Cartoons and common sense

I can see it (though 'nuke 'em' rather than '9-11 them' would be more apt). I doubt it would be as many Christians saying it than Muslims are saying it now, by any degree, which I agreed with you on. Perhaps Christianity 600 years ago would though...probably trigger a bloodthirsty crusade of rape and torture.

I agree, Parasomnium.It's important to keep in mind, as a secular Muslim commented on NPR the other day, that you can purchase portraits of the Prophet in Middle Eastern markets. We are witnessing not only a great deal of violent hatred but considerable dissembling and hypocrisy.The fact that Muslim clerics circulated pamphlets with depictions of the prophet as a pedophile and a pig, conflating them with the Danish cartoons, is telling: much of the religous hierarchy in the Muslim world wants to promote this "culture war."While I would not create or publish these images, I do defend another's right to do so vigorously. The freedom to parody or satirize people and institutions of power is a fundamental right of speech in the West. We should not surrender it.My gravest concern is with the apologists--Vatican and American--who insist it is wrong to offend another's religious belief. This is an extremely dangerous idea. My right to speak does not end at the limits of another's preference not to be offended, and those in the West who suggest it should end there likely have some agenda beyond a concern for Islam.I would give the same advice to Muslims that I give to conservative Christians who want to control sexual, political, or religious content in the mass media: If you don't like what you see, don't buy the paper.This message has been edited by Omnivorous, 02-05-2006 05:59 PM

---

"Dost thou think because thou art virtuous there shall be no more cakes and ale?"
-Sir Toby Belch, Twelfth Night Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

That's what's actually so scary. These shouting mobs do indeed have a very medieval mindset which, combined with a peculiar fondness of blood - other people's blood - sets the stage for all kinds of nastiness to be around the corner. Today it's Beirut, tomorrow it could be Copenhagen.

I saw your later reply to modulous so I am keeping that in mind as well. My point is that practically every group thinks they are special and react badly, sometimes violently, to depictions that are offensive or taboo according to their worldview.Your position seems to be that muslims seem more scary in their protests. Is that because the ones pictured are dark skinned, speak with a foreign accent, and engage in violent protest? I ask because I can and have seen lesser "outrage" (totally nonviolent) by muslims on this, and much worse by other groups on other subjects.I went into a theater under a bomb threat, surrounded by yelling and frothing Xians, to watch a movie which had no intention of demeaning their prophet. I'm sorry, but all fanatics of all kinds are frightening, and the muslims are no worse.Heck I have been to antiBush/antiWar rallies with similar outrage and behavior. Nope, not sure. You mean the things SOME of them put on their placards. Have you seen what other demonstrators put on their placards? Did you see proBush demonstrators with signs saying things like "nuke France" and "invade Europe"? Hmmmm, why would they be any different than the mideast ones?How about the signs of violence while I walked into that cinema under threat of bombing?Hey, I agree that anyone getting this worked up over cartoons or any other form of communication/imagery has lost perspective, and are not acting rationally. I'm just saying it's all over the place. If you choose to pick out this recent behavior as somehow significant for Islam in general, especially "worse" than other behavior, then you have blinders on. Its only more recent, that's all.

---

holmes
"What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)

Then you need to get more information on the story. While depictions of their prophet is considered a bad thing, that is NOT the major complaint here at all. Peruse the images of signs held by the protesters, and many are about disrepectful images.On Late Edition, a Saudi ambassador was explaining the issue and it was wholly about the disrespectful nature of the images, and not simply that it was mohammed being pictured.As much as I think the issue is overblown and I support satire, including this stuff, it is pretty blatantly offensive to muslims. It directly connects mohammed to actions they do not want him pictured supporting or doing or being.Tell you what, put up satirical cartoons of baby jesus engaging in fellatio with the three wise men while God watches proudly, suggesting that pedophilia is part and parcel of Xian tenets, and my guess is you'll find a similar reaction from Xians... oh yeah, that is if you can get such images published ina newspaper and not get put in prison.They have different concepts of what is taboo, and sacred than us, that is all.

---

holmes
"What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)

Boy, are you watching the new Fox channel or something? Both you and Mark need to get new news services.All mobs can be this way. That's usually what mobs are. Peculiar fondness for blood? Unlike abortion protesters? How about civil rights protesters?Did you see the LA riots? Should I now be in fear of all black people?Not all those protesting were part of a "mob". If you notice when violence began, many would depart. In beirut, if you followed the news, there was an added issue of xian militia types getting involved and sparking violence. Kind of like blacks and jews at a klan or nazi protest who end up turning things into a brawl.And it should be said there are plenty of muslims who are not engaging in any of this, taking a rational approach. I have watched them on news programs. Haven't you seen these, or are you only watching scenes of rioting played again and again?As much as I was stupified by people getting worked up by cartoons and apparently enough to torch the Danish embassy, I'm more concerned that normally rational people (to me) are overreacting and trying to portray this as something unique to a certain people and indeed worse than that engaged in by others.I have seen and experienced worse than this, by nonmuslims. It is not even locked away 100s of years ago. Why are we forgetting this?

---

holmes
"What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)

Holmes, He spread Islam by the sword, what's wrong with depicting Mohammed as being violent? He was. Associating Mohammed's words & actions with the killers who perpetrate this crap doesn't seem too outlandish to me. The people who are to blame for having their religion depicted in this way are the ones who are threatening violence now.Perhaps the irony is lost...Of course, I can see why Johnny average muslim is upset in being lumped in with the fundies, but then I don't have a problem with their mode of objection.Mark

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

Modulous, That's not what I said. I said that other religions have managed to avoid idolatry to no greater level than Islam despite allowing images of their prophets & gods. Again, that's not what I said. The point was that as idolatry goes, it doesn't get greater than the requirement for total submission to the will of god. So why they are hung up on images of prophets leading to idolatry when idolatry is actually a requirement of Islam is anyones guess.Mark

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

And I don't think Muslims would agree. Sounds like equivocation to me. The term idolatry as used in this case refers to the worship of idols. An idol is an object of worship that is not God. Allah is not an idol.

Modulous, Irrelevant. My New Oxford defines it thusly; "extreme admiration, love, or reverence for something or someone". But point taken.Mark

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

Unlike Jews and Xians? How was Israel formed? What did Moses do after coming down off the mountain?When depicted as bloodthirsty crusaders or even bigoted prudes they get upset. And for the umpteenth time, look at what Xians did over LToC. According to the Bible Jesus did hang out with the underclass and spread love, yet when depicted as such in a loving way, they threatened to kill people.I was there, they did this. Its sort of hard to forget. You know very little about Islam is what it seems you are saying. While he engaged in wars, they did not engage in the same style of war and forced conversion as Xians did. Neither did they engage in the same sort of warfare. He did have proscriptions, and that would include activity seen today by terrorists.One might note the perhaps greater irony, that jews were actually protected and perhaps survived because Islam protected them from centuries of prosecution. Then more recently jews bent on ressurecting a millenia dead kingdom over the will of others in that region, commited terrorist acts against them and Xians who stood in their way. It was jews which engaged in every type of activity seen now, only they did it first. In fact jewish extermists continue to do this.They even protest, and violently.Yet it is muslims portrayed as being somehow different, somehow MORE prone to violence. That's just not accurate. I see the irony in protesting in ways which support the very image one is protesting against. It seems to me you and pars are missing the irony of claiming that these generalized and patently offensive pieces are actually supported, or justified, by such behavior when this same behavior is seen elsewhere and yet does not get projected elsewhere.Did the LA riots justify images that blacks are violent? Did violent protests in Ireland justify the image of Irish as violent people in need of gov't domination?I am against the form of protest being engaged in by fanatics. Indeed I am supportive of the cartoon satires being protested. I'm just scratching my head at people acting as if this has something to do with Islam any more than anything else.

---

holmes
"What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)

Given that we were discussing things from this point of view:

quote:

---

If the reaction is consistant with the tenets of their belief system they why would they be expected to react any differently?

---

I beg to differ. I think that is a later definition. I believe it comes from the Greek eidolon (images) and latreia (worship).

.True. I suppose I was arguing more with the link you quoted.I heard a Muslim on the news saying he hoped people didn't think this is the reaction of most Muslims. Yes, I enjoyed Ben Hur but the false Arab was taking Hollywood a bit too far.The Passion is violent, dunno if you'd like that. I'd recommend it because it's new ground. However, I think Gibson's desire to make it look like a Carravagio painting, meant that the plot payed the price. I was left wondering and waiting for a story that never came.

Modulous, So do I. They can believe what they like, it's what they can demonstrate, in that case..Mark

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

How many Christians have flown airplanes into tall buildings, or blown themselves up in busy commuter trains? How many Jews? It's irrelevant whether it really has anything to do with Islam or not. The perception alone in the mind of a deluded sod that there is a connection with Islam is enough for yet another massacre. In that respect, it has everything to do with Islam, in whatever form.This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 06-Feb-2006 01:32 PM