Anger Over Mohammed Cartoon

[dar512]

Well now I'm thinking that maybe the whole culture takes itself a bit too seriously. There's been a lot of ruckus in Europe recently over a cartoon picturing Mohammed. Have these guys never seen the zillion and one Jesus cartoons or God cartoons? Have none of them seen "The Life of Brian"?

These guys need to take a tip from another cartoon: "Don't take life so serious, son. It ain't nohow permanent."

[Undertoad]

[dar512]

Now I understand. They're not angry because it's blasphemous. They're angry because it's too close to the truth.

[glatt]

I'm willing to bet that over 99% of the people protesting the cartoon haven't even seen it. Since it's blasphemy to print it, no Arab paper has run it.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by glatt

I'm willing to bet that over 99% of the people protesting the cartoon haven't even seen it. Since it's blasphemy to print it, no Arab paper has run it.

Are you suggesting that Muslims don't read papers that aren't printed by Arabs? I doubt it. Obviously there's no way to verify your numbers, but I disagree with your point that most haven't seen it because it wouldn't be printed by "Arab papers."

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by BigV

Are you suggesting that Muslims don't read papers that aren't printed by Arabs? I doubt it. Obviously there's no way to verify your numbers, but I disagree with your point that most haven't seen it because it wouldn't be printed by "Arab papers."

As far as I can tell from the articles on the net, the 12 'toons have only been published in one Danish and one french, papers. If that's true then Glatt's 99% is valid and probably conservative.

[BigV]

Can you blaspheme in someone else's language/religious tradition?

I do see it as blasphemous. The writing is pretty clear that depictions of the Prophet are viewed as idolatry. It is also clear that it is very insulting. That's an incindiary combination.

However--it is the reaction to such provocations that counts more than anything.

Righteous indignation? Perfectly justified. Killing and burning, wreaking havoc against uninvolved third parties? Perfectly hypocritical. "Justifying" by inventing some causal relationship between a dairy conglomerate and the author of the cartoon based on nationality? An excuse for hooliganism.

There is some level of insult to me or those dear to me at which I will respond. Depending on the insult and how stirred up I am at the time, I can easily envision a violent reaction. Who here could not? In these times, the Muslim world it very stirred up--the air is saturated with an attitude of persecution. And this is a very grave insult. The reactions are predictable.

But it is a cartoon. It is not a crime against a person. It is pictures and words. It is not violence. It is an invitation to a fight, but it doesn't have to be an excuse for a fight.

It is evidence of intolerance and hypocrisy. And both sides are showing their intolerance and hypocrisy to maximum effect.

[tw]

Originally Posted by BigV

Can you blaspheme in someone else's language/religious tradition?

... The reactions are predictable.

A newspaper in Jordan tried to reprint the comics to show logical thinkers what this hype was about. The editor was made redundant and the entire publication withdrawn before anyone could read it. Why? Logically, everyone should read and understand the most important detail - actual comic strip. But logic does not apply. This is about religion - imposed upon how all others must think. We cannot see that comic because we must be protected. Nonsense. But then this contraversy is not about logic. It is all about the emotions so attached to religion.

Meanwhile, the original purpose of that comic strip was not to insult and disparage anyone. Its original intent was to demonstrate the concepts and conflicts in people's interpretations of Islam. Whether this is true, I cannot say. I don't have the best evidence - the actual comics.

[Sundae]

I have to say I'm with BigV on this one.

Originally Posted by BigV

I do see it as blasphemous. The writing is pretty clear that depictions of the Prophet are viewed as idolatry. It is also clear that it is very insulting. That's an incindiary combination.

To ask where the line needs to be drawn in depicting the prophet is missing the point - the cartoons were NOT stick figures, or single pixel images, or even fruit & veg (although that made me laugh out loud). They were designed to offend and they did their job.

Originally Posted by BigV

However--it is the reaction to such provocations that counts more than anything. Killing and burning, wreaking havoc against uninvolved third parties? Perfectly hypocritical. "Justifying" by inventing some causal relationship between a dairy conglomerate and the author of the cartoon based on nationality? An excuse for hooliganism.

It is evidence of intolerance and hypocrisy. And both sides are showing their intolerance and hypocrisy to maximum effect.

I won't defend anyone carrying placards that advocate death & destruction to strangers based on where they live. But I also don't think it's right to judge others on the behaviour of a minority that share their religion.

Just out of interest, I haven't seen anything in the news about Muslims in Denmark protesting - has anyone else?

[Undertoad]

The publisher of the French paper fired the editor who printed them.

[Undertoad]

Glatt's number is too low, because it would be blasphemous for them to actually look at the cartoons.

[Undertoad]

http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/...sten-Cartoons/

[Undertoad]

Brit muslims respond.

[Undertoad]

[Undertoad]