Of Denmark, Islam, and caricatures
 

I assume most of you have heard about the caricatures, portraying the prophet Mohammed, initially published in a Danish newspaper. Subsequently published in Norway, Germany, and France (and perhaps elsewhere), the caricatures have created a lot of hostility in Islamic countries and areas throughout the world. LOTS.

But you can read about the details elsewhere - maybe even in a thread here at FOFC, I dunno.

What I'm curious about is this: if the caricatures are so utterly blasphemous to the point of causing major international incidents, and if the concept of any image depicting the prophet Mohammed is so heinous, how can a Jordanian newspaper reprint the caricatures?
That's like saying murder is a terrible act, and then capping someone to demonstrate how awful it is.

Someone enlighten me...

I'd like to see them

They're probably veryfuny

Pumping up your newspaper's circulation numbers. The bottom line trumps all.

I am amused in a sad way (same as the extreme anti-abortion nuts in this country) by the idiots who are so upset by Mohammed being portrayed as violent that they take hostages and make death threats to show their outrage.

We do that all the time. Texas especially.

Sounds like something is rotten in Denmark.

Actually, the most effective way that this has been protested thus far was actually pretty non-violent. There is currently a campaign to boycott Danish goods sold in the Middle East. I heard a news story about a Danish dairy conglomerate who has been especially hurt by the boycott. It did enough damage to Danish businesses that the government actually tried to step in to try smooth things over.

http://www.dairyreporter.com/news/ng...e-east-boycott

Dola - I'd just like to point out that from a free-speech standpoint, I don't think Jyllands-Posten should have to apologize at all for what they ran with. But of course, the flip side to that is that protestors should also have every right to challenge what is printed.

A reference worth acknowledging, but alas, I know it won't.. :D

Well you have to admit it makes more sense when the person who actually committed the murder gets capped.

As for the topic. Christians in general don't seem to complain quite so much when God/Jesus is, I'll say defamed, in similar ways. I think individuals upset by this are overreacting to an extreme degree, and I find it hard to take any country seriously when they withdraw their ambassador over such a perceived sleight.

I've seen the pics and I see nothing different than other political/religious caricatures I'm known to seeing. The moronic part is that some of the pictures are months old, but because some people found out only now it's all of a sudden a crime or something, according to some. This news has been around for a couple of days overhere. Some people threatened the entire European Union because one person made a drawing and a couple others decided to print them more than once.

Besides, the pics I've seen aren't even funny.

Where are our Danish correspondents when we need them!? ;)

We are not talking about mere protests here. We are talking about threats of violence and armed intimidation. This is an attempt to silence free speech and a free press through intimidation. It should not be allowed to stand. The response from the West should be a strong affirmation of the free press, free speech, and free expression.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060202/...ZhBHNlYwM3MjE-

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - Outrage over caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad escalated in the Arab and Islamic world Thursday, with Palestinian gunmen briefly kidnapping a German citizen and protesters in Pakistan chanting "death to France" and "death to Denmark."

Palestinian militants surrounded European Union headquarters in Gaza, and gunmen burst into several hotels and apartments in the West Bank in search of foreigners to take hostage.

In Iraq, Islamic leaders urged worshippers to stage demonstrations from Baghdad to the southern city of Basra following weekly prayer services Friday. Afghanistan and Indonesia condemned the drawings, and Iran summoned the Austrian ambassador, whose country holds the EU presidency.

The issue opened divisions among European Union governments. Austrian Foreign Minister Ursula Plassnik said EU leaders have a responsibility to "clearly condemn" insults to any religion. But French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy said he preferred "an excess of caricature to an excess of censorship."

Sarkozy joined journalists in rallying around the editorial director of France Soir, who was fired by the newspaper's Egyptian owner. France Soir and several other newspapers across Europe reprinted the caricatures this week in a show of support for freedom of expression.

The cartoons were first published in September in a Danish newspaper, touching off anger among Muslims who knew about it. The issue reignited last week after Saudi Arabia recalled its ambassador to Denmark.

The Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, had asked 40 cartoonists to draw images of the prophet. The purpose, its chief editor said, was "to examine whether people would succumb to self-censorship, as we have seen in other cases when it comes to Muslim issues."

Islamic law, based on clerics' interpretation of the Quran and the sayings of the prophet, forbids depictions of the Prophet Muhammad and other major religious figures — even positive ones — to prevent idolatry. Shiite Muslim clerics differ in that they allow images of their greatest saint, Ali, the prophet's son-in-law, though not Muhammad.

Critics say the drawings were particularly insulting because some appeared to ridicule Muhammad. One cartoon showed the prophet wearing a turban shaped as a bomb.

France's Grand Rabbi Joseph Sitruk said he shared Muslim anger.

"We gain nothing by lowering religions, humiliating them and making caricatures of them. It's a lack of honesty and respect," he said. He said freedom of expression "is not a right without limits."

In the Arab world, a Jordanian newspaper, Shihan, took the bold step Thursday of running some of the drawings, saying it wanted to show its readers how offensive the cartoons were but also urging the world's Muslims to "be reasonable." Its editorial noted that Jyllands-Posten had apologized, "but for some reason, nobody in the Muslim world wants to hear the apology."

Hours later, the Jordanian government threatened legal action against Shihan, and the owners of the weekly said they had fired its chief editor, Jihad al-Momani, and withdrawn the issue from sale.

The outrage Thursday was most tangible in the Palestinian territories, where Norway and Denmark closed diplomatic offices after masked gunmen threatened to kidnap foreigners in Gaza.

Palestinian gunmen in the West Bank searched several hotels, and a German citizen was briefly kidnapped by gunmen from a hotel in the city of Nablus. Palestinian police freed the German, a teacher, after less than an hour.

Foreign reporters either pulled out of Gaza on Thursday or canceled plans to go to the coastal strip.

Palestinian security officials said they would try to protect foreigners in Gaza. Nineteen foreigners have been kidnapped in Gaza in recent months; all were freed unharmed.

The protests in the Palestinian territories came a week after the Islamic militant group Hamas defeated the ruling Fatah Party in parliamentary elections.

In one unusual twist, Mahmoud Zahar, a Hamas leader, visited a Gaza church Thursday and promised protection to Christians after Fatah gunmen threatened to target churches as part of their protests. Zahar offered to dispatch gunmen from Hamas' military wing, the Izzedine al Qassam Brigades, to guard the church.

"You are our brothers," Zahar told Father Manuel Musallam of the Holy Family Church.

In Gaza City, a dozen gunmen linked to Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas' defeated Fatah Party surrounded the EU Commission's local office.

One of the militants, flanked by two masked men with assault rifles, said the governments of Germany, France, Norway and Denmark must apologize for the cartoons by Thursday evening. If no apology is issued, the gunmen said they would target citizens of the four countries and shut down media offices, including the French news agency.

"Any citizens of these countries, who are present in Gaza, will put themselves in danger," the gunman said.

About 10 armed Palestinians gathered later at the French cultural center in Gaza City and warned of a "tough response" to any further disparagement of Muhammad.

Only a few dozen foreigners from the targeted countries were in Gaza on Thursday. Many others pulled out in recent months, following a spate of abductions of foreigners by Fatah-linked gunmen.

Danish and French members of an international observer team at the Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt stayed away from Gaza on Thursday, and instead worked from the group's headquarters in the Israeli town of Ashkelon, said a spokesman, Julio de La Guardia.

Gunhild Forselv, spokeswoman for the international mission in the West Bank town of Hebron, said she was in touch with community leaders and was not concerned for the safety of the 72-member observer force, which includes 21 Norwegians and 11 Danes. "We don't feel threatened," she said.

The EU's election observers were winding down operations, as planned, said Mathias Eick, who is German. He said the Gaza office had been closed and that 49 observers were in Ramallah. "There were security risks even before the election and nothing has changed," he said.

Norway closed its representative office in the West Bank to the public because of the threats, but said the 23-member staff remained on the job.

The Danish Foreign Ministry in Copenhagen said all Danes, except for two diplomats, have left the West Bank and Gaza in recent days. The Danish representative office in the West Bank was to be closed Friday because of the threats, a diplomat said.

In Nablus, gunmen from the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, a violent Fatah offshoot, went to four hotels and told staff they must not host Europeans from the targeted countries. The gunmen said they searched two apartments for foreigners to kidnap, but didn't find any. Foreigners now have three days to leave town, the gunmen said in an impromptu news conference after their fruitless search.

Because no one ever makes fun of religious figures :rolleyes:




SI

These countries protesting this are making serious political mistake. George Bush has tried as hard as he can to get Europe to sign on with his war on terror and he has failed. Europe has been far more sympathetic to muslims and arabs than the US. But trying to tell all these European countries that they no longer have the right to free speech when it offends muslims is going to drive that support away faster than they can say Mohammed. This is a weak hand that is being severely overplayed. Where Bush failed, bullshit like this might succeed.

At some point, you have to realize that the bully is never going to be your friend, even when you hand over your lunch money willingly every day and you do his homework.

Some day you're going to inadvertently insult him and he's still going to pound you into the dirt.

Salmon Rushdie is still alive. And his death warrant was probably great P.R. Though, I'm sure he soiled a few pairs of drawers at first.

Europe is more symphatic to Muslims?! What? Have you seen France? Or, say, the ghettos in Germany and Sweden? The US integrates Muslims, Europe segregates them. I'd say the US is far more sympathetic to Muslims than Europe (generally speaking) is.

Yes, which is why the newspaper shouldn't have apologized. On the radio, the Danish editor was on explaining that the cartoons were in line with the material that they post targeting other issues. So, instead of apologizing, they should have ramped up the edginess of cartoons, especially against controversial Christian issues to hammer the point that they were equal opportunity.

I remember when I was in college, one of the campus publications published a rather graphic cartoon depicting Jesus having anal sex with God (or an altar boy, it was years ago and I forget which). It barely got much of a reaction at all from the campus community. Why? Because that type of editorial cartoon was par for the course for that publication so nobody thought twice about it. If you do controversial cartoons every day against multiple targets, the people will come to expect it and eventually will cease to be so outraged.

Or maybe just because it was in a college publication to begin with. I didn't know anyone ever read those things until now... or did you just look at the picture?

Don't throw all European countries on one trash pile called Europe, there is no such a thing as 'Europe' on this matter. Some countries traditionally have goverments who would follow Bush (or any other US preisdent) without thinking about the consequences (UK, Netherlands, a.o.) and some will be against him no matter what (France, Germany, a.o.). And even these examples aren't always appliciable.

Again, please don't throw all European countries (governments) on one pile of garbage.

Overhere in Maassluis we have such a muslim ghetto. The muslim groups live together and seperated (Moroccans and Turkish basically seperated). In the 1970's the government thought that getting people with the same origins to live together was the best way to go. There are the normal problems that come around with ghetto's, but it's not centered to just the muslims who live there. A big group of muslims fit in well into the Dutch community here.

Sure, also in the Netherlands some extremist muslims abuse their freedom of speech and religion to preach against freedom of speech and religion. But these extremists life in every religion. The problem is that the attention is centered around the (anti-)muslim movement. For Christ's sake, some political party in the house of representatives here wants all women stripped from their rights to vote, but they fly by under the radar right now.

I always defend the right to the free speecho (like this) even I don't like the message.

Ok, Muslims, it is time to grow up. It's time to get a sense of humor, even regarding your own religion.

Anybody want to take a crack at this from a logic standpoint?

It is ok to do that if your purpose is to inform, rather than to demean? Or, they have a double standard and Muslims are allowed to do something that non-Muslims cannot? The truth is probably a mix of the two.

For those interested in the origins of the drawings:


It seems that one way or another the newspaper was determined to create controversy - which I defend their right to do. It's rather amusing that Western governments are now falling over themselves (including ours, btw) to condemn these drawings.


Still waiting for someone to call on these enraged Muslim communities to practice tolerance and respect.

Bah, he didn't even state the quote right.

To think, perchance to dream about getting it right might be nice, but I think the change (like mine) was intentional.. :D

Don't hold your breath. There's a very well established double standard there.

Shameful that Western governments, supposedly proud of their freedoms, would condemn such a thing. The Middle East is already in charge.

Aye...there's the rub I suppose.

*sigh*

SI

All of this misquoted Shakespeare should be copied into the Ping: Non-scientists thread.

Actually, my flippant remark equating this to our capital punishment policy isn't too far off, I don't think.

We, as a nation, say that killing a human being is wrong (even if they want to end their own life). However, we condone killing in certain circumstances in order to do two things:
1) Punish the guilty
2) To deter others from committing certain crimes

I imagine the newspaper sees this issue in a similar way. They likely feel they are punishing the parties that offended them by showing the cartoons in order to create more anger at the papers that printed them. It's one thing to read about something that is offensive, but it won't affect you the same as seeing it. Showing the cartoons created a greater reaction than just reporting on them would have. Therefore, it punishes the papers that printed them and deters other papers from doing something similar down the road.

It's unfortunate that this doesn't inspire more of it. If nearly every newspaper in the 'West' ran the caricatures on the front page for the next week, what would anybody really do about it?

I agree with your general line of thinking, but what differentiates it in this case, at least as far as I can tell, is that creating caricatures of Mohammed is not simply something that "angers" Muslims. It is complete and utter blasphemy. I am trying to discern the difference between something that angers people to the point of creating international incidents over it, and something that is so heinous from a religious standpoint that it does so.

No, you have a point. No defense, but my understanding of Christianity is that this would be a "lesser" crime from a Christian theological standpoint than an Islamic one. The Jordanian newspaper's logic (tortured as it may be) might be that they are providing access to what the blasphemy was, not engaging in it themselves.

It's doublethink. Don't you think that killing is considered heinous from a religious standpoint here? Hell, it's in the 10 commandments!

After reading today's article on usatoday.com, all I have to say is:

Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke.

Isn't it '...thou shall not commit murder...'?

The "State" gets away with it because they call it an execution and its a form of justice...but then there is abortion...is that murder or justice...or a different can of worms all together?

Not to go TOO far off topic here, how is it that it would have been legal for Lacy Petersen to abort her child the day before she was murdered by Scott, but Scott gets a double murder conviction because she didn't? Double standards if you ask me...but back to the other important stuff...thanks for letting me vent!

She was 7 and a half months pregnant. I do not believe you can get an abortion in California that late in the pregnancy.

Your probably right, I just figured of ALL the states that would allow "Partial-Birth" abortions on request, CA would...so THAT example wouldn't be correct but I think in a general sense(change the names to protect my ignorace) it still stands...

Depends on the translation, I think, but I have seen it both ways.

I really don't think the press of every community on the planet must concern themselves with the religious beliefs and practices of every other community on the planet.

EDIT...


And so we see again the dangers of wrapping yourself up in religious dogma. You want people to die for caricatures of a religious figure.

I really don't think this is the case at all. There are a lot of european countries that are coming pretty close to openly discriminating against Muslims. The French with their ban on Head dresses and veils in schools. One of the Nordic countries, I think, is in the middle of passing a law preventing the wearing of Burkhas(sp?)

I don't think Europe in general treats either Jews or Muslims with the same equality they experience here in the US.

To indulge you a bit with the partial thread-jack--I can't believe they charged Scott Peterson with a double murder, and got away with it without much controversy. It does sound a bit politically motivated to me.

Yep, as I alluded to in an earlier post, instead of apologizing the paper should have run something like a cartoon of Jesus molesting an altar boy (doesn't have to be graphic, but suggestive enough to get the message across), or something along those lines. That would be a satirical way of pointing out a serious issue in the Catholic Church (on par with the violence and Islam cartoon) and would support the paper's claim that they engage in equal opportunity satire.

The media here in the UK has decided not to broadcast or publish the cartoons (which is, I think, a very good move), but I have seen a few of them, including the bomb-as-turban picture. I've been following the debate over the past couple of days (there's been little talk of anything else), and - issues of free speech aside - I can't see any redeeming satirical value in these cartoons. They're not funny, and they don't offer anything to the 'debate' - they're crude, badly-drawn cheap shots that wouldn't be out of place on the walls of a public toilet. We can say 'grow up' to those who've been offended, but they're well within their rights to be mad as hell right now (although that's not to excuse the gunman-militia crap, of course).

It's funny how the media portrays these gatherings as ''protests'' while a bunch of Christians and Catholics protesting similar issues would be called ''out of touch'' and/ or vrackpots.

Really? Can you give me any examples of the mainstream media portraying Christian/Catholic protestors protesting something that is strictly forbidden under their religion as "out of touch" and/or crackpots? If I recall, just a few weeks back there were a ton of Christian and Catholic protestors in DC (pro-lifers) during the anniversary of Roe v. Wade. I don't recall any mainstream media outlets ever referring to them as "out of touch" or crackpots.

Poor the Christians! Such a hard life here in America. So persecuted and put upon by that vile and all powerful media. If only Christians had some voice in the government maybe things would be different. If only there were Christians in seats of power, perhaps this parade of horribles that befalls them in America would not be happening! Woe be them!

FYI: Most Catholics I know are under the impression they are Christians.


I have no sympathy for these protestors. I am all for freedom of speech, it's just the Christian persecution complex in America just sticks in my craw.

Oh, yeah. That'd be the perfect answer. Why not show a swastica on day three? Let's just piss everyone off to show that we piss everyone off. Vapid.

Oh, c'mon. When they protest, yeah, they're treated as ok protesters with a right to free speech. When they start blowing up abortion clinics, they're effin' nuts. I think the line here is pretty broad- you start breaking the law, you're a nut.

SI

In 2004, he had 16 touchdowns and 1,405 receiving yards. This past season, just 750 yards and four touchdowns.

Clearly, at 32, Muhammad is in decline, and I see nothing wrong with poking a little fun in his direction.

Ahh...once again...religion and anger...the great human weakness.

But??? That number he wears must MEAN something! Don't know what...yet...but give it time and we will thing of something. Then look out! Ahh!! HA! I knew that it meant something about something that would mean something to someone so we can be mad about whatever.

Actually, I think it would be thought provoking. If the newspaper's aim is to inspire debate about the nexus of religion, censorship, and offensiveness then having parallel blasphemous Christian imagery would be just the thing. For those raised in a Christian/pseudo-Christian culture who say that the angered muslims should simply get over the Mohammed caricatures, comparative imagery more salient to one's own religious beliefs may add some perspective to the debate.

You can't indicate that 'Europe' is any particular way about any aspect of society - European countries vary hugely and as usual in life even with a country you'll find vast differences between areas due to social and economic differences amongst other things.

(for instance go to the 'boon docks' of Norfolk and peoples attitude is often much more insular than in the rest of England ... simply because people from those areas are often less travelled and cosmopolitan than most of the country (before anyone from England hassles me for knocking Norfolk - I'm a Norfolk yokel born and bred :D))

Two great tastes that taste great together!

Less filling!

Didn't argue that and never would.

But the post I was responding was painting with a very broad brush it appeared to me.

Does anyone actually have a link to these offensive caricatures? I can't seem to find one, but I don't speak Danish, so maybe that's why.

Edit: Nevermind. I found them at wikipedia.

But the newspaper's aim is probably just to sell more newspapers.

Corey Dillon is Allah's profit?

Wait... Dillon had 13 touchdowns...

Never mind... close, though!

Further, the comment was referring to the media's portrayl of the people, not what you or I think of them. Heck, breaking the law or not, I think most religious fanatics are "crackpots", "nutjobs", "'effin nuts", or what have you. I still can't recall the mainstream media ever referring to any protests by Christians (no matter how violent) as being the work out of crackpots or people being "out of touch."

An interesting perspective from the Kuwait Times:

hxxp://www.kuwaittimes.net/Navariedn...rtid=471797949

Completely unrelated: hxxp://blog.infinitemonkeysblog.com/archive/001946.html

Legohammed.

When was the last time you saw a Christian good-guy in a mainstream television drama or movie? They get to be the bad guys all the time, though. Or the butt of jokes on the comedy shows and movies. What would people like Steven Colbert do without Christians to satirize?

I love Colbert, by the way. And am pretty much desensitized to the daily mockery of religious people in the media. Doesn't really bother me any more. It's usually kind of funny, though it was creepy and annoying in the movie Dogma. What a pile of steaming crap that was.

Just think it's odd that people can't see it. Maybe they're desensitized, too.

For some really interesting commentary: hxxp://www.alghurabaa.co.uk/index.html

I bet no one in Denmark would have ever guessed they'd be lumped into a "Trinity of Evil". If there's no such thing as bad press, Denmark is gettting the best free PR in its history.


Edit for some hxxp'ing. Sorry. Should have done that when I first posted.

7th Heaven?

LOL! Okay! There's one. You've just about doubled my ratio there. No further comment. ;)

You should have specified good television. In that case, I've got nothing.

Wow. Nice link. Gee... uh... I guess they really don't like gay people either!

Bad guys? What examples of openly Christian bad guys are there in manstream television drama or movies?

Other than the obvious "7th Heaven" (as Drake pointed out), I think I recall some movie about Jesus that was pretty popular. There was the "Chronic(what!?)cles of Narnia" that had heavy Christian themes and symbolism. Temple Page (Sean Patrick Thomas) in the District was a devout Christian. What about "Touched By An Angel"? Those "Left Behind" movies are straight to DVD fare, but are uber-Christian.

I also forgot Mr. Ecko. How could I forget Mr. Ecko? He's a bad, bad man (in the Michael Jackson sense of the word) and a Christian. He's got that Holy Stick 'o' Beatens.

Wasn't the president on West Wing a devout Catholic?

What about that short lived show "Miracles?"

There was also "Joan of Arcdia", no? (Though she shouldn't be allowed to be mentioned in the same post as Mr. Ecko.)

Also, I would argue, that it is safe to assume that almost every character in mainstream television dramas (or comedies) (or movies) is presumed Christian until demonstrated otherwise. How many prime time network shows have leading characters who aren't Christian? How many movies in the past year? I only sat this because it can't just be a coincidence when TV characters celebrate Christmas in very special Christmas episodes every year. Or when they get married they do so in churches. I don't think it's too far a reach to assume those people are, indeed, Christian. I don't see too many TV families celebrating Ramadan or Passover or getting married in ashrams or mosques very often. Maybe they are, but I guess I'm missing those shows.

For movies there was Susan Sarandon in "Dead Man Walking" and Matthew Mcmowhatishisname in "Contact."

Also John Stewart or Colbert making a joke about what a jackass Pat Robertson is does not constitute the persecution of Christians. It constitutes making a joke about a jackass who uses religion to justify his extremist views.

Anyway, we've strayed waaaay too far off topic here... Back to the whole cartoon thing.

LOL! Please. Don't even try this. If you can't see it you can't see it. I could assail you with example after example, but I don't have the time or interest. Watch Jon Stewart tonight and you'll already have your list of pro's outnumbered in one half hour of knee slappin comedy. And movies about Jesus are not the same as Movies that feature the holier-than-though neighborhood preacher that has some evil dastardly secret. Or make fun of nuns in a convent or Catholic School, or the born again kid from school that's a total intolerant bitch.

Or any number of now common stereotypical swipes at Christians. You're just embarrassing yourself with this barrel scraping. ;)

And I like Jon Stewart. And Steven Colbert. It's not that big of a deal. But to say that there are no media portrayals of conservative Christians as whack-jobs and extremists is just plain silly.

Read my second post for the full list, which includes almost every show on TV, so I don't really think that counts as "barrel scraping."

John Stewart isn't on tonight, but I will try and catch him Monday. Hopefully "This Week In God" will be on. I love that segment.

My apologies, but I think the only one embarrassing himself is you. You haven't brought up any examples other than Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert whose goals are to skewer everyone!

There are movies where you have a preacher who doesn't want kids to have fun (like "Footloose"), but usually in those movies, by the end, the preacher understands that its ok in the end (like "Footloose").

There are far more sympathetic Christians than 'bad' Christians in TV shows and the media. For example, one of my favorite movies in the last few years, "Master and Commander" had the entire crew fairly faithful Christians who knew Biblical stories (Jonah) and had the Captain read from the Bible went their fellows died. The Simpson's Ned Flanders is holier-than-thou, but he is generally shown in a good light (while Homer is shown to be petty for disliking him). Those are a couple examples.

I agree. Who said that "there are no media portrayals of conservative Christians as whack-jobs and extremists"?

This is a good point. Last week on the "Daily Show", Stewart skewered Hillary Clinton, Cindy Sheehan, and Hugo Chavez. Hrmm... Maybe that doesn't really support my point all that much, considering I am pretty sure all three are Christians!

South Park is always good for a laugh at the expense of the holier than thou. Have they ever done a Mohammad episode? That would be hilarious.

My only complaint about South Park is that I need the captions on to make out much of what's being said.

So *that's* where ez ran off to.

as my mother said "they've gotta learn to relax"

i think i might put it a little differently, but the fact of the matter is that they do need to learn to adjust. they need to realize that just because they find something distasteful/wrong/blasphemous that doesn't prohibit anyone else from doing it.

and if you're muslim and you don't agree with that...pack your shit up and move back to one of the theocratic muslim nations where it won't happen. the rest of the world certainly isn't obligated to tiptoe around them and hew to muslim/jewish/catholic standards of what is blasphemous/distasteful.

the fact that many muslim nations can't/won't recognize this is one of the chief reasons why Islam has "bloody borders" with the west, and will continue to be a religion that is not warmly welcomed by the western world.

Yes, and it's not as though this is something new, either.

To be honest this whole issue frustrates me on several levels. I believe in the freedom of speech, and that includes the possibility of making fun of whoever however.

Now, out of self-preservation, I'd most likely stay away from making too much fun of Muslims, because I know they have a tough time dealing with it like mature adults. However, if I can make fun of Jesus and people who don't like it will only get a bit upset, while others will laugh, I think that I should be able to make fun of Mohammed without fearing a colombian necktie.

If these radicals, because that's what the protesters are (in reality a minority, but since the press wants news, they're blowing it out of proportions as usual), would just calm the hell down and realize that the same papers are not only kidding with Mohammed, they're also making fun of the jew with the beard, the earth would be a better place to live. They need to understand that just because people A doesn't worship the same gods/prophets as people B, they're not any worse neighbours than those who share the same religion.

Let people worship whatever religion they want to.. whatever I believe won't hurt you.. ok?

The fact that these people can't separate Norway from Denmark doesn't exactly help them in their quest for acceptance.. they're currently boycotting all Scandinavian products, including butter from Norway.. which will lead them to an extreme shortage of butter within the next week.. bright.. very bright..

You're right. I just don't know how a Christian gets by in this country.

We kill the infidels, silly. We just do it quietly.

Or we get the government to do it for us.

So a group of my fundamentalist buddies and I got really pissed at The Book of Daniel, so we got our guns and stormed the local TV station, trashing the place and burning the satellite van and shouting DEATH TO HOLLYWOOD AND THE TV NETWORKS. So we took the weatherman hostage and held him until the show was cancelled. However, nothing they can do make up for what they have done. We have declared war on HOLLYWOOD AND THE TV NETWORKS and are urging our friends to kill anyone associated with that unholy cabal.

We have a perfect right to do this since the show insulted our religion. We of course respect freedom of expression, but that must be balanced against respect for our religious beliefs. If you do not agree, then DEATH TO YOU.

My pastor is going to be so pissed off when he finds out you stole his notes for Sunday's sermon.

As defined by Princeton word net:

christian (adj.) "following the teachings or manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus Christ"

I used the adjective definition because the noun definition was a bit circular in definition.

Anyhow, Catholics ARE Christians. They hold that Jesus Christ is the Messiah and follow his teachings.

:D

SI

Mohammad was one of the "Super Best Friends" in that episode.

SI

Yeah. That's, uh, pretty much what I said. I was just trying to throw in the funny there, mate.

This is one of the HUGE problems I have with Islam. Christianity teaches you to challenge your faith so that you strengthen it. Sometimes, a challenge to your faith might be a satirical cartoon, it might be a life event, it might be any of a number of different things. You search your soul, consult the tenants of your faith, and come to a conclusion. Some people lose their faith, while others strengthen their faith. So in Western Culture you wind up with two camps, the faithful and the non-believers (before any one takes too many shots, I realize this is a gross simplification at 10:00 PM).

However, in Islam, this seems to not be the case. You are told not to question your faith. You should not question Mohammed. You shall not satirize Mohammed. If anyone does so, they are blasphemous and belong in the House of War, etc. Because of this, there is no questioning of faith. The result is a faith where you are told what to believe, but there is no critical thinking. It creates a faith that is easy to lead astray because the masses are taught not to question their Imams or the faith.

Should this be a surprise? Not if you realize that Mohammed was a warrior. The creed is a warrior's creed, why else split the world into the House of Submission and the House of War. But that is getting a bit off-topic. Any successful military leader understands that you need to have full authority, and anything that undermines it is bad. Therefore, I can see Mohammed ponder, "Question me? That is right out. And no satirical pictures of me either!" Again, this is some of what I was thinking about earlier today while driving back from a trade show, so some of it is half-cooked, but is a good starting point.

Sorry, I've seen way too much Catholic bashing lately (in person, on the net, etc.), and its been bugging the daylights out of me. Much of it from people who don't have a clue, so I overreacted.

Sorry.

No worries. I'm a reformed Catholic, so while I don't really buy into it nowadays, I was baptized, had first communion, gave confession, and was even confirmed. I have a pretty strong grasp of the basics.

Wait... are you really saying this after knowing the history of Christianity? Blasphamy was a crime in Christian Europe and if you critized the Pope, you may have found yourself excommunicated and/or burned as a heretic.

I'm sorry, but unquestioned adherence to a faith is not Islam's alone and Christianity hasn't been free of that vice.

Yes, yes, and democracy has killed its share of innocents because those who practiced it wanted to eradicate dictatorships. Claiming that "people who believed this did something heinous 500 years ago, so the idea is obviously a bad one" is not sound logic. Unquestioned adherence to faith was less a product of Middle Ages Xianity than it was of a socio-political reality that discouraged independent thought on behalf of an economically enslaved lower class.

dola...

And if you think that means I'm just defending Christianity, you're not paying attention.

It is kind of difficult to claim a faith has taught to 'challenge your faith' when you see the history of it. Most of Christian history has been intollerant of dissent and "challenges to the faith". The only 'challenging' or accepting blasphemy has happened very recently, as Christianity lost its irontight hold on the populace.

It appears that only Judaism, of the great monotheistic religions, has avoided such dogmatic views dominating most of its history (as it has encouraged scholarly debate almost since the time of Moses).