Danish Muslims despair at portrayal

[Isambard]

islam does not "conceal" that it is also political.
i don't follow your reasoning and disagree with what you're saying.
no - you do not have to respect religious figures.
what you should respect is the feelings of your fellow human beings, whether you understand them or not.
this seems to me like just plain and simple decency.
btw - as a side note, is there any gathering of human beings that does not involve politics?

When you give religon a special status, you conceal the politics. Noone disagrees with freedom of speech in regards to politics (for obvious reasons) but when its hidden in a religion it suddenly becomes taboo for some reason.

Feelings are secondary as giving any form of political thought free reign w/o critisism is dangerous.

You can not like it all you want, but at the end of the day Im sure youll agree Bush shouldnt be free from satire just because a few christian churchs feel he's some sort of messiah, then ditto for Muhammed and muslims.

So too bad so sad for offended parties, but granting religion a free pass is a great way to have it turn around and bite you in the ass!:coolalien

*PS. Any group that gets together and ultimately makes positive claims is political in some regard. Which is why good satire spares noone.

 

[snakelegs]

When you give religon a special status, you conceal the politics. Noone disagrees with freedom of speech in regards to politics (for obvious reasons) but when its hidden in a religion it suddenly becomes taboo for some reason.

Feelings are secondary as giving any form of political thought free reign w/o critisism is dangerous.

You can not like it all you want, but at the end of the day Im sure youll agree Bush shouldnt be free from satire just because a few christian churchs feel he's some sort of messiah, then ditto for Muhammed and muslims.

So too bad so sad for offended parties, but granting religion a free pass is a great way to have it turn around and bite you in the ass!:coolalien

*PS. Any group that gets together and ultimately makes positive claims is political in some regard. Which is why good satire spares noone.

the politics in islam is not hidden!
i see nothing wrong with writing a piece criticizing islam - don't you see the difference between a cartoon insulting a religious figure and a criticism of islam? i don't think a religion needs a "free pass" or is above criticism.
if you can't see the difference between george bush and a religious figure...well, we are in 2 different worlds and will just have to disagree.

 

[wilberhum]

When you give religon a special status, you conceal the politics. Noone disagrees with freedom of speech in regards to politics (for obvious reasons) but when its hidden in a religion it suddenly becomes taboo for some reason.

Feelings are secondary as giving any form of political thought free reign w/o critisism is dangerous.

You can not like it all you want, but at the end of the day Im sure youll agree Bush shouldnt be free from satire just because a few christian churchs feel he's some sort of messiah, then ditto for Muhammed and muslims.

So too bad so sad for offended parties, but granting religion a free pass is a great way to have it turn around and bite you in the ass!:coolalien

*PS. Any group that gets together and ultimately makes positive claims is political in some regard. Which is why good satire spares noone.

As usual, again you have done an excellent job. :shade:
Keep up the good work.

 

[Roasted Cashew]

That it does. Freedom of expression means I can say something potentially insulting to you and you mustnt react violently. It also means I have to sit there and take as well when you rebuttle by calling me an idiot.

Being a Muslim myself, I am ashamed that some Muslims would do such a thing and take law into their own hands. This is indeed the work of WEAK Muslims who get angry easily.

The Prophet (PBUH) said: A strong man is not he who defeats his adversary by wrestling, but a strong man is he who controls himself at the time of anger.

Indeed, I am disgusted by what the cartoonists did. It's a disgrace that people would let it go by calling it "freedom of expression" or even worse "criticism". I think people who can't differentiate between criticism and "insults" are idiots. I do believe in dialog and debate but such a thing is a direct provocation and shows how morally dead are the cartoonists and people who back them. I'm not sure how these people will behave when someone draw their mothers naked being screwed by another man.

I am not sure how depicting Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) as a terrorist or womanizer helpful. Anyway, The Prophet was continuously berated, reviled, and denigrated. The Qur'an has documented in several verses the different accusations that were leveled at Prophet Muhammad(pbuh). Some of these charges, which probably mainly came from the polytheistic Arabs, accused Muhammad of basing the Qur'an on confused dreams; making it up; and being merely a poet, a madman, or a soothsayer:

Nay! They (the disbelievers) say: "[The Qur'an is] Medleys of dreams; nay! he has made it up; nay! he is a poet. So let him bring to us a sign as the former [prophets] were sent with" (21.5).

And they (the disbelievers) say: "O you [Muhammad] to whom the Remembrance (the Qur'an) has been revealed! You are a madman" (15.6).

Therefore continue [O Muhammad!] to remind; for by the grace of your Lord, you are not a soothsayer or a madman (52.29).

Yet, there is not a single verse in the Qur'an that told the Prophet or Muslims in general to respond to the accusers with any form of violence. If only Muslims could control their anger and behave like strong Muslims.

The Apostle of Allah (pbuh) said to us: When one of you becomes angry while standing, he should sit down. If the anger leaves him, well and good; otherwise he should lie down.

 

[Isambard]

the politics in islam is not hidden!
i see nothing wrong with writing a piece criticizing islam - don't you see the difference between a cartoon insulting a religious figure and a criticism of islam? i don't think a religion needs a "free pass" or is above criticism.
if you can't see the difference between george bush and a religious figure...well, we are in 2 different worlds and will just have to disagree.

Im curious. How would you seperate the following?

Divine right of Kings
Religiously fuelled terrorism for a particular state
Persecution of minorities for religious reasons
Conflicting blasphomy (Christians say Muhammed was X, Muslims say the bible is a corruption. Both claim offense)
Religiously "inspired" political leaders

etc.

Where do you draw the seperation between religion and politics?

 

[snakelegs]

Im curious. How would you seperate the following?

Divine right of Kings
Religiously fuelled terrorism for a particular state
Persecution of minorities for religious reasons
Conflicting blasphomy (Christians say Muhammed was X, Muslims say the bible is a corruption. Both claim offense)
Religiously "inspired" political leaders

etc.

Where do you draw the seperation between religion and politics?

i'm not sure there is a separation. as i said before:
a valid excercise (in my opinion) of freedom of speech is to write an essay criticizing a religion. some people might take offense, but it is still valid, in my opinion.
a misuse of freedom of speech is to mock and insult religious figures. the intention here is simply to offend and (hopefully, in this case) provoke.
to me there is a big difference between the 2. also a big difference in maturity level.

 

[snakelegs]

Yet, there is not a single verse in the Qur'an that told the Prophet or Muslims in general to respond to the accusers with any form of violence. If only Muslims could control their anger and behave like strong Muslims.

The Apostle of Allah (pbuh) said to us: When one of you becomes angry while standing, he should sit down. If the anger leaves him, well and good; otherwise he should lie down.

this is true. but there are a few problematical hadiths.

 

[Isambard]

i'm not sure there is a separation. as i said before:
a valid excercise (in my opinion) of freedom of speech is to write an essay criticizing a religion. some people might take offense, but it is still valid, in my opinion.
a misuse of freedom of speech is to mock and insult religious figures. the intention here is simply to offend and (hopefully, in this case) provoke.
to me there is a big difference between the 2. also a big difference in maturity level.

Well the cartoonists were attacking the political aspects...but....lets widen it to cartoons in general (such as in South park where they do attack religious belief).

Why is characaturization (sp?) any less valid than an essay?

 

[snakelegs]

Well the cartoonists were attacking the political aspects...but....lets widen it to cartoons in general (such as in South park where they do attack religious belief).

Why is characaturization (sp?) any less valid than an essay?

we can argue forever.
i'm not familiar with south park. (i don't have tv)
as for the cartoon under discussion, i personally i see no merit in it - it's sole purpose is to mock a religious figure.
i think it might be conceivable that one could draw a cartoon critical of religious belief - this is not the same as attacking a figure revered by millions of people.
personally, i am quite critical of religion in general. but i respect people's religious feelings and its importance to other people.

 

[Cabdullahi]

People with no religion dont have that kind of sympathy towards a person with religion when their religion is mocked.they dont care, anything that they disregard can be ridiculed its freedom of speech:Evil:
When the prophet (saw) is mocked or made fun of i have this feeling of anger and i feel these thing are purposely done to make not just me but every pious muslim feel agitated.If human beings are feeling this way, why dont they stop it instead of republishing it.

If everyone says something about what other people believe in and hide behind the so called "its freedom of speech" and we can say what ever we want its just crazy and if people carry on like this respect will be lost boundries broken.

Yes islam is political and the westerners dont like it they are scared of its rise but i will tell u, i am so sure that it will revolutionize the world

People need to wake up why were highly influental figures killed i can name a whole list, malcom x, martin luther king, jfk.America wants to control the world control what we think when we think.they are doing it through the media.so my friends i dont know about you but i am not becoming a slave of some new world order regime. i am the slave of ALLAH and will always be inshallah

 

[wilberhum]

People with religion don't have that kind of sympathy towards a person with no religion.

 

[snakelegs]

People with no religion dont have that kind of sympathy towards a person with religion when their religion is mocked.they dont care, anything that they disregard can be ridiculed its freedom of speech:Evil:

i disagree with the above. you do not need a religion in order to respect other people's feelings. you do not need a religion in order to think it is wrong to mock others.

 

[Roasted Cashew]

People with religion don't have that kind of sympathy towards a person with no religion.

I am surprised you didn't resorted to cartoons this time. Ok. Sorry. Just wanted to jump in. hehe

 

[Cabdullahi]

People with religion don't have that kind of sympathy towards a person with no religion.

Ofcourse we have sympathy for u WE WANT YOU TO COME INTO THE LIGHT OUT FROM THE DARKNESS THAT ENGULFS YOU.The thing is You are hungry for knowledge but i feel you have some sort of inner anger against muslims?? that can be seen from your posts tell me if i am wrong.:statisfie

 

[wilberhum]

Ofcourse we have sympathy for u WE WANT YOU TO COME INTO THE LIGHT OUT FROM THE DARKNESS THAT ENGULFS YOU.The thing is You are hungry for knowledge but i feel you have some sort of inner anger against muslims?? that can be seen from your posts tell me if i am wrong.:statisfie

Your wrong.

 

[Pygoscelis]

I for one would be far more disturbed about people sawing of heads and blowing up buildings and claiming to do it in the name of my worldview than I would having my worldview mocked in a cartoon.

 

[Keltoi]

I for one would be far more disturbed about people sawing of heads and blowing up buildings and claiming to do it in the name of my worldview than I would having my worldview mocked in a cartoon.

I've said that before and it still does confuse me a bit. However, I think in this context the issues are not the same. The point of the cartoons was to equate suicide bombings with the Prophet Muhammed. Yes, it was done as satire to make a statement about the current state of Islam from the Western perspective, but it was also highly inflammatory from a Muslim perspective.

In reality, what is your average everyday Muslim living in the West, usually the child of immigrants, supposed to do about people half a world away sawing people's heads off and blowing up women and children in marketplaces? It's not something they condone or support, and its just as alien to them as it is to you and me. Excluding some of the juvenile posters on this board, I've never met a Western Muslim who thinks beheadings and suicide bombs are the way to go for the future of Islam.

That being said, I don't support censorship, but I do support common sense and basic respect. As Snakelegs has mentioned, it isn't too much to ask for. I just don't want the government controlling "basic decency and respect".

 

[Roasted Cashew]

I've said that before and it still does confuse me a bit. However, I think in this context the issues are not the same. The point of the cartoons was to equate suicide bombings with the Prophet Muhammed. Yes, it was done as satire to make a statement about the current state of Islam from the Western perspective, but it was also highly inflammatory from a Muslim perspective.

In reality, what is your average everyday Muslim living in the West, usually the child of immigrants, supposed to do about people half a world away sawing people's heads off and blowing up women and children in marketplaces? It's not something they condone or support, and its just as alien to them as it is to you and me. Excluding some of the juvenile posters on this board, I've never met a Western Muslim who thinks beheadings and suicide bombs are the way to go for the future of Islam.

That being said, I don't support censorship, but I do support common sense and basic respect. As Snakelegs has mentioned, it isn't too much to ask for. I just don't want the government controlling "basic decency and respect".

I agree with. eace:

 

[Pygoscelis]

My point is that the cartoons were outsiders suggesting that Islam is about terrorism. The terrorists are proclaimed muslims claiming that Islam is about terrorism (and doing so in horrific ways). Which is worse?

 

[Muezzin]

My point is that the cartoons were outsiders suggesting that Islam is about terrorism. The terrorists are proclaimed muslims claiming that Islam is about terrorism (and doing so in horrific ways). Which is worse?

They're both bad, but it's a great, great pity that Muslims generally do not protest against violent misuse of the religion of Islam as vehemently as we do against negative media portrayals.

On the other hand, some Muslims are working on it, with 'Not in My Name' demonstrations and things. I'll see if I can find a link.

Also, teachers in mosques condemn atrocities committed behind the shield of Islam and teach Muslims this is in no way tolerated in Islam.