May 20 - Draw Mohammed Day
- Thread starter Roi
- Start date
- Status
kittoo
Cretinously credulous
sillik said:
Oh come on bro. Can we please stop doing this cause it will offend Muslims, can we please stop doing that cause it will offend Muslims! Why should I care if someone is stuck in 7th century? Why should I care for someone whose only response to everything is 'we're going to kill you'?
There is no way I am going to change the way I live for someone who cant fathom it and threatens me. I will give one example. A friend of mine, a Hindu, was in US. He was wearing a Swastika T-shirt (and Swastika is very very sacred in Hinduism and has nothing to do with Hitler), but when someone objected, he simply removed the T-shirt and did not go all 'I will kill you its my religion' cause he was in US and to respect their culture is decency. Maybe if a western guy had objected in India about Swastika, he would've told him the importance of Swastika in Hinduism. Its about respecting the culture of your hosts, about respecting a culture even if you dont understand. I dont see Islam doing it very much, or at least as much as what would be accommodating.
EricHasNoPull
Banned
Baki said:
I don't think you understand the difference between intentionally, offending, mocking and humiliating an entire race, religion or sexual orientation of people and having the right to think and express views independent of any religion and race.
Not everybody's view of Gods, Prophets, and people in this world are the same. People in demographic, Western societies should be allowed to say or express what they believe or not believe in freely.
Here is a good example: when Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad came to the US a few years ago and publicly questioned the existence of the Jewish holocaust and also stated that Iran was a country free of homosexuals.
I don't think there was death threats made towards him by large group of Jews and Gays in the US. Those two statements may very well offend Jews and homosexuals, but he was simply stating his point of views, whether he was intentionally trying to piss off Jews and gays is totally subjective to the individual interpreting his message. But the fact remains he genuinely expressed his beliefs. and of course he was in a democratic country when he said that and I am sure just like any Western society, there were lots of protests, protesting against his world views and his presence in the US. but then the next day those protesters moved on with their lives, they didn't publicly claim to kill Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for being anti-gay and anti-Semite.
And again to answer the last part of your question, I think I already did it in the above statement, if these Muslims just had a peaceful protest outside this University lecture hall and
this facebook page still came into existence, chances are I wouldn't join it , nor would I care much about it, because it's just a page on a GLOBAL, PUBLIC website dedicated to drawing an image of a holly figure. Sure it will offend (maybe millions) but as a christian, I wouldn't care if there was a "Draw Jesus Page" On the other hand (even though I am not a Muslim) I make take great offense to a page that was labeled "Kill Islam" or some shit like that.
Again freedom of expression vs Death threats.
gumshoe said:
First off, "I" am not doing anything. I guess you're using "you" generally speaking.
Second, I don't give a rat's ass how many Muslims there are, nor do I care whom / what they respect.
Third, I'm not trying to achieve anything but to hopefully open some "your" eyes to the fact that Islam is an extremely flawed religion / political ideology with a barbaric, extremely violent, sadistic warlord as its head figure.
Most of you people here, as well as most "Westerners," have no clue what Islam is really about. Modern-day terrorists are merely religious zealots that strictly follow what the Qur'an and Hadith preaches. They are not "extremists." They are just true believers and practitioners of a religion / political ideology that tells them to forcefully convert all non-believers. And if they are unable to convert non-believers of Islam, they are instructed by the Qur'an and Muhammad to kill as many non-believers as possible.
Finally, I couldn't care less if Muslims or "other people" approve of me posting a cartoon (that I didn't even draw) depicting Muhammad cutting off someone's head. He actually did this to 600-900 Jews back in the day. If you can't handle that image, then that's your problem, not mine. Don't tell me you play non-violent games with absolutely no blood in it...
P.S. When did I ever mention anything about freedom of speech?
This has nothing to do with freedom of speech and everything to do with censorship, political correctness, and society submitting to Islam / Muslims, while being perfectly fine about other religions getting made fun of and being persecuted daily.
kittoo
Cretinously credulous
Click said:
Very very true. Every other major religion, be it Christianity or Hinduism (both of which also have over a Billion followers) or Judaism, get mocked all the time. No one gives much thought to that nor do the followers issue death threats. If the protests were non-violent and democratic, I would've supported them. But it to issue death threats to everything proves, IMO, that Islam is indeed an extremely flawed religion. And to be honest, I am fed up of this phrase that only a handful Muslims are terrorists etc. All terrorists are Muslims who kill in the name of Allah, so there must be something wrong in Islam. Its absolutely shocking to see everyone submitting to Islam in the name of political correctness or whatever. When a terrorist kills innocents in Mumbai or London or Chechenya or NY or Madrid, newspapers call him a 'gunmen' etc, rather than calling him an Islamic terrorist! This is stupidity, rather than political correctness. When we ourselves aren't accepting that there is something wrong with Islam, how can we expect Muslims to reform themselves?
NakedCosmonaut
Member
idahoblue said:I've got nothing, sorry dude. I feel I have failed.
Hell, I'll just explain it. In the center are the 'Legion of Deities', each with their own halo color, not unlike your various Lanterns. I'm pretty sure everybody recognizes all of them. Outside the 'light' are the villains. On the left is David Miscavige, current leader of Scientology and by all accounts a scumbag. His pet is South Parks version of Xenu. On the right is, as Rentahamster explained, Emma Watson in a mech throwing up the horns. And of course, the Flying Spaghetti Monster below them all.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
:lolNakedCosmonaut said:
Seriously, though, that's some good looking art. I really did like it
Ah. Nice one, I feel stupid now though. I think it's funny I think of Pastafarianism as more of a religion than Scientology. That never even entered my mind!NakedCosmonaut said:
You were doing okay up until the halfway point. "all terrorists are Mulsims"? What the fuck, dude?kittoo said:
Discotheque
Banned
Yeah, lol. There are plenty of terrorists that weren't islamic.
Came into this thread to make a similar post. I'll emphasize this one instead; as long as you're not trampling upon each others' lives and safety, your beliefs are of no concern to others and others' beliefs should be of no concern to you. If you really think drawing Mohammad is a huge affront to God, then you'll be laughing when we're all burning in eternal punishment.SnakeXs said:
Point is, God doesn't need your help. I think he can manage. So who cares what other people do if it doesn't affect you?
kittoo
Cretinously credulous
idahoblue said:
I get the fact that you maybe referring to the Ireland condition or something, and I guess I did forget about them or a few others like them. So I should say-'most of the terrorists are Muslims' (as click said).
It could be also because my country, India, has faced only Muslim terrorists and our newspapers and channels only discuss Islamic terrorism. Also, most of the biggest terrorism incidents are done by Islamic terrorists only.
spiderman123
Member
lol some comments have totally derailed this thread. I was for the idea of making fun of the Mohammad thing but come on a little extreme pics don't yah think. Lets draw some funny pics ....some of these pics are just crazy scary.
GillianSeed79 said:
iapetus said:Yeah, reading through this thread doesn't really give that impression.
Both sides are being shamefully disingenuous about this.
The point of Draw Mohammed Day is to offend Muslims and by doing so, show that we will not allow terrorism to limit free expression.
In the west, people are afraid to criticize Islam. Whether that criticism is childish and crude or sophisticated and poignant, every expression, no matter how puerile, deserves to be heard. Those voices are legally protected in most western countries, but they are not culturally supported. An institutionalised culture of self-imposed censorship has taken root, and created a double-standard with regard to religious criticism because people are afraid. Without the murders and the threats, this double-standard would not exist.
Every religion is fair game except Islam, not because offending Muslims is more rude, hurtful, unpleasant or childish, but because a small percentage of Muslims have successfully bullied the world into an attitude of respect through fear.
Draw Mohammed Day is important because every person who contributes in whatever way is doing so in defiance of that culture of fear. Islam is neither more worthy of respect than Christianity, nor is it less worthy of respect. This is about redressing that balance in a non-violent manner.
In some countries it is. However, it should not be. And thankfully, in most it is not.Baki said:
The truth does not need legal protection. They should be free to make their claims and look like fools when faced with the evidence. So long as they're barred from speaking, no one can know how silly and poorly grounded their opinions are.
spiderman123
Member
found this pretty funny
perfectchaos007
Member
spiderman123 said:
found this pretty funny
considering there has to be 72 virgins per 1 guy....the math just doesn't add up. There's not enough women....let alone virgins...for that ratio to be satisfied.
GrotesqueBeauty
Banned
perfectchaos007 said:
NakedCosmonaut
Member
Rentahamster said::lol
Seriously, though, that's some good looking art. I really did like it
Emma Watson would probably work too actually, Hermione is clearly a Bride of Satan.
Click said:
Ive heard that quote before, many times. I dont know who originally said it but Ive heard a radio interview with an Australian imam who said pretty much the same thing.
Islamic terrorists are bad - very bad - PR for the religion.
Religious apologists are also dangerous because through silence and cultural relativism they directly condone fatwas and murder for the trivial 'crime' of blasphemy.
Free speech is infinitely more important than not offending someone's superstitious religious beliefs. But then again it is disingenuous to imply as some other people have done that islam is the problem.
The problem is extremism. But there is certainly more extremist sentiment apparent in muslim countries at the moment. But would you be saying that if you lived in Belfast in the 80s, for example?
Vigilant Walrus
Member
I still feel that, the things that offend us are still something we should ignore, rather than going this route.
What would stop me from taking any ideology, or political idea, and simply claim that any negative talk about it, will be declared offenssive, and will result in threats, and death on your part?
I mean, I think it's to easy. People should respect other peoples wishes, but they don't have too. If I am a Ketchup Lunatic and I'll decide that anyone who does not like Ketchup has to die, where is the rightness in that?
People have the right to say, they don't like ketchup. They have the right to draw it. Just like Muslim newspaper have the right to draw racist anti jewish cartoons every day, with no consequences. I think it's deeply wrong, but like the nuhammed cartoons. If I don't like it - I just look the other way.
I feel that using other arguments like looking at it like a black/white picture, is almost like endorsing a cataclysm for violence. It starts when no drawing of muhammed. then no backslash of islam. then no other religions. then... Like, it's a step on the way to give headroom and just confirming that being a bully works.
What would stop me from taking any ideology, or political idea, and simply claim that any negative talk about it, will be declared offenssive, and will result in threats, and death on your part?
I mean, I think it's to easy. People should respect other peoples wishes, but they don't have too. If I am a Ketchup Lunatic and I'll decide that anyone who does not like Ketchup has to die, where is the rightness in that?
People have the right to say, they don't like ketchup. They have the right to draw it. Just like Muslim newspaper have the right to draw racist anti jewish cartoons every day, with no consequences. I think it's deeply wrong, but like the nuhammed cartoons. If I don't like it - I just look the other way.
I feel that using other arguments like looking at it like a black/white picture, is almost like endorsing a cataclysm for violence. It starts when no drawing of muhammed. then no backslash of islam. then no other religions. then... Like, it's a step on the way to give headroom and just confirming that being a bully works.
Vigilant Walrus
Member
idahoblue said:
Yeah, maybe I should have deleted first, but I decided to do a quick edit. Apparently not quick enough;D
:lol
water_wendi
Water is not wet!
ive seen some of the stuff people have drawn. If people rioted and killed people over a bomb turban they are really going to have a conniption fit over this :lol Religion.
I love the fact that some pictures being shown in some countries as evidence of how the western people ridicule Mohammed has nothing remotely to do with any discussions regarding islam. Pictures such as the one of a bearded man from a pig squealing contests have become a person shaming Mohammed, pictures of random old men from comics have become Mohammed because they had beards etc etc.
Also, the fact that we are supposed to be ok with joking about christians, jews and other faiths, which I do, but this one religion is supposed to get a free card is just fucking silly.
Also, the fact that we are supposed to be ok with joking about christians, jews and other faiths, which I do, but this one religion is supposed to get a free card is just fucking silly.
perfectchaos007
Member
So 2 more days till the Mohammed pics are drawn? How are these pics going to be publisized to make sure that everyone sees them? no newspaper would dare let you put them in their local paper...and I heard that some people are going to go to college campuses to draw mohammed with chalk but school is out for the summer at most universities i know :lol
So seriously what's the plan to get these drawings publicity?
So seriously what's the plan to get these drawings publicity?
perfectchaos007
Member
Brashnir said:
what's an internet? is it a new hammock?
but seriously CNN won't do a story about it. Youtube will probably take all video's with mohammed drawings down because they are pussies.
I figured the internet would be the main source of distributing mohammed pictures, but what larger media source on the web would help get these images seen by as many people as possible? Is it a secret? I guess we'll find out. I just hope a good plan is in place and it works to perfection, that's all.
Instigator
Banned
How come no one (or almost) is making and posting their own Mohammed drawings in this thread? It would make this thread much more fun.
kittoo said:
I don't see your point. He was told that what he was wearing offended people, and he removed it. If he'd followed the same attitude advocated by most in this thread, he'd have refused to remove it, replaced all the rest of his clothes with swastika-patterened ones, and declared August 13th to be 'Bring a swastika to work day'.
Particle Physicist
between a quark and a baryon
.
Forget for a second, the contemporary imagery behind the swastika.iapetus said:
If the reason for taking offence at the swastika was that you didn't want the swastika idolising yet you were willing to kill in its name, I would support all of the above. I don't see a problem with offending people that take offence for no good reason and threaten the freedoms of others with their ridiculous, outdated superstitions.
The hypocrisy behind preventing idolatry by idolising makes it impossible for me to sympathise with these people. If they truly wanted to protect mo from idolatry or being deified then they've gone completely the wrong way about it.
If you think this is just about people wanting to aggressively confront muslims, I think you're too early. I don't doubt that will happen in the future but not yet. The people you think of don't need a special day to hate on, they do it all year round. I genuinely believe that this is a stand against religion encroaching on freedoms outside of its borders and not an excuse for aggressive, confrontational people to fight and insult muslims.
Now the knee-jerk reaction to the next terror attack (assuming there is one), that'll be a different beast altogether.
Ollie Pooch
In a perfect world, we'd all be homersexual
As much as this whole thing probably started as a comment on free speech, many of the pics just look like a cheap excuse for people to draw things in poor taste :lol
Still, I look forward to seeing what comes out of this.
Still, I look forward to seeing what comes out of this.
kittoo
Cretinously credulous
iapetus said:
I understand where you are coming from and why you didnt understand.
What I meant was that these guys, those who threatened South park creators, are in your land, USA. Free speech etc are in culture of USA and those who threatened Matt and Trey, should rather have followed the culture of hosts (like my Hindu friend did), rather than threatening that they will kill. My Hindu friend could've denied, but he rather respected the feelings of people in US. These guys who threatened Matt and Trey, they are not respecting US culture and law of free speech, but rather are bringing their version of Radical Islam from Pakistan/Saudi Arabia to there.
kittoo said:
No, because if it's about respecting beliefs/cultures, there are people going out of their way to avoid doing this on both sides of this discussion. If we say that respecting beliefs/cultures is the right thing to do, then it's self-evident that Draw Mohammed Day is a dickish move, and also that calling for actions against people who do draw Mohammed is dickish. If we say that there's no call to respect a belief/culture that you disagree with then Draw Mohammed Day is just fine, as is railing against those who do.
The only model under which you get the result you want (DMD is fine, complaining about drawing Mohammed is bad) is one where you say respecting beliefs/cultures is important, just so long as it's my belief/culture.
Yeah, there are obvious cases where going overboard on either side is inherently wrong. Once you're calling for the death of people who disagree with you, that's a fairly obvious one. But because a minority of Muslims call for the death of those who disrespect them you should go out of your way to offend the moderates as well? Seriously? When do we start calling for the abolition of the Republican party because of the nutjobs who pray for Obama to die? How about concentration camps for people who like animals because of the existence of ALF?
kittoo
Cretinously credulous
2San said:
How many people those have killed, kind sir?
Edit: On further thinking, I guess since they havent killed anyone (not a single killing proved yet), they arent even terrorist organization in a general sense. So while groups that want pure Hindu state might exist, they aren't terrorists. And dont come up with communal riots arguments cause they are a different ballgame altogether.
On further thinking, I find your argument even more absurd. Cause you are equating India's own Hindu parties to foreign Islamic terrorists who kill people in India (or worldwide for that matter). I dont see how they are same. Yeah if Hindu terrorists were killing innocents in Pakistan, then that would give you ground to equate them.
Oh I thought the "there only few terrorists in the whole religion"card didn't hold up?kittoo said:
What people fail to ignore is that the majority of terrorism happen in Islamic countries themselves. Are people really suggesting that Muslims condone this shit? If you haven't noticed in democratic Islamic nations these groups don't get a lot votes.
:lolkittoo said:
You don't know a lot about your country do you?
kittoo
Cretinously credulous
2San said:
I dont want to discuss with someone who rather will go for personal insults than discussing or arguing rationally. I dont really care if you think that I dont know much about my country.
sonicmj1 said:
What part of 'most' you dont understand?
In India, LTTE assassinated Rajiv Gandhi (in 1991) and Khalistani terrorists assasinated Indira Gandhi in 1984. Both insurgencies are now dead.
Muslim terrorists- multiple killings in Mumbai (at least 5-6), in Bangalore, in Ahemadabad, in Varanasi, in Akshardham, in Jaipur, in New Delhi, in IISc, a few big ones in Kashmir, in Hyderabad...the list goes on. And these are only of big ones, not counting literally hundreds of smaller ones in Kashmir.
And that was in India only. What would you say about WTC, Moscow, Madrid, London, Bali, recent failed one in NYC?
- Status