Discussion in 'Freedom of Expression' started by Anonymous, May 6, 2012.
A god is an imperative for anyone who needs to be told how to live.
Sorry for the lateness, everyone. Had this yesterday but didn't have time to post. Slowpoke will make it up to you.
Anyways, following on from last year's 'Memehammad', here's my quick sketch contribution.
Just because you say it's a rendering of Muhammad, doesn't mean that it is...
In which case, no one needs to be offended and we can carry on drawing such pictures without people getting upset about it. Pretty sure that was the reason this whole thing started.
People living in certain countries will get upset about it.
Not going to comment too much on this (that's a first), but there are serious repercussions for people who do this drawing in this part of the world.
But that is what he's trying to say. If it doesn't look like Mohamed, why get upset about it? It's circular logic.
Depictions of Muhammad
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The permissibility of depictions of Muhammad, the founder of Islam, has long been a concern in the history of Islam. 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. 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.
People who believe that Muslims have somehow wronged them, or don't need to exist, etc., will use this occasion as an excuse to troll the less intelligent among the Islamic.
Haters gonna hate, I guess.
Would it be funny if I drew a picture of Xenophon drawing a picture of Mohammed?
Oh hai! Malaysian government troll.
It's free speech. Can a group of people threaten the world into silence? The fundamentalists in the USA would keep us from celebrating Holloween, watching Harry Potter or using swear words using God or Jesus, godammit at least they wouldn't kill someone for it.
Are you forgetting the Christian that murdered an abortion doctor in the US because of his job?
and "Kill A Commie for Christ"?
Pakistan Unblocks Twitter After Eight-Hour Ban
In My Government?
More likely than you think?
If we keep this up, the world will be a better place for all faithfuls.
Draw Mohammed, not war.
No beheadings, just no Twitter for a day.
^This might be the most stupid post I've ever read on this forum.
I'd like to see someone draw a picture of Moses on the cross.
You must be new here.
Shaw, are you saying one equals most?
Nope, but this recycled retort takes a close second in the Stupid Posts contest.
I have the right to offend anybody, any religion, any aliens. It's no more than you say I'm stupid, you stupid.
I was mistaken... THIS^ takes the fucking stupid cake.
I'd love for you to tell me that IRL. That'd make my day, right after I fucked up your day.
The clever prophet.
It seems to me a long day, 5/20 haven't ended.
For many of us, it's still 4/20, yo.
That's it, I'm going to go hide in the corner now and shudder in silence. Or not.
STFU YOU STUPID EX SCIENTOLOGIST
Well you seem to be pulling statistics out of your ass, this guy has a very large following of muslims who speak out and even started ummahfilms. So it's more than one really.
Is WWP taken over by Wikipedia now?
I watched it. Actually he didn't speak out. At most he is saying that people use fanatics in media to make Muslims look bad. He is saying Muslim is not like that. That's no argument about that.
Even Pakistani when exposed to Western culture, they may pray 5 times a day, turn off the cell phone during that, but they still get girls drunk, but maybe debate a little on the spot what to do about them, and then do whatever everybody else do. They don't care if you draw Mohammed or not. But they can't say don't kill people for that. You will never know which of your "friends" are fanatic prone, and which Muslim country you will end up travelling or living one day.
View attachment images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRUQoEQGZNNOGd1JtODTwo6plTvFQf8p
The dox are called "The Quran" and "Sharia".
If you live in a secular country, you can probably speak out.
If you live in an islamically ruled country you face death for exercising a number of elementary human rights such as free speach.
Sure, you are free to criticise Israel, democracy etc all you like under Sharia.
Oh, and you know how badly "apostates" are treated by Scientology?
Well, guess how Muhammad and the Quran say that God wants you to treat apostates?
Ok, too slow. I'll answer. God says that, in Islam, the disconnection has to happen between the skull and the shoulders.
Seems like some people think Draw Mo Day is about trying to offend Muslims because you can. But I think it's meant to be a form of reductio ad absurdum: take the assertion that it is morally wrong for muslims to represent the prophet (PBUH) and stretch it to silly. A lot of the best cartoons do just that.
The map is not the territory. Words and symbols are not the thing symbolized. Any meaning conveyed by a word or an image comes from our intention to assign a meaning and from our skill in provoking that meaning or idea in the minds of those receiving our message.
Banning or outlawing symbols is very tricky business. Is it really the ink scratches on paper that need to go, or is it the thoughts linked to those scratches that are the problem?
There's an infamous Scientology painting showing iconic figures from religions around the world walking along a mountain path. At the top of the mountain is some guy in a suit I think, representing Scientology. If it became illegal to make images of holy men generally, you could replace all those human figures with weebles or cartoons or cans of soup to convey the same idea.
Hundreds of years ago muslims did wrestle with the fallout from this problematic rule against representing the prophet. They realized the logical consequences of such a rule were huge. Any representation of a human figure was potentially going to stir up trouble for the same reason that a picture of Mohammad might stir up trouble: idolatry, or valuing something more than you should, or feeling a reverence toward an image that is similar to the reverence felt toward the person the image represents.
So they got rid of all artwork with human figures. Then, well shit, the animals had to go also. But geometric patterns, those remained worthy subjects for their painters and artisans.
At some point the burden of ancestral superstition becomes too much and people simply let it go. Draw Mo Day is like a little straw dropped upon the camel's back, hoping it might be the one that breaks it.
Oh one more thought before I go play outside --
People who survive serious accidents with head injuries sometimes can't get off like they used to. Maybe before their brain injury they liked to think about a hot babe taking a shower, then the doorbell, then Mr. UPS delivery guy ... etc. But after the injury, none of the old familiar mental images work. It's like they can't really *see* things in their head anymore. So they need a magazine with actual pictures of naughty bits to stop their balls from turning blue. But for some even that's not enough. It must be video.
My point is, some people may have a hard time understanding who Mohammad is and what he did unless you make a video about him.
Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!