'Anti' Isalm cartoons....

cleanbluesky · 3 Feb 2006 at 11:51

Phantom said:
1. he (the Phrophet) should not have been drawn - (no portraits, images or drawings of him exist in Islam, to prevent him being 'idolised')...
2. Islam is wholly against terrorism and terrifying the innocent (people who do not fight) so to say Mohammed is the root of it all is plain wrong.

Yet the response to this has been threats of terrorism :confused:

wordy · 3 Feb 2006 at 11:53

sandy10 said:
Tolerance and Peace:

Traditionally, Christian churches have regarded homosexual sex as sinful, based on certain passages in the Bible. This position is still affirmed by the largest Christian denominations, including the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and most Protestant denominations, especially among Evangelicals such as the Southern Baptist Convention

Love thy Neighbour, and the fable of the good samaritan are also in the bible.

My point is that that as intelligent human beings we are each responsible for our own actions. Using a book as an excuse to hurt/kill someone because it's a religous book not a vaild excuse. You were not forced to do it

Vonhelmet · 3 Feb 2006 at 11:54

Phantom said:
people are missing the point here... theyre objecting to the fact that their prophet is depicted as a characteur (and one which "agrees" with terrorism). they believe this is wrong on 2 accounts:
1. he (the Phrophet) should not have been drawn - (no portraits, images or drawings of him exist in Islam, to prevent him being 'idolised')...
2. Islam is wholly against terrorism and terrifying the innocent (people who do not fight) so to say Mohammed is the root of it all is plain wrong.

the cartoon just shows ignorance and the ability not to understand the facts which results in causing the antagonism between muslims and non-muslims. why people cant just respect other peoples beliefs i do not know. have they not anything better to do? hmm... probably not.

As I have pointed out in SC, the cartoons are satire, intended to show the disparity between the peaceful claims and the unpeaceful actions of some. This covers point 2 of your post. Point 1 is harder to defend, but for the simple fact of free speech and differing opinions and beliefs of who Mohammed was and whether or not he should be depicted.

dilated · 3 Feb 2006 at 11:55

cleanbluesky said:
Yet the response to this has been threats of terrorism

exactly.

"im not a violent man, call me one and ill kick your head in!" :rolleyes:

Vonhelmet · 3 Feb 2006 at 11:55

dilated said:
I have two pints to add...

After two days of arguing this, and several more ahead, finally - some thinking I can get behind!

sandy10 · 3 Feb 2006 at 11:56

Humpty said:
What a load of rubbish!! Get your head out of the sand and look at history and the world around you; people who are motivated by thier faith have done a huge amount of good.

...of course, that wasn't quite the point.

However, a vast number of the most religious people, with the deepest faith are those carrying diseases, starving, and living in intolerable conditions in a favala in South America. So it's percentages isn't it.

Science has proven results, good and bad....Religion doesn't.

theleg · 3 Feb 2006 at 11:57

Can nobody see the cultural aspects here?

Are western muslims threatening death and disaster to all? Or is it the ones stuck in bumhole countries in the middle east?

Islam isnt going crazy over this...The poor and ignorant of the middle east are..Along with the terrorist nutjobs.

Vonhelmet · 3 Feb 2006 at 12:02

sandy10 said:
Science has proven results, good and bad....Religion doesn't.

Apart from the peace and happiness and community it brings people.

But hey - you ignored that last time, why should you acknowledge it this time?

You're a good troll - I'll give you that. You've got me to post in a discussion I said I'd give up on.

EDIT: I also fail to see how you're stating that Christians disapprove of homosexual sex somehow shows that we are intolerant or un-peaceful. It's perfectly reasonable and possible to disapprove of something without being intolerant of it.

Phantom · 3 Feb 2006 at 12:04

dilated said:
cleanbluesky said:

Yet the response to this has been threats of terrorism

Click to expand...

exactly.

"im not a violent man, call me one and ill kick your head in!"

what can you do about a few people who take things in their own hands and stir up peoples anger? they dont represent the views of the majority, yet its then the religion who gets the blame. the only way you can understand it is to learn about the religion yourself from an unbiased point of view (not what the media or other people want you to see or know about). Only then should you be making comments like that.

cleanbluesky · 3 Feb 2006 at 12:05

Balddog said:
Can nobody see the cultural aspects here?

Are western muslims threatening death and disaster to all? Or is it the ones stuck in bumhole countries in the middle east?

Islam isnt going crazy over this...The poor and ignorant of the middle east are..Along with the terrorist nutjobs.

Saudi aren't having a favourable reaction, they aren't exactly third world

GSDog · 3 Feb 2006 at 12:05

They are still showing the cartoon on EuroNews, it's the first time I've seen it.

Archangelus · 3 Feb 2006 at 12:07

Balddog said:
Can nobody see the cultural aspects here?

Are western muslims threatening death and disaster to all? Or is it the ones stuck in bumhole countries in the middle east?

Islam isnt going crazy over this...The poor and ignorant of the middle east are..Along with the terrorist nutjobs.

I can see what you're saying, and I don't dispute it. Thing is, Western muslim leaders have not done anything publicly, aside from vocally condemning the terrost acts committed in the name of Islam, to try to resolve the terrorist situation, and non muslims have started viewing ALL muslims negatively, and I think this cartoon situation is just symptomatic of that.

sandy10 · 3 Feb 2006 at 12:08

vonhelmet said:
Apart from the peace and happiness and community it brings people.

Yes, it was acknowledged, but it's percentages.

It's like saying "war is terrible" - two sides to every story.

War wasn't terrible when it prevented Hitler from conquering Europe, for example.

Click to expand...

chopchop · 3 Feb 2006 at 12:08

i think the whiners should **** off back to their own country :mad:

.

Vonhelmet · 3 Feb 2006 at 12:12

chopchop said:
i think the whiners should **** off back to their own country .

Well, you can be glad that very few of them are in this country to begin with.

*awaits invasion*

sandy10 · 3 Feb 2006 at 12:12

chopchop said:
i think the whiners should **** off back to their own country .

...and if they, and their parents are born and raised in England?!?

Vonhelmet · 3 Feb 2006 at 12:13

sandy10 said:
vonhelmet said:

Apart from the peace and happiness and community it brings people.

Click to expand...

Yes, it was acknowledged, but it's percentages.

It's like saying "war is terrible" - two sides to every story.

War wasn't terrible when it prevented Hitler from conquering Europe, for example.

And you believe that percentage wise religion causes more misery than happiness?

In that case, I believe that you should produce some evidence to back such an outlandish assertion, or I will be forced to fall back on H0 - that you are an anti-religious zealot.

fatiain · 3 Feb 2006 at 12:14

sandy10 said:
...and if they, and their parents are born and raised in England?!?

Well they can obviously **** off back to England!

Oh wait. Doesn't really work does it?

wordy · 3 Feb 2006 at 12:14

Something I'd like to add tho is that it's perfectly acceptible for Al-Jazeera and other middle eastern new organisations to show terrorists be-heading westeners. but then muslims are getting bent out of shape about a bloody cartoon.

Double standards or what

theleg · 3 Feb 2006 at 12:14

cleanbluesky said:
Saudi aren't having a favourable reaction, they aren't exactly third world

I bet the rich saudis arent doin a thing...Its the poor as hell saudis that are getting worked up...