Beer Monkey
Member
BRB, using imagination because no flesh other than face and hands.
Somewhere, Bill Maher is enjoying an iced tea.
But that's none of his business.
You aren't responsible for these protesting asshats, just like American's aren't responsible for the Westboro church assholes. Extremists do not define a nation or religion.
The Mongol invasion and the teaching of Al-Ghazali would do that to a civilisation. Before Al-Ghazali the natural sciences were an integral part of Islamic society. After him well, we've got nut jobs who believe science is the works of the infidels. That alone should clue people as to how different these Islamists are from early Islam. Not to excuse some of the stuff that's been in the religion since the beginning, but these guys we have today are something else.The Islamic world has been moving backwards since like 1000-1200.
200 people show up at a rally
They don't talk numbers but I doubt they're only 200.Several other Pakistani cities erupted in protest, including Lahore
from the article in one of the pictures.
They don't talk numbers but I doubt they're only 200.
What sort of education does the average Pakistani receive?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_PakistanWhat sort of education does the average Pakistani receive?
The Islamic world has been moving backwards since like 1000-1200.
This remark covers the entire thread but says nothing. Wouldn't you like to narrow it down a bit, so we know exactly why you are so disappointed with the rest of us?
Cultural decline seems to coincide 1) Mongol Invasion 2) Colonialism, 3) US-backed coups. Countries need to start learning to stop interfering with other countries' internal affairs.
"Making Blasphemy Cartoon of Prophet is the Worst Act of Terrorism"
I think that would be murdering unarmed civilians but what do I know? Maybe they should protest murders first and then move on to cartoons.
I don't think the message in this picture is from a fringe philosophy. I think a shit-ton of Muslims love their prophet way too much. My mom, a soft-hearted 58-year old grandmother, living in Canada for almost 30 years, also thinks people who draw the Muslim prophet should be killed. She didn't even have any hateful inflections in her voice - she just says it matter-of-factly, as if the thought goes without saying.
I'll show her this picture when I get home. It might be sick but I laughed out loud at work when I saw this - it's surreal, lol.
Pakistan must be a fantastic place to live if the worst act of terrorism is a cartoon.
Yep, that's the impression I get too. Their prophet even tried to prevent this by forbidding his followers from creating images of him so they wouldn't direct their worship to him when they should be worshiping God.
It apparently backfired big time and a lot of people interpreted it as him being so holy and saint that even depicting him would be blasphemous.
The people protesting and the people clashing against them both seem to have one thing in common. They both seem to be thirsty for blood or righteousness rather than peace. Many people in this thread have proven they have no clue about what they are talking about. Got to be angry and complain at something I guess.
Can you blame them? Islam, as a whole, doesn't really jive with feminism and the LGBT community so what do you expect?
200 protesters is nothing in a country of that size, although most people there probably do condemn the drawings of Prophet Muhammad. Eh Pakistan has bigger issues to sort out than the drawings of some French cartoonists. Sad to see, but Pakistan is all over the place at the moment.
On the other hand the semi-racist and generalization of Pakistanis in this thread is gr8
Get the fuck out of here with this fucking toxic, racist shit
Expected more from you of all fucking people
FFS, stop generalizing a bunch of guys to a whole nation and calling them "morons". For the last time, the whole fucking country is not like this. It fucking sucks when I see people using news like this to judge the whole country.Backward country. My country seems to like importing these morons though.
Only one side is to blame for the lack of peace trying to say that cartoonists are to blame is just wrong.
while not capital punishment (up to 3 years though) in germany blasphemy is a crime as well.I'm not sure I'm adding to the discussion with this, but here we go.
These are the only 13 countries left in the world in which denouncing God (or Atheism basically), blasphemy, and/or leaving Islam can(and does) lead to capital punishment:
Afghanistan 31.8 million (>99% Muslims)
Iran 77.2 million (98% Muslims)
Malaysia 30.4 million (61% Muslims)
Maldives 0.4 million (100% Muslims)
Mauritania 3.4 million (almost 100% Muslims)
Nigeria 174.5 million (50% Muslims, concentrated in the North thus only there's the Sharia law etc.)
Pakistan 196.2 million (97% Muslims)
Qatar 2.2 million (83% Muslims)
Saudi Arabia 30.8 million (97% Muslims, rest are foreign workers)
Somalia 10.4 million (almost 100% Muslims)
Sudan 37.3 million (97% Muslims)
United Arab Emirates 9.3 million (77% Muslims)
Yemen 23.8 million (99% Muslims)
I guess IS can be counted as well, yay!
Oh and it goes without saying that implementing the Sharia law also comes with lots of other goodies obviously...
That's a lot of people who are organized in official countries in which satire like CH would lead to the death of the people involved. No terrorists needed.
People often get offended as they feel all Muslims are accused of being terrorists when it's only a tiny number of people. While that's true, my point with the population numbers above is that the poisonous way of thinking is shared by a big junk of Muslims when looked at globally.
So demanding the death of Mohammed cartoon satirists etc. in countries like in the OP is not really weird from that point of view, it's in fact in compliance with the official law.
Actually, considering those numbers, it's somewhat reassuring that most people even in these countries don't seem to care enough to demand killing people that don't affect them nor do they create a flood of terrorists. The actual extremists must be a minority everywhere, the violent ones even more so. Sadly sometimes they hold the power as you can see above.
However, all these perfectly nice and peaceful people still have the same flaw of religious indoctrination. Even if you don't act on it, I don't think it's a healthy mindset to have. It will take a long time until it's not normal to have "well those blasphemists had it coming" thoughts even for more "moderate" Muslims.
(of course in each of these countries are people that fight/ don't want such laws but are easily taken out by the people in power. I'm not saying they can just stand up and say "no, let's not do this anymore". Although this particular topic is probably anyway not a big deal in countries in which virtually everyone is Muslim )
LOL, Habermas is a religious nut who believes the bible is a history book and he doesn't get to speak for "the majority of scholarship". Anyhow, I can cut and paste as well as you so here are rational responses to Habermas' shitty list of 12 "facts".
I saw a report that said about 500 years ago,
depictions of Mohammad were ok in the Muslim religion...
If that's true, WTF HAPPENED?!?
The permissibility of depictions of Muhammad in Islam has been a contentious issue. Oral and written descriptions are readily accepted by all traditions of Islam, but there is disagreement about visual depictions. The Quran does not explicitly forbid images of Muhammad, but there are a few hadith (supplemental teachings) which have explicitly prohibited Muslims from creating visual depictions of figures.[citation needed]
Most Sunni Muslims believe that visual depictions of all the prophets of Islam should be prohibited and are particularly averse to visual representations of Muhammad. The key concern is that the use of images can encourage idolatry. In Shia Islam, however, images of Muhammad are quite common nowadays, even though Shia scholars historically were against such depictions. Still, many Muslims who take a stricter view of the supplemental traditions will sometimes challenge any depiction of Muhammad, including those created and published by non-Muslims.
I saw a report that said about 500 years ago,
depictions of Mohammad were ok in the Muslim religion...
If that's true, WTF HAPPENED?!?
Soon around 1700s, man by the name of Abdul Wahhab was born in the present day Arabia. He dispensed a strict, austere version of Islam that was a complete political antithetis to the Turkish Caliphate's more grandoise, liberal Islam. Abdul Wahhab was imprisoned by the Caliphate for a few times in the Arabia for causing problems. He still preached his Islam to the Bedouin, and started a following soon. He tried to sell them the idea that Arabia was sacred, and belonged to the Bedouins.I saw a report that said about 500 years ago,
depictions of Mohammad were ok in the Muslim religion...
If that's true, WTF HAPPENED?!?
It's free speech."Must be hanged immediately"
Wow. That's not barbaric at all. Nope.
I don't know which flag they burnt, but it wasn't French.
Come on guys, at least do some research.
It is starting to get hard to argue with his point about hundreds of millions supporting the attack when a country with almost 200 million muslims decides to show their disdain of the terrorists by condemning the cartoons.
It is a fucked up Muslim majority country containing more than 10% of the world's Muslim population.
It has less to do with religion and more to do with Imperialism. If people would actually look at the wider context of issues surrounding attacks and the general ill feeling these people have then maybe they'd have a better understanding of the situation instead of blaming it solely on religion.
Religion is no doubt a contributing factor for some, but so were the many wars and meddling with governments and politics in the Middle East and Asia for decades upon decades, which by the way hasn't stopped. The simplest explanation of religion being the cause for all of this unrest is simply a dishonest way of explaining or even understanding it.
JOHN DOLAN said:Of course, not everyone was blunt enough to blame the French outright. The most common evasion was to say that these twelve people were killed because “the West” kills people in the Muslim world. But that’s not what the attackers said. The two men who charged into Charlie Hebdo’s offices yelled, “We have avenged the Prophet” for Charlie Hebdo’s notorious cartoons caricaturing Mohammed.
They did not mention Gaza, drones, or Iraq. Their rage was for the verbal and graphic crimes committed by the journalists they murdered.
Writers like Teju Cole adopted the Gaza/Pakistan/Iraq line and simply ignored the killers’ own explanation, clear and simple as it was. That is what we call, in the lit-crit biz, a blind spot. And it’s a very interesting one, about the size of the Pacific Ocean and just as full of trash. Why would an Anglo critic fail to notice Sunni jihadists’ hysterical rage at mere verbal transgressions?
Because his own culture suffers from the same hysterical sensitivity to verbal transgressions and insensitivity to all else. Anglo culture has always shared this hysterical sensitivity to verbal transgressions, while French culture has delighted, for centuries, in playing with obscenity, blasphemy, and profanity as an intellectual pastime.
Cultures don’t respect difference. Cultures are in the business of destroying difference everywhere they find it.
I probably shouldn't laugh, but this picture is just too much.