"Everybody Draw Mohammed Day." (May 20th)

[Telstra]

I love how gays demand respect and acceptance, and won't stand for insults against themselves, but are so quick to insult an entire other group of people.

Always hypocritical I guess.

One group say it is NOT an insult and the other group say it is an insult.
Who is right ??

its like the god debate really ...
The group who threaten violence is always wrong !!!

 

[Apollo]

I won't kill you if you insult me...in fact I've yet to meet a radical gay faction that resorts to killing (except for self-defense).

Nor does all of the islamic faith. Drawing a thousand pictures of muhammed won't just insult and anger the radicals, it will anger all of them. And all that will do is breed more radicals, and more terrorist. Making the job of governments harder to keep people safe. Because you want to be stupid and racist.

 

[Apollo]

One group say it is NOT an insult and the other group say it is an insult.
Who is right ??

its like the god debate really ...
The group who threaten violence is always wrong !!!

There are no two groups. It is an insult. The Qu'ran clearly says that no depiction of Mohammed shall be drawn. I mean, do you want a broadway play or something?

 

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

I love how gays demand respect and acceptance, and won't stand for insults against themselves, but are so quick to insult an entire other group of people.

Always hypocritical I guess.

maybe a theys of POWER introduce new word fa people instead gay bi straight so it let um enjoy all da other joys world got offer um at other expense of course

so ya like me dress up as gay unemployed rock star ya not like and wear red riding hoods shoes cause ya
! Yeah !
dat be 2 and 6 please

 

[Telstra]

There are no two groups. It is an insult. The Qu'ran clearly says that no depiction of Mohammed shall be drawn. I mean, do you want a broadway play or something?

And the Qu'rin (my own holy book) clearly say put your head in the sand.
Would you do that for me so that not to insult me ?

 

[spooger]

The name is originally written in the Arabic alphabet, not the Latin alphabet. Transliteration is never exact, so there are often variations in "English" spellings of Arabic words.

... marry me ... NOW dammit ... you've got to have a tricky tongue if you can say all that !!! ..

 

[rareboy]

There are no two groups. It is an insult. The Qu'ran clearly says that no depiction of Mohammed shall be drawn. I mean, do you want a broadway play or something?

Jesus H. Buddha

What is the fucking problem.

In early Islam there were iconophiles and iconoclasts. Just like in Christianity.

The proscription against figurative art is not specifically about Mohammed in the Koran.

Once again. Pictures of the islamic prophet exist. In the Ottoman empire there was a rich tradition of portrait and animal art.

It is the Wahhabi sect that has gone all pretzel shaped about this. Every Muslim does not necessarily have the same issues with it, so for the love of god, please stop saying they do.

And when all islamic states outlaw the depiction in any poster, photo, painting or sculpture of their religious and political leaders, then we won't have to continually point out the hypocrisy of the position about representational imagery.

Certainly some Jubbers here have made their own positions clear. Mikami, Red Rubber Ball and Paws have managed to debase the discussion. Well done.

Puzzuzu made the point very eloquently. When the fundamentalist Islamists, or anyone for that matter insult and persecute gays, the difference is, we don't threaten them with death. We're stronger than that.

The constant threat of death to anyone who disagrees with any tenet of one of the world's many religions has become tiresome. It only underscores the spiritual and intellectual weakness of the adherents who make these threats. These little men, who are so impotent. This isn't about insulting Mohammed. It is about insulting them and their narrow, misogynist, ignorant view of the wide world. And being threatened that unless the whole world bends, the terrorists will increase.

Well fuck that. Reality check. Unless fundamentalism in any religion and political system is crushed, the whole world will be controlled by terrorists, whether they're Baptist rapturists, Islamists, Zionist extremists, North Korean communists or Afghani tribal factions

Enough. Enough. Enough.

I've got my paintbox at the ready.

 

[Puzuzzu]

Nor does all of the islamic faith. Drawing a thousand pictures of muhammed won't just insult and anger the radicals, it will anger all of them. And all that will do is breed more radicals, and more terrorist. Making the job of governments harder to keep people safe. Because you want to be stupid and racist.

Did I say all Muslims want to kill me? I can do whatever I wish (As long as I don't harm anyone directly, or Indirectly), and not even 1 has the right to threaten my life.
This is about fundamental rights, not only Muslims. I won't stand to have my voice taken away for whatever reason.

 

[Telstra]

one of the main teachings about the desert religions is "do not worship idols".

For some reason they mis-understood the meaning completely and it becomes "do not draw/create images of Mohammad" This is just plain plagiarism from the original religion.

I have heard one of the Dutch mayor (she is a Muslim, her parents from Morocco) described "radical extremists" as serial killers ...

 

[saymyname]

I love how gays demand respect and acceptance, and won't stand for insults against themselves, but are so quick to insult an entire other group of people.

Always hypocritical I guess.

Haha, you have to be fucking kidding. The equivalent of this would be to say that we will kill anyone who doesn't agree that anal sex is the bees knees. There's a difference between respect and acceptance and threatening to KILL PEOPLE over drawing your make believe imaginary friend. Why should we tolerate the intolerant?

 

[saymyname]

If anyone should be participating in and supporting this event, it's the NON-EXTREMIST MUSLIMS THEMSELVES! Everytime a religious extremist acts out, be it Christian or Muslims, the so-called non-extremists NEVER DO ANYTHING TO SHOW THAT IT'S NOT IN THEIR NAME! Guess who is then making it permissible! YOU!!! You fucking cowards sit their on your hands and complain about how your entire religion is being tarnished because of a "few extremists," well guess what, they're people of YOUR faith, and they just happen to be the loudest, so maybe you should grow a pair and do something to protect free speech and free expression, you fucking cowards.

 

[Telstra]

Expressing disrespect and hatred towards a whole religion because of the actions of a few people?

Shameful and disgusting.

When you try to tell me I'm being hypocritical or attempt to justify this cause, just know that I'm not going to debate blatant abhorrence.

Use your experiences as a minority that's constantly ridiculed and have some compassion for your fellow human.

Absolutely disgusting.

And yes, I'm looking at you Telstra and rareboy.

Not as shameful and disgusting as preaching poisons and threatening violence.
Yes i'm talking about the tiny few extremists and not the majority.

Also when did i disrespect religion ? I simply disagreed with some teachings.

 

[Puzuzzu]

Expressing disrespect and hatred towards a whole religion because of the actions of a few people?

Shameful and disgusting.

When you try to tell me I'm being hypocritical or attempt to justify this cause, just know that I'm not going to debate blatant abhorrence.

Use your experiences as a minority that's constantly ridiculed and have some compassion for your fellow human.

Absolutely disgusting.

And yes, I'm looking at you Telstra and rareboy.

Uhhhh.....
Why don't they in countries where they are a majority, and minorities are mistreated?

 

[Paws]

Wow.

Hey look

That doesn't even make sense.

I can split up

Secret Christian conspiracy!

quotes too. Without

Jon Stewart says "go fuck yourself"!

proper arguments.

Hypocritical first amendment: it only helps and serves the perpetrators or people that are higher up the social ladder and not victims. It's not about morals and ethics, it about exerting power over others (or something). Some people can shut out as loud as they want, whatever they want, they're not going to get heard or supported because their opinion is not popular, they'll even get mocked for what they say/do. If you don't notice how much the first amendment gets abused in a malicious way, burst your own bubble.

You don't have the right not to be offended. It's absurd.

Lovely, that fascist opinion. Say that again once you're at the bottom of the social ladder and everybody picks on you. But you might never ever experience that, so just shut up if you don't have a clue about life.

 

[NotThatCreative]

I totally approve of this Molly Norris woman and what she's doing. Freedom of speech cannot be held hostage by anything or any group, and we mustn't let it. If she actually gets people to go along with this, it'll be a win for free speech advocates.

As for it being offensive to Muslims, did I miss something or isn't the prohibition only a prohibition on Muslims? The purpose is because there's concern that if you allow portraits/statues/etcetera it could lead to idolatry. So us non-Muslims are allowed to draw him if we choose, technically. It's only recently that some of the extremists made it some forbidden for all. It's not. And as far as blaspheming their religion is concerned, South Park blasphemes their religion, Christianity (Jesus shitting on President Bush and the American flag, anyone?) and Buddhism (Buddha snorting coke, remember?). They can deal with being criticized just like others do. Or at least keep their protesting peaceful.

 

[rareboy]

^ Nah.

You're right.

Again, it is the Saudi wahhabi fundamentalists that seem to have their panties in a twist about this. And like the baptists in the US and the orthodox hardliners in Israel, they are hijacking their religions in order to make us all behave.

Frankly, if I thought I'd have to spend all eternity in heaven with the slavering true believers of any of these faiths, I swear I'd rather go right to the ninth circle of hell.

 

[Xzilla7]

Hypocritical first amendment: it only helps and serves the perpetrators or people that are higher up the social ladder and not victims. It's not about morals and ethics, it about exerting power over others (or something). Some people can shut out as loud as they want, whatever they want, they're not going to get heard or supported because their opinion is not popular, they'll even get mocked for what they say/do. If you don't notice how much the first amendment gets abused in a malicious way, burst your own bubble.

What? The First Amendment is a protection of free speech from the Government, specifically Congress. The document rests on the belief that the right to free speech is a natural right--it doesn't grant you the right to free speech, because you already have it. But just because you have the right to free speech doesn't mean you have the right to an audience. Hence, it's impossible for the First Amendment to be "hypocritical".

Now, you do have the right to representation. You can argue that minorities do not have adequate representation, but that is not a First Amendment issue.

Lovely, that fascist opinion. Say that again once you're at the bottom of the social ladder and everybody picks on you. But you might never ever experience that, so just shut up if you don't have a clue about life.

You are aware of the various efforts to combat bullying, right? There are even efforts to combat cyber-bullying since there is a lot of spillover. Court precedent also states that slander and libel are not protected under the First Amendment.

It's not that you have a right to not be offended, it's that nobody has the right to slander you. Restricting "offensive" speech is almost as fascist as the class warfare you describe.

 

[rareboy]

^ you're wasting your efforts.

Paws has clearly demonstrated an inability to respond rationally and appears incapable of critical analysis and moderating his position.

Just like all the poorly educated extremists of all religious and political ilks.

All the wahhabi'ists should spend some time studying representational art in islamic culture; better yet comparative study against the iconoclastic periods in christian art.

Nothing is new under the sun except now all fundamentalist wing-nuts have an international platform.

 

[GaGaloo]

The fact that she is placing people's right to express themselves above the rules of a religion are stupid.

If that is a serious statement then you are a total idiot. Freedom of expression should always come before religion. Why on earth you would think otherwise is beyond me.

 

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

me thinks media think of people first ans why people not in war zones etc wanna waste jaw time over it a strange when many way and OH look global world economy what nice it is

can - reach out and touch somebody- not mine it one them media expressions get sell what mean nothin

every country got this - multi race ethic color social etc so on aint humans a mess - so relgion no can do shit and governments shit a lot but it crap ans Companys limited ans media only like stir trouble ta get more news ta stir

so gonna touch ma computer haa

ta all them no got computer we workin on it but might out of date by then and people discover stuff what be there all time fa eons

any one read this HI see ya in da field