has anyone claimed that all Muslims are like this, or even that it is the norm. What has been said is that there exists a worrying subset of the Islamic faith who are willing to do violence upon others for using their basic human rights, the right to free speech, the right to religious freedom, the right to live without fear of harm.
I do not see how that can be a controversial statement. I do not see how that is steriotypical or racist. What I do see is an insultingly dismissive attitude from those crying 'racist' or 'religious descrimination' which does not get into the core of the issue. And in fact, I believe that it is insulting to Muslims as well.
Muhammed didn't want to be drawn and as it was the wishes of their deity they follow it, imagine it as though jesus said you couldn't show him in a bad ligth, south park woulv'e been protested day and night if they showed jesus how they do now, it's a deity preference.
I say we just nuke all the fucktards....and by nuke I mean kill out right and by fuck tards I mean terrorists
Yes, but this is the English spelling. Using characters from the alphabet that we use.A Pious Cultist said: