Jump to content
Islamic Forum
3dshocker

The Muhammad Cartoons

Recommended Posts

kk, so I've been hearing about this cartoon thing for a while now and here's my views.

 

Danish dudes pumped out cartoons of muhammad, sum cool, sum funny and some which I figured ppl would find offensive.

 

Muslim world falls into unrest and launches massive protests against the newspapers.

 

My questions

 

#1 - Do these people have no sense of humour regarding religion?

#2 - Why should the Prophet Muhammad and Islam recieve immunity from being targets of humour?

#3 - Why should Muhammad and Islam recieve immunity from insultive opinions?

#4 - Why should religious beliefs be respected at all?

#5 - Why does there seem to be an obession with Muhammad in the muslim community?

#6 - I have muslim friends who said what both sides did were stupid, but their not going to go all out protests against whats happening cuz they have better things to do - does the fact that these ppl don't care enough to protest on the streets make them any less muslim?

 

P.S. For those that dont know, my bias is pretty much that no beliefs should be protected in any manner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

your questions are so stupid! first of all, its all been already explained

 

and you just come up with stupid questions, particulary this one, the stupidest

 

#5 - Why does there seem to be an obession with Muhammad in the muslim community?

 

why dont you get off your lazy butt and go look it up and stop asking questions that were already answered, each and every one of your TOPICS(i was going to say single posts, but you really only have topics, no single posts) get stupider and stupider as they go

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, the mature thing to do would have been to just direct me to the topic where the issue of the danish cartoons have been resolved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

which of the THREE topics are you looking for? its not MY job to search for you, before you post, YOU are supposed to search for yourself!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salamu Alaikum,

 

First of all, we need to show patience xsperf, manners are a good way of showing non-muslims what Islam is about since they judge it based on the followers and not the religion.

 

secondly, yes, your questions have been answered all over the forum, and I cannot really explain to you our love of the Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) it will just not sink in, nobody in the western civilization, or in the world for that fact understands the respect we carry for such figures as the Prophet (PBUH) because they don't seem to respect themselves (no offense but from an Islamic Perspective it's true).

 

I suggest you try looking into the history of Islam and a little book called the "Qur'an", you may have heard of it, really divine, never changed, yeah might be an interesting read for an open-minded person such as yourself :D

 

Salamu Alaikum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kk, so I've been hearing about this cartoon thing for a while now and here's my views.

 

Danish dudes pumped out cartoons of muhammad, sum cool, sum funny and some which I figured ppl would find offensive.

 

Muslim world falls into unrest and launches massive protests against the newspapers.

 

My questions

 

#1 - Do these people have no sense of humour regarding religion?

#2 - Why should the Prophet Muhammad and Islam recieve immunity from being targets of humour?

#3 - Why should Muhammad and Islam recieve immunity from insultive opinions?

#4 - Why should religious beliefs be respected at all?

#5 - Why does there seem to be an obession with Muhammad in the muslim community?

#6 - I have muslim friends who said what both sides did were stupid, but their not going to go all out protests against whats happening cuz they have better things to do - does the fact that these ppl don't care enough to protest on the streets make them any less muslim?

 

P.S. For those that dont know, my bias is pretty much that no beliefs should be protected in any manner.

One word, RESPECT.

There is a a huge difference between the definition of respect in eastern and western societies.

Religious humour is considered like taboo. Religious humour just like humour in general should have limits, it's all about where you draw the lines.

Example, What if a friend of yours steal your clothes while in a public pool and you have to walk home B*t Nak*d . That's humour . Or what if your friend jokes about your Mom's anatomy, How would you react. Maybe you'll laugh it off or maybe you will feel angry, maybe hurt or maybe just weird.

But if you get hurt and or angry, would it be still funny if your friend keeps on joking about that? that's the point, The cartoons emotionally hurt the muslim community. Humour isn't bad but it can't be detached from consequences, if you trip and fall, that's funny, but if you trip and fall and split your head open, that's not funny.

peace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

kk, Ignore the questions in my original post as some have found them a bit offensive. I'm gonna hammer out #4 though, freedom of expression vs protection of beliefs.

 

I cannot really explain to you our love of the Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) it will just not sink in

I agree, I view it as an obsession - for that that see this as negative, I view love between a man and a woman as mutual obsession :D

 

 

I suggest you try looking into the history of Islam and a little book called the "Qur'an", you may have heard of it, really divine, never changed, yeah might be an interesting read for an open-minded person such as yourself biggrin.gif
I doubt the aim of the Qur'an is to prove the existence of Allah. If that is the case, I would not read a book that does not prove it's basis before it starts saying things in the authority of a high almighty god. I suppose the problem is my reluctance to accept matters of faith beyond logic and comprehension?

 

One word, RESPECT.

There is a a huge difference between the definition of respect in eastern and western societies.

Religious humour is considered like taboo. Religious humour just like humour in general should have limits, it's all about where you draw the lines.

I agree that there must be some kind of difference which is the cause of the inability to comprehend one another.

 

On the west side we do believe peoples beliefs should be respected but it is not an iron rule. The problem there is that if we passed legislation to protect beliefs, it would be the death of freedom of expression. The continues cycle of analyzing our beliefs, finding faults, and exploring new lines of thought is crucial to human progress. The stronger we hold on to any set of beliefs, the harder this is to do. Furthermore it is the continuous oblieteration of old beliefs by we liberals of the west and europe that have lead to women being treated as persons, religion losing its influence on education and government, and gays and lesbians being treated as humans. Several people are still offended that we offer rights to women, gays, and ban religious influence on state. We will not offer protection to beliefs.

 

Galileo blew away the beliefs of everyone as nonsense when he started publishing proofs that the world is NOT the centre of the universe. Because of the western stance regarding freedom of expression overriding protection of the beliefs of the general public, we would defend Galileo's right to say the things he did. The society back then which sought to protect beliefs deemed sacred almost had him killed for what he said.

 

I have told you about the west side, tell me about the east side view on respect for freedom vs protecting beliefs.

Edited by 3dshocker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree that there must be some kind of difference which is the cause of the inability to comprehend one another.

On the west side we do believe peoples beliefs should be respected but it is not an iron rule. The problem there is that if we passed legislation to protect beliefs, it would be the death of freedom of expression. The continues cycle of analyzing our beliefs, finding faults, and exploring new lines of thought is crucial to human progress. The stronger we hold on to any set of beliefs, the harder this is to do. Furthermore it is the continuous oblieteration of old beliefs by we liberals of the west and europe that have lead to women being treated as persons, religion losing its influence on education and government, and gays and lesbians being treated as humans. Several people are still offended that we offer rights to women, gays, and ban religious influence on state. We will not offer protection to beliefs.

The problem isn't a lack of solution but one that's practical.

If the church and state are separate, then both must not get in th eway of each other.

For ex, free speech is protected by the 1st amendment but it has limits.

You can't yell fire in public places. Logic is simple, law should be used as a sheild not sword.

Thus the free speech,expression,press should not be used to ignite disturbance/nuisance etc.

It's not a new concept.

A given Fact is that muslims will not put up with the Prophet's image being produced and ridiculed for humour. It's a crystal clear inference than that it will cause disturbance across muslim nations.

Doesn't take Einstein to figure out that it's a bad move. After all free expression wouldn't allow

you to print the Images from the stolen tape of Pam Anderson and Tommy Lee. In a "free country" try walking down the street with no clothes on and see if free expression is truely free.

Laws shouldn't exclude diplomacy. On the flipside though, If muslims want to hang the homos or adulterers, than that would be something to thinkabout as here, the state and the church may not avoid a conflict. But in regards to the cartoons, there is no conflict. It was simply a bad move.

peace. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've said several times in other thread about the nature of the restrictions placed in free society. The thing we strive for is that we are free to act freely so long as we do not bring physical harm to others and that we do not harm children in any way. This is not where the west is but it is the liberalist ideology we are progressing towards.

 

Oh yes, and the church and state are always in conflict, the church - religion - always wants to impose its rules upon society. The religious influence in our lives (in the west) has been greatly oppressed and I must say I am greatful for that.

 

I believe there is a major conflict when millions of people all over the world condemn and demand the punishment of a group of cartoonists for the cartoons they drew.

 

Religious influence is attempting to impose itself on our lives again by striking down anything and everything it finds offensive and I'm seeing every muslim who calls for punishment, or is even agitated enough to take time out of their day to peacefully protest against insults against muhammad as pawns of a religious war against the free world. If you love something enough to silence the people who offend that which you love by way of a cartoon, then there is something seriously wrong with you. Atleast that would be atheist perspective and that of those who defend the right to offend beliefs.

 

I see the cartoons themselves as good move. Not necessarily for their intended purposes but the outcome they have produced - these cartoons have pointed out the serious problem of religion vs freedom.

 

P.S. Anyone want to address the comparison I'm making with galileo?

Edited by 3dshocker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've said several times in other thread about the nature of the restrictions placed in free society. The thing we strive for is that we are free to act freely so long as we do not bring physical harm to others and that we do not harm children in any way. This is not where the west is but it is the liberalist ideology we are progressing towards.

 

Oh yes, and the church and state are always in conflict, the church - religion - always wants to impose its rules upon society. The religious influence in our lives (in the west) has been greatly oppressed and I must say I am greatful for that.

 

I believe there is a major conflict when millions of people all over the world condemn and demand the punishment of a group of cartoonists for the cartoons they drew.

 

Religious influence is attempting to impose itself on our lives again by striking down anything and everything it finds offensive and I'm seeing every muslim who calls for punishment, or is even agitated enough to take time out of their day to peacefully protest against insults against muhammad as pawns of a religious war against the free world. If you love something enough to silence the people who offend that which you love by way of a cartoon, then there is something seriously wrong with you. Atleast that would be atheist perspective and that of those who defend the right to offend beliefs.

 

I see the cartoons themselves as good move. Not necessarily for their intended purposes but the outcome they have produced - these cartoons have pointed out the serious problem of religion vs freedom.

 

P.S. Anyone want to address the comparison I'm making with galileo?

From where u stand I don't see why u can't see the problem.

The issue is not who's wrong or right but simply why provoke a conflict.

Yelling fire in a theatre is not inflicting physical harm but firm bases for it.

And that's where not just freedom but logic stands.

Things that are bound to inflict physical harm could be expressed verbally or artistically.

The formal definition of a civilized society suggests a sociey that operates to minimize conflict.

Even though a conflict is inevitable ,if you choose blue over red you will be conflict with some one else, why than provoke it? That's the question.

Imagine an explicit picture of your mom (wait... don't really imagine it, & also sorry to bring it up) in a newspaper in the birthday suit where her anatomy is underscored. It maybe a practicing free expression to the artist but is it the same to you? I seriously doubt that but let's assume you don't approve of such. To that offesive degree is indeed how some people take the cartoon(s).I can see why you would think that it's a good move for liberatariamism etc but it's all too suddle, like a shocker. The timing is off by a couple of centuries (give or take sometime.)

peace :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3dshocker, are you saying that woman arent being treated as people in Islam? if you are, well let me tell you something, in Islam, woman are being treated far better than they are being treated today in the USA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3dshocker, are you saying that woman arent being treated as people in Islam? if you are, well let me tell you something, in Islam, woman are being treated far better than they are being treated today in the USA.

Find me a real Islamic society (one where women are treated equal to men) and I'll discuss this with you then :D

 

P.S. Why does everyone keep thinking I'm from the USA???

Edited by 3dshocker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:D

 

 

 

Find me a real Islamic society (one where women are treated equal to men) and I'll discuss this with you then

 

i doubt there is a society that has ever existed that established equality, in its truest sense, for women. the west talks about it, but it isnt a reality. here in oz, womens wages are lower, just for a start.

 

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
P.S. Why does everyone keep thinking I'm from the USA???

LoL...don't know why I find this funny. :D

I guess because of your views...USA ,Canada, you'll form the west ..The devil..just kidding.

Let it be known than ...3dshocker is from the canada land of Steve Nash..for those who know him.

However this guy llogical he's I and I am from the U.S .Land of the Devil.. :D (sorry I still find it funny)

 

i doubt there is a society that has ever existed that established equality, in its truest sense, for women. the west talks about it, but it isnt a reality. here in oz, womens wages are lower, just for a start.

precisely...equality is a long way from being achived since we as species are evolving from a patriarchal society, and equality in true sense is no where although we seem to be progressing towards it.In the west there still exists the "glass ceiling'' and for the rest there still exhist the traditions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:D

 

Islam promotes traditional roles for men and women.

 

here in the west our roles are becomming confused. and our children and families are suffering.

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:D

 

Islam promotes traditional roles for men and women.

 

here in the west our roles are becomming confused. and our children and families are suffering.

 

:D

that was quick... there is no doubt that men and women are different but I think to assign different and firm roles based on Gender is discrimination?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:D

 

women nurturing children is not discrimination. i could see a womans gay group saying so.

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the only reason i said USA is because thats where i am. Why arent you willing to discuss it now, i must "find you a real Islamic society" .. well let me tell you two things. Currently, there is no society that is purely Islamic and follows the law of the sharia. And secondly, accoring to Yusuf Estes, woman and men are NOT equal. Woman have to bear the pain of giving birth, they have a different role in society, they are good at one thing, men are good at another. They are NOT equal, but just because they arent equal doesnt mean one is better than the other. And thirdly, trying to make them equal, like the USA does(and maybe canada) is what screws up people. When woman try to go and support a family by getting a job, kids virtually grow up without parents, and who knows what will happen to them. They do drugs, become convicts, obviously go to jail, and whatnot. So in an ideal Islamic society which follows the sharia, woman would KEEP THEIR DIGNITY AND THEIR CLOTHES, and 90% of the kids wouldnt be labeled as failures of parenting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:D

 

well said brother xsperf.

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

xsperf, never thought u could go any lower :D

 

It is true that men and women are not equal, it is also true that all men are not equal. Philosophically it would follow that they must not be treated as equal and placed in roles reflecting their worth. This would never work well in a richly dominated male chauvenistic society. It was this line of thinking that led to women being property, men being dominant, and the rich being in power.

 

What a beautiful society eh?

Unfortunately for you several centuries ago a revolution began to take place. People wanted to be free to live life the way they want instead of being forced into a fixed heirarchy. We fought for the right to live the way we want and this is what has brought Europe and the West to where it is today. We recognize that everybody is not equal but we strive to treat them equally so they have equal opportunity. People are happy when they are free. Only in the west do we have notions of "women and children first", most men will resort to physical violence when they see a women being beaten by a man, women always get the better end of a divorce, Oh yes, and this one will probably drive you nuts but women have access to political power as well --> Hilary Clinton -->Possibly the next president of the USA. Freedom from a society of predefined roles is such a terrible thing isnt it?

 

 

Oh yea, and by the way

And thirdly, trying to make them equal, like the USA does(and maybe canada) is what screws up people. When woman try to go and support a family by getting a job, kids virtually grow up without parents, and who knows what will happen to them. They do drugs, become convicts, obviously go to jail, and whatnot.

I am 19. My dad has been unemployed and living with his mother for the last 6 years.My mom started working multiple jobs to support me and my brother. It is true I rarely see my parents over the last 6 years.

 

I don't do drugs, I'm not a convict and I've never been in jail.

Currently going to university for computer engineering.

 

 

Women of the west may seem undignified to you, maybe all women who are free to live as they please seem undignified to you. Revealing clothing may seem undignified to you, but the thoughts of a simple minded conservative such as yourself is irrelevant in the freeworld.

 

P.S. You're parents failed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
accoring to Yusuf Estes, woman and men are NOT equal

I didn't really hear of yusuf Estes but wow.. does he have credibility.

Separartion of labor was definitely a smart thing in prehistoric hunting and gathering societies since men are more suitable for hunting and women foraging. But in today's world this is insignificant.

I can't deny that men & women are different but fact remains that there still exists an invisible strata and men are on top.I can also prove that even when following sharia men are clearly favored. About the west,the dignity and kids growing up screwed up ....that's no less stereotypical than calling muslims terrorists. I doubt if people raise their kids according to the doctorine of pimp and houchism, so if the kids do turn out to be that parents aren't to be blamed. Because On the flip side, knowing that Islam doesn't support suicide bombing but people still do. Maybe the motherless child is the cuase but wait didn't Jesus have no father,I think he turned out just fine. It's not who's raising the kids but how they are raised. About clothes,there is no denying that Islam is more conservative and teaches modesty where west is the opposite, it's simply a matter of culture, statistically one is not necessarily better than the other.

Peace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:D

 

men, have throughtout the ages have made all the worlds significant inventions, mathematical, medical, scientific, breakthroughs. they have domminated ALL the arts, and are the drivers of everything that builds a civilisation, not including family.

 

if women had talent, or potential to contribute in these thousands of millenia, they have had hundreds of cultures and many civilisations to do so. in times of war, famine etc, all human resourses are used by a society. if woman had something to contribute during these times, their input would have been accepted, and would have proven their "equality". they did not contribute to any of the worlds major achievements as far as science , the arts, phylosophy, maths etc etc etc.

 

men and women both have a role. it is diverse but equal. above is what men excell at.

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:D

 

men, have throughtout the ages have made all the worlds significant inventions, mathematical, medical, scientific, breakthroughs. they have domminated ALL the arts, and are the drivers of everything that builds a civilisation, not including family.

 

if women had talent, or potential to contribute in these thousands of millenia, they have had hundreds of cultures and many civilisations to do so. in times of war, famine etc, all human resourses are used by a society. if woman had something to contribute during these times, their input would have been accepted, and would have proven their "equality". they did not contribute to any of the worlds major achievements as far as science , the arts, phylosophy, maths etc etc etc.

 

men and women both have a role. it is diverse but equal. above is what men excell at.

 

:D

True..but are you saying that women are less intelligent? because good luck on proving that.

Women have proportinally the same cranial capacity as men and similarly have same areas of

devleoped areas found in modern sapien male (frontol lobe etc)

Why was einstein a man than?

Because how can women prove E=MC^2 if they aren't even allowed in the lab.

Sure..throughout civilzations, men have solely contributed to the scientific develoment.

But don't Overlook the literacy rate which varies greatly between the two genders.

just take a literacy rate survey of some 2nd and 3rd world country and see the difference.

If women can't attend school and learn past a set limit than how can they contribute in these fields?

No offense and If you don't mind me asking ..do you know if your mom have the same education as your dad?(you don't have to answer if you don't want to)

peace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if women had talent, or potential to contribute in these thousands of millenia, they have had hundreds of cultures and many civilisations to do so. in times of war, famine etc, all human resourses are used by a society. if woman had something to contribute during these times, their input would have been accepted, and would have proven their "equality". they did not contribute to any of the worlds major achievements as far as science , the arts, phylosophy, maths etc etc etc.

 

Ignorance is sin. Just because you have not seen a dodo bird does not mean the bird never existed. You have to THINK about why the bird is missing.

 

#1 - Women in general are not interested in the same thing as men, did a lil bit of research and turns out they are not inclined towards the practical sciences and technology related stuff. It is not because they cannot do it but because they are not interested in it. The odd balls that are interested do just fine as their capacity and ability to learn is on par with males. In my class of 250 engineers,we have 2 girls, both of them are doing quite well above the average.

 

note - Philosophy is something that can be dominated by women as they are interested in social sciences related stuff.

 

 

#2 - Women have been oppressed for "thousands of millenia" and they continue to be oppressed in parts of the world today. Not having an opportunity to contribute is the issue here, it speaks nothing of the potential of the individual. By the same arguement you proposed, the black people of the world have not contributed to modern technology - I was of this opinion one time as well. Since I think in a more err....sophisticated manner nowadays I recognize that restraint is what keeps people from achieveing their potential. It is not fair to judge their contributions when they are being denied the opportunity to do so. In the west women have been given this opportunity to contribute.

 

Food for thought - the first programmer was a female

 

Women have contributed alot more to modern technology then you give them credit for - where you from zukiful?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×