"Everbody Draw Muhammad" Day

[Nero]

Oh for pete's sake, quit being so bloody sensitive.

[TTanT]

^Thank you, Dusty.

 

This thread is turning into a whining contest, and fast.

 

You [bleep] and [bleep] had better get over yourselves, now. (There, I offended everyone, so let's move on....)

[PoorLepRecon]

Let's get back on topic guys. Also, avoid any racial remarks, whether you are joking or not.

[fakeitormakeit2]

The claim you made was "if a woman accepts a ride from you, it's legal to rape her. this is true in sharia countries."

 

That's not true. It's total BS.

 

In the Qatif rape case (which you are referencing) the victim was punished for being alone with a male not her husband. That's barbaric and wrong, but it is NOT the same as saying that in that situation it's "legal to rape her". If it were, the rapists wouldn't have been punished.

 

A classic example of how people get facts wrong, twist things around, and start ugly rumors.

 

http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cfm?contentID=2009020828735&method=home.regcon

 

allah akbar

 

oh and http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/17/world/in-pakistan-rape-victims-are-the-criminals.html?pagewanted=1

How dare you, you are extremely ignorant. Was it truly necessary to say Allah akbar there? Excessive stupidity like that is why Arabs, Christian or Muslim, find Americans disrespectful and bully-ish. The depiction of Mohammad to combact a specific instance in the censorship in which the work of an artist was ruined is acceptable, but ignorant bursts of garbage like pointlessly saying Allah akbar? What is your motivation for saying that other than pure mockery?

 

Calm down. No need to get your turban in a twist, he does have a point. Also as said above you are being very hypocritical there, oh and btw, if you hate Americans so much, why the hell do you live there? I'm not American, but love it or leave it son. :)

1. Turbans are worn by Sikhs, 16-19th century Turks and specific peoples, Semites do not wear turbans.

 

2. Again, I've already explain the conclusion you reach of hypocrisy is pragmatic. One is out of protest while the other one is just being insulting. While one does have the right to be offensive, why should they? Just because one has the ability to do so doesn't mean it is the polite thing to do. Visit your grandmother dying in the hospital with cancer or go to the concert you've been waiting to go to all year. While you perfectly could go to the concert with no legal impediments or questioning of right, wouldn't it be really great of you to sacrifice what you would have enjoyed in place of being with your grandmother one last time? There can also be your grandma in the hospital for knee replacement and there's a concert. You can go to the concert and than visit your grandmother maybe the next day or something with no rush as her condition is non-fatal. The same solution cannot be applied to every situation as well as just because you can doesn't mean you should. One using their rights to be offensive is just being a [puncture], but they can always utilize that same right in protest.

 

3. I don't hate America. I made an observation on a blatant problem. Nothing is scott-free from error, so if you recognize an error in it, you hate it? Big logical flaw.

[DragnFly]

Normally I do not like to get myself involved in political or religious posts on these forums, however in this case I do have something to say.

 

There's simply a lack of respect in the world these days. People should have respect for other people's cultures and ways no matter how much it conflicts with your own beliefs or practices.

 

 

What reason would anyone have to draw such an image other than being immature, or trying to start conflict?

 

 

 

I'd like to see these people go over to the middle east and try to do that stuff. Reminds me of all those Nazi skinheads who like to march around, (under police protection of course).

 

First off, I agree. People do need to be respectful to each other, and of their cultures and beliefs, even if they disagree with them. Basically, if people are not being a jerk to you, then you should not intentionally set out to insult or offend them and their beliefs. Its called tact, and most people these days could learn to use some.

 

However , I do not know I would say they have no reason to draw Mohammad. Plain and simple, its a protected right, even if its one that might offend others. As south park was alluding to during the cartooon wars episodes, if you make an exception for one group then obviously other groups should be equally entitled to exceptions. Pretty soon theres nothing you can say or do that would not be offensive to somebody.

 

 

I think it's a totally justified protest. I hate that Comedy Central caved in to the scare tactic that those extremists sent to Matt and Trey. It's clearly wrong for people to get murdered over drawing something and I think it's a great protest to show the extremists that people aren't afraid of them.

The problem is that it's offensive to the moderate Muslims as well as the extremists.

 

Edit: also applicable to the above. You can't forget that extremists make up a small percentage of Muslims, so you're essentially offending a bunch of people who haven't done anything other than follow what they believe in.

 

You see, here is the thing that irks me about this post, both on these forums and elsewhere.

 

People reply here, talking about how the number of muslim extremists are small, and that such things are offensive to moderate muslims and that its offensive to them. Both are true.

 

However, the hypocrisy in this is its often the same people whom bash Christians for their beliefs. The number of Christians who are extremists are very small, and the majority are moderate. Yet... Christian bashing has become one of the pastimes of this forum.

 

Even the BBC is guilty of such bias: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-411846/We-biased-admit-stars-BBC-News.html

 

Its sort of like how the people on this board argue about the government has no right to tell people they cannot consume drugs, yet think they have a right for the government to tell people what they can eat. See the jolly rancher thread where they argued the girl should be punished for breaking a rule, yet they argue its wrong for pot smokers to be arrested despite the fact that they broke a law.

 

Its hypocritical.

[Faux]

the number of muslim extremists are small

 

I would argue that there are countries who follow Sharia law and would consider their citizens to be extremists.

 

That number is not something I'd describe as "small".

[Alg]

the number of muslim extremists are small

 

I would argue that there are countries who follow Sharia law and would consider their citizens to be extremists.

 

That number is not something I'd describe as "small".

That's only if you define a citizen by the laws of his/her country.

[Giordano]

the number of muslim extremists are small

 

I would argue that there are countries who follow Sharia law and would consider their citizens to be extremists.

 

That number is not something I'd describe as "small".

That's only if you define a citizen by the laws of his/her country.

But thank God you can't judge a country's citizens by it's minority powered government, right?

[Saru Inc]

Both Nick's and ALG's posts confused me.

 

What I think you mean is

 

 

ALG: Just because its the law doesn't guarantee people agree with it. However, many do.

 

Nick: Which minority and/or country are you talking about exactly?

[Giordano]

Just in general. As you probably know, tyrants in many countries are "elected" into power thus having a "democractic" appeal to their country when in fact the elections are rigged (Iran) or the minority (the state Party) votes them in.

 

If people living in Sharia countries move away from that country, I could bet on the first thing they drop of their culture, is Sharia law.

[qeltar]

I would argue that there are countries who follow Sharia law and would consider their citizens to be extremists.

So you agree with / support everything your government does?

[blossom2581]

Maybe it is time to get back to the topic. Found that some replies might have swung too far from the discussion topic.

 

Certainly, religious issues are sensitive

 

I understand that there are different people around. Some are atheists, some are agnostics, some are faithful and some are devout.

 

And among the faithfuls and devouts, they are divided by different religious faith and denominations. I can be an Evangelist and you can be a Methodist. I can be a Christian while you can be a Muslim. There are different people having different beliefs around.

 

Well, while I have to respect your faith (or your atheist belief), I would expect that others do respect my belief also. Drawing those pictures showing a Islamic prophet is just a silly way to show how disrespectful and immature we are. Yes, many people does that just for mere "fun". As a religious person, I cannot take any philosopers avocating a world without God a nonsense and speak against them vermently, and I suppose the opposite is true also. I do not think anyone can speak against any prophets or religious figure without respect. And nobody likes others poking fun of others that we love, respect or trust in. Religious figures is merely a subset of these people.

 

People have freedom of speech and freedom of religion, but that does not mean that others' have to be offended by any of my speeches. IF I have that sentiment I should keep it private. And if I think no deities exist I should, instead of bashing any prophets that I see, express my opinion, through reasons and logic.

 

And if others try to convert me, I suppose they should also do this through dialogue. Yes, religious compulsion is not an option here.

 

And even in Islam, which is commonly thought to be compulsive, is actually otherwise. According to Quran,

 

Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth has been made clear from error. Whoever rejects false worship and believes in God has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that never breaks. And God hears and knows all things. (Quran 2:256)

 

If it had been your Lords will, all of the people on Earth would have believed. Would you then compel the people so to have them believe? (Quran 10:99)

 

I must say that there are extremists who kill in the name of their religions (even if their religions forbid so), but they do not represent the majority of the faithful. These people often work with a political agenda, using religion as a means to their own good sake.

 

As the saying goes, "two wrongs does not make one right", offending a large majority of the moderate faithful, aginating them to act irrationally (e.g. plot a retaliatory act), increasing levels of misunderstanding and vendetta and obstructing the progress of mutual understanding betwen cultures, will not make those extremists disappear.

 

Rather, one turns his neighbours enemies. This can be the most foolish thing for anyone to do.

 

Therefore, to quench religious hatred, we should start with mutual respect and acceptance. As a result, in my opinion, this Muhammed drawing application should not be used by anyone,

[OldJoe]

^ So not to step on anybodies toes, you think SP shouldn't show Buddha snorting coke?

I don't understand this to be honest. I live in a "free world" and should be able to draw Muhammed if i want to. Anything offends anyone, should we there for ban what might offend? Then we go back in time and not forward.

[SeanyTheSailor]

To the original question.

 

South Park makes fun of EVERYONE. If it can be made fun of, they do it. No one else [bleep]ed, or maybe no one else cared when they did. Why does Islam have to be so special? They should have to take it just liek everyone else. If I start a religion that says you can't depict naked people is all the porn in the world going to implode? Hell no, its just ridiculous.

[Alg]

^ So not to step on anybodies toes, you think SP shouldn't show Buddha snorting coke?

I don't understand this to be honest. I live in a "free world" and should be able to draw Muhammed if i want to. Anything offends anyone, should we there for ban what might offend? Then we go back in time and not forward.

The thing with it is that, while people should have the right to draw Muhammad, they also should know that they have to accept whatever consequences come with offending people as a result... Which this demonstration does not.

Part of maturity is knowing the responsibilities that come with your freedom.

 

If the group in question is okay with it, fine. If not, then you're just being disrespectful.

[Romy]

The whole idea of this day, is that the freedom of speech was taken, in a free country, for no valid reason.

 

 

The day is sort of... means of protest, to show those who took our freedom, that they've lost the battle, and much more than that.

 

 

Immature? I guess. Just? I believe so. Are there other ways? Perhaps, but this one is effective, and is not going to be stopped anyway.

[OldJoe]

^ So not to step on anybodies toes, you think SP shouldn't show Buddha snorting coke?

I don't understand this to be honest. I live in a "free world" and should be able to draw Muhammed if i want to. Anything offends anyone, should we there for ban what might offend? Then we go back in time and not forward.

The thing with it is that, while people should have the right to draw Muhammad, they also should know that they have to accept whatever consequences come with offending people as a result... Which this demonstration does not.

Part of maturity is knowing the responsibilities that come with your freedom.

 

If the group in question is okay with it, fine. If not, then you're just being disrespectful.

 

Yes, but the offended should also be mature and not burn flags and plant bombs.

I could count so many things offends and disrespects me in one way or another, but i wouldn't ban their right to do so, since it would only make me a hypocrite.

[Alg]

That's the thing, nobody's going at this the right way. It doesn't make sense to make death threats about this, and being more (and purposefully) offensive about it in the name of 'freedom' is just going to make things worse.

I'm harder on the latter side because they had the chance to be the better side and instead chose to sink to the same level as those they offended. Instead of threatening to kill, though, they pretty much declared that it's okay for the world to mock the beliefs of an entire group without penalty. That's not exactly progressive either.

[Romy]

Well, ALG, don't you think death and violent threats for these things won't be nearly as common today?

 

 

 

 

I mean, if I, as a terrorist, saw that my threats only brought more of what I tried to stop, I'd think twice before trying at it again.

[Alg]

Or it will encourage them to go through with their threats so that others will be too afraid to do the same (Hence, terrorism)

Maybe

 

Again, I just don't think fighting intolerance with intolerance is the way to go.

[Romy]

They can't possibly assasinate, or even reach, everyone that took part in that day. They can't even do that with 5% of them.

 

Sounds like it would only heat things up and create more hype over that day, to me.

 

 

 

 

 

And to be perfectly honest, fighting intelerance with intolerance is very effective. Try it.

[tripsis]

REMINDER:

 

Admin Edit: Let's keep this a discussion of the day, and not a "lulz, lets look at my crappy disrespectful paint drawing for the lulz" topic. I've removed the page of pictures, because some of our users *do* find them offensive. See the bottom of page 3 for more info - Das - Tip.it Admin

 

I've long fought for a more liberal, free and diverse off topic. This is where, I feel a line must be drawn.

 

While I'm not muslim, and find the pictures somewhat amusing, I did think that it was disrespectful to whatever muslim users we have, and as a result have removed all of the pictures making fun of Mohammed. I'm ALL for this being discussed as far as the day , what it means and the ethics of it, But I don't want to see members drawing custom pictures to partake in the day - effectively bashing a religion that finds a portrayal of him offensive. IF you have a screencap from southpark or a paper or something thats caused controversy leading up to this event and can use it to enhance the discussion It would be fine to post it. but otherwise It's classless and tasteless, and I think we're better than that. I believe we can handle the discussion fine we just need to be respectful of the diverse group of users on this forum, whether you agree with them - or not.

 

 

Any questions? I'll happily field them

 

~Das

Short translation: no pictures. It is clearly specified in the first post so there's no reason/excuse to post them.

[EarthySun]

Did anybody say that they found it offensive to their religion yet? I think that only these Muslim users themselves can protest these images to be offensive and against their pursuit of happiness.

 

So far, what I've seen is people that are acting politically correct to appease those who I have yet to discover.

[The Dark Lord]

Tripsis, was that honestly necessary?

 

We've already explained it to Earthy_Sun that Das said not to post any pictures. It seems a little obsessive to put part of Das's post in red, bold, and THE LARGEST FONT SIZE in order to make a point that has already been stated multiple times.

 

Otherwise, it just clogs up the thread and distracts users from the discussion.

[tripsis]

Tripsis, was that honestly necessary?

 

We've already explained it to Earthy_Sun that Das said not to post any pictures. It seems a little obsessive to put part of Das's post in red, bold, and THE LARGEST FONT SIZE in order to make a point that has already been stated multiple times.

 

Otherwise, it just clogs up the thread and distracts users from the discussion.

It was just a clarification and the posts were removed to prevent any further discussion on the matter, so I'd appreciate it if we could drop this one after this post too. If you have more to say you can contact me via PM. As for the red, bold and large font size, that's just how Das formatted it and it was quoted directly from the front page. And apparently stating it multiple times wasn't enough because another reminder was necessary.

 

EarthySun - Some of the images that were originally removed were distasteful regardless of your religion. As for depicting Muhammad in general - yes it is likely that only Muslims find it offensive, but we do have Muslims on this forum and it's only right to respect them.