General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums"Why Muslims Decry Prophet Images"
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/12/ambassadors-killing-shines-light-on-muslim-sensitivities-around-prophet-mohammed/?hpt=hp_c1(CNN) Violence over depictions of the Prophet Mohammed may mystify many non-Muslims, but it speaks to a central tenet of Islam: that the Prophet was a man, not God, and that portraying him threatens to lead to worshiping a human instead of Allah.
It's all rooted in the notion of idol worship, says Akbar Ahmed, who chairs the Islamic Studies department at American University. In Islam, the notion of God versus any depiction of God or any sacred figure is very strong."
The Prophet himself was aware that if people saw his face portrayed by people, they would soon start worshiping him, Ahmed says. So he himself spoke against such images, saying Im just a man.
The prohibition against such portrayals was on stark display Tuesday, as mobs in Egypt and Libya attacked U.S. compounds in response to a film that vilifies the Prophet Mohammed, who founded Islam in the 7th century. The attack on the U.S. personnel in Benghazi, Libya, was orchestrated by extremists who used the protests as a diversion, U.S. sources told CNN Wednesday.
liberallibral
(272 posts)Any followers of ANY religion, that thinks it's ok to cause chaos and murder innocent people, over friggin' CARTOONS, BOOKS or MOVIES are ANIMALS!!!!
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)Lots more at the article --
http://www.religionfacts.com/islam/things/depictions-of-muhammad-examples.htm
Some are aquite beautiful. Many seem to have an oriental, Far Eastern quality to them. Worth a look just for an art appreciation aspecct.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)even here in the US....
and allow demagogues to rile them up into mobs.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)The film was just an excuse. Even if the film never existed it would have been something else or just an outright attack.
Curtland1015
(4,404 posts)...and fringe nut jobs interpret it as "KILL anyone drawing a picture of that man!"
It's the fringe followers that make all religions look crazy.
braddy
(3,585 posts)Not to mention 15 wives and many concubines, and a 6 year old wife.
As the warrior of Islam Mohammed ordered the beheading of between 600-800 Jewish men and sexual enslavement of their women and slavery for the children.
I just don't see him as a humble man.
A HERETIC I AM
(24,363 posts)I keel you!
braddy
(3,585 posts)texastoast
(8,180 posts)sinkingfeeling
(51,438 posts)people in the name of God?
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)braddy
(3,585 posts)When he switched to founder of Islam, he formed an army became a warlord and started the conquering, gaining sex slaves, and multiple wives for himself, limiting his men to 4 wives, but all the sex slaves they could take.
yawnmaster
(2,812 posts)then it was explained why...that is what so what.
Your so what is nonsensical in this context.
sinkingfeeling
(51,438 posts)religion and Muslim beliefs have no validity? My point is that many of the 'fathers of Christianity' did things that are just as bad. I see very little difference between those two religions or their followers.
yawnmaster
(2,812 posts)to which you responded.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,708 posts)My God. Their God. Your God. They are all big enough to withstand the brickbats from some lunatics.
braddy
(3,585 posts)sinkingfeeling
(51,438 posts)braddy
(3,585 posts)Example--Question: Why do Primitive Baptists not have crucifixes or pictures of Jesus in their churches and homes?
The scriptures unequivocally forbid images of God of any kind (Ex 20:4-5, I Cor 10:14, Gal 5:19-21, I Jn 5:21). Since Jesus is the Son of God, and therefore equal with God (Jn 5:18, Philip 2:5-8), pictures of Jesus must also be censured by these commandments.
Pictures of Jesus are in every sense idols. The popular portraits of Jesus are products of man's imagination, and misrepresent Jesus in dishonoring ways.
Here is a link which describes differences between Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, for idols it says. Judaism--"Images and statues forbidden." Christianity--"Images and statues allowed in some denominations, but not worshiped." Islam--"Images and statues forbidden." http://www.chsbs.cmich.edu/fattah/courses/islampolitics/threereligions.htm
sinkingfeeling
(51,438 posts)countryjake
(8,554 posts)the Old Order religions stemming from the original Reformation who try to lead simple lives, with little falderal or adornment. Only thing on the walls of their meeting houses would be their bonnets and hats; some even refuse to have any images made of themselves, let alone any depiction of their god. They don't recite oaths or creeds, nor pledge allegiance or worship any man-made artifact...they are the conscientious objectors who practice pacifism and pretty much want to be left alone, since their ancestors all came here to avoid religious persecution.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)Marinedem
(373 posts)Someone's beliefs and sensitivities don't trump anyone's right to life.
I don't give a fuck how offensive it is. Cover your ears and plug your eyes.
ProdigalJunkMail
(12,017 posts)i care about the religious nuts blowing shit up and killing people. those guys can get bent...
sP
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)Murder in the name of god is still murder.
sinkingfeeling
(51,438 posts)Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)Murder in the name of god is still murder.
Christianity has massive amounts of blood on their hands in the name of God.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)The Midway Rebel
(2,191 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Probably not worth chatting with you about this but I would point out that the new covenant church spoken of in Acts did not kill Jesus.
The Midway Rebel
(2,191 posts)Are you willing to invalidate them as you have Islam?
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)I want and demand my freedom "from" religion.
The Midway Rebel
(2,191 posts)Only one that gurauntees your freedom "of" religion.
Afterall, in God We Trust.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)"In God we trust?"
I wonder who I have missed it over so many years of reading it every so often..
Or is my CATO Institute produced copy (it was cheap), a bad copy?
Now after the snark, feel much better, it was added to the pledge, written by Bellamy, in the 1880s (an avowed Socialist), oh in the 1950s. Did I mention the Constitution came to be in 1789?
The Midway Rebel
(2,191 posts)I am however sorry that no one that repiled in this subtread seems to understand the differnece betweent hthe words "of and "from".
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
You know the Establishment Clause might explain why... but maybe I am daft.
Have an excellent day. At least you have not told me the lovely trope that this is a Christian nation.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)unless there can be freedom "from" it.
The Midway Rebel
(2,191 posts)I posted the "In god We Trust" meme to display the paradigm in which we discourse. Do you want to deny that paradigm? Let me gather your armor for you Don Quixote.
eta: missing word
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)and you should feel bad
The Midway Rebel
(2,191 posts)And I do feel bad about that.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)Religion has been the cause of massive amounts of death, pain and destruction.
And each one of them likes to talk about how peaceful and loving they are.
jsr
(7,712 posts)but I respect their right to believe in bullshit as long as they don't go around killing people for disagreeing with their bullshit.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)Riots and murder in the street because by portraying Mohammed in a Danish newspaper as a cartoon will lead to his being worshipped! How frikkin' ludicrous!
And, wouldn't that mean that only Muslims are prohibited from portraying him? If I eat a bacon, bacon and bacon sandwich will the Muslim bully-thug-mobs come after me too?
jsr
(7,712 posts)Smickey
(3,305 posts)"takin it to the cheese".
Yea I know its bread but cheese works better.
Come on "takin it to the bread" just does not sing like cheese.
On edit: No I am not from Wisconsin.
loli phabay
(5,580 posts)And there will be people who will blame you. Thats the progression once you start trying to justify the nuts who riot and kill because they were offended. It makes me wonder how far appeasement will go once you start.
The Midway Rebel
(2,191 posts)They had turned from God to idolatry. He began his religous career preaching to Christians and Jews in Mecca and they told him to GTFO.
Jesus also preached against idolatry.
I doubt either of them wanted his legacy to be the worship of alters, paintings, relics and crap-o-belia from his life and times.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)of gods, or anything like that when Muhammed started to preach to them. He literally took things from both, to create a third faith.
But Judaism had left the idolatry stage, and the problems with Ba'al worship, a common Mediterranean basin god, by about oh the Babylonian captivity. That be a few years before, like in the thousands and hundreds.
It was far more about the tribes that did have worship of idols than Jews or Christians...
BarackTheVote
(938 posts)"worship [...] alters, paintings, relics and crap-o-belia from his life and times." Veneration is different from worship. Worship is and has always been reserved for God alone.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)or what native peoples have told me about the local church, and what is behind or under altars, or carved on walls. but I will behave. Hell, I even got some photos from the Church of Sta Lucia in Guanajuato that after those talks, took on a whole different meaning.
That said, mainstream WESTERN EUROPEAN, you are mostly correct.
The Midway Rebel
(2,191 posts)Yes. Especially after the Christians and Jews kicked him out of Mecca.
Hestia
(3,818 posts)In the book, he relates a story that the reason Islam came into being is because Mohammed's family was rich and there was a famine going on at the time. If people wanted bread, they had to convert. I'll have to dig the book out and go back and reread that section.
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)Believing in a mythical figure without evidence it exist.
BarackTheVote
(938 posts)people are naturally aggressive against The Other; it's hard-wired into our brains. If religion disappeared tomorrow, people killing other people wouldn't go away--their reasons for doing so would simply change. Even now, most of what we call "religious atrocities" (the Spanish Inquisition, and the Crusades, for example) had other, complex historical and geopolitical reasons for occurring beyond the simplistic interpretation that "it was religion's fault."
You don't have to practice religion, you don't even have to like religion, but to blame religion for everything wrong with humanity for the last 2000 years is absurd.
Confusious
(8,317 posts)But it was a big part of it. Somewhere around 80%
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)well my God can kick your God's ass.
BarackTheVote
(938 posts)power-grubbing, greed for resources, greed for land, xenophobia, and vengeance as 20% of the equation? I really think you should check your math
I will grant you that religion is, far too often, the opiate of the masses, with far, far, too many people subjugating their intellect and their own conscience to words from a pulpit, from a person whose only qualification is that they've been able to convince people that they know more about a book than they do (and this coming from someone religious, I gotta call 'em like I see 'em). But remember Rome: while the Plebes made pious sacrifice at the temples, most Patricians were laughing behind their backs and plotting how to exploit the religious devotion of the less fortunate. A lot of wars were sold to the Plebes with religious terminology, but you can bet that the majority of the times, it was the Aristocracy using religion as a rallying cry for their own greedy interests.
treestar
(82,383 posts)get to decide what offends them. So carrying that forward, I think that people who are Muslims have this same right of respect in general. Not legally, but morally, we know it upsets them and so why do it - seems those who do it are doing it because they know they will get a reaction.
loli phabay
(5,580 posts)Somehow i dont think the nuts have any respect for our rights and culture of free speech and being idiots.
treestar
(82,383 posts)I don't see them trying to offend us a Christians, per se, and perhaps they would know if would not have an effect. I don't think the most rabid hate Christians, but America, the US and its power. And there are Muslims in America. The biggest difference between the two cultures is the power of religion in government - we have the First Amendment and freedom of religion. To their culture that's an alien idea.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)but I don't murder random muslims because of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia
treestar
(82,383 posts)Especially in Saudi Arabia. So the religion is a greater part of their lives. We would not kill Muslims over that but Muslims in the USA cannot have that life - they are just another religion, free to practice, but not free to impose any kind of Sharia law, even in a local entity where they might be a majority. Of course there are the crazies in Kansas and other places that feel it necessary to bar "Sharia law."
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)The Saudi family uses religion as a tool of political control. But that notwithstanding, civilized people don't go off on murderous tangents because they have been "offended". Otherwise, Saudi Arabia would be a sea of glass.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Their motives vary, but they are all crazy.
But there's no reason to provoke them if you know they are crazy enough - it's been known for a long time there are some Muslims who get that upset. Going back to the Rushdie novel.
But I don't think it's the movie alone. It's the movie combined with all the rest of it.
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)Christians Iconoclasts were quite violent during that schism.
And Judaism has had its own issues with figuration.
aint_no_life_nowhere
(21,925 posts)also known under the title "The Message". Despite the film being about the life of Mohammed, he never appeared as an actor in the film nor did we hear his voice. Anthony Quinn played Hamza, Mohammed's uncle, who leads his armies into battle and who had to pretend to hear the voice of Mohammed and repeat his words. Sometimes Mohammed is played by the camera and we see what Mohammed is seeing through the camera's point of view. Quinn turned in one of the greatest performances of his career. Despite the fact that the filmmakers followed Islamic tradition in not depicting the image of the Prophet, despite the fact the director was a Moslem, there were a lot of protests by Islamic groups and even buildings in Washington, D.C. were taken over by protestors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad,_Messenger_of_God
"...In accordance with Muslim beliefs regarding depictions of Muhammad, he was not depicted on-screen nor was his voice heard. At the beginning of the film, a statement is displayed, "The makers of this film honour the Islamic tradition which holds that the impersonation of the Prophet offends against the spirituality of his message. Therefore, the person of Mohammad will not be shown."
This rule extended to his wives, his daughters, his sons-in-law, and the first caliphs (Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali). This left Muhammad's uncle Hamza (Anthony Quinn) and his adopted son Zayd (Damien Thomas) as the central characters. During the battles of Badr and Uhud depicted in the movie, Hamza was in nominal command, even though the actual fighting was led by Muhammad.
Whenever Muhammad was present or very close by, his presence was indicated by light organ music. His words, as he spoke them, were repeated by someone else such as Hamza, Zayd and Bilal. When a scene called for him to be present, the action was filmed from his point of view. Others in the scene nodded to the unheard dialogue. ..."
nanabugg
(2,198 posts)this with millions of statues of Jesus and other likenesses...even though its against the command to not make any graven images.
RedCappedBandit
(5,514 posts)They're free to believe whatever ridiculous fairy tales they want. They have no fucking right to use that as an excuse to kill anyone. This goes for wackos of all stripes.
Navl
(18 posts)the Quran that is what they are supposed to do to infidels....they either convert or die.
angstlessk
(11,862 posts)Link to: http://957chatterton.blogspot.com/2012/06/top-ten-people-bible-tells-you-to-kill.html
10) Anyone who doesn't believe a priest
Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. Deuteronomy 17: 12 NLT
9) Fortunetellers
A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death. Leviticus 20: 27 NAB
8) Witches
You should not let a sorceress live. Exodus 22: 17 NAB
7) Those who work on the Sabbath
The LORD then gave these further instructions to Moses: 'Tell the people of Israel to keep my Sabbath day, for the Sabbath is a sign of the covenant between me and you forever. It helps you to remember that I am the LORD, who makes you holy. Yes, keep the Sabbath day, for it is holy. Anyone who desecrates it must die; anyone who works on that day will be cut off from the community. Work six days only, but the seventh day must be a day of total rest. I repeat: Because the LORD considers it a holy day, anyone who works on the Sabbath must be put to death.' Exodus 31:12-15 NLT
6) Non-virgins
But if this charge is true (that she wasn't a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father's house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst. Deuteronomy 22: 20-21 NAB
5) Homosexuals
"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." Leviticus 20: 13 NAB
4) Followers of other religions
Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. Exodus 22: 19 NAB
3) Sons of sinners
Make ready to slaughter his sons for the guilt of their fathers; Lest they rise and posses the earth, and fill the breadth of the world with tyrants. Isaiah 14: 21 NAB
2) Atheists
They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, to think rationally? I will not respect any religions that will convict me of a thought crime.
1) Rape victims
If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has relations with her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife. Deuteronomy 22: 23-24 NAB
it's a little confusing to you, but those are from the Old Testament, which has it's place, but the New Testament, which is what most Christians adhere to (or should), is one of redemption and forgiveness. The relationship between the old and new testaments is somewhat complex.
The Qur'an is quite clear about what is to be done with those who do not believe as it says they should. The way they reconcile the deaths of other "Muslims" like those that died on 9/11 is that those could not be true believers since they were not living as Mohammed dictated. Even though the Qur'an decries the death of "innocents", the definition of just who those innocents are is interpretive. Certainly the people in our embassy would not be considered as such under any definition.
The real problem over there is that their religion and their governments are intertwined, so the policies of the state take the form of the dictates of their religion. Some have claimed that we just need to put up with it since it was a democratic choice. However, democracy without safeguards for the minority is no better than Nazi Germany. In other words, a democracy in and of itself does not add legitimacy to a government. The United States, btw, is not a democracy, it is a republic. The president isn't elected by the people, he is elected by the electoral college which is there to help safeguard against mob rule resulting in dissenting parties being persecuted.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)You are right, it is confusing.
RedCappedBandit
(5,514 posts)yawnmaster
(2,812 posts)Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)yawnmaster
(2,812 posts)MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)It's a mystery!
sinkingfeeling
(51,438 posts)RedCappedBandit
(5,514 posts)The Midway Rebel
(2,191 posts)etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)I can't see the relevence .... Muslims are expressly prohibited from the slaughter of innocents
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Dude says, offhandedly, "don't pick your nose", 600 years later fingers and noses are being hacked off willy nilly, folks are being tortured to find out if they are part of the blasphemous nose picking sect, etc.
"cast off the shoe, follow the gourd!"
Codeine
(25,586 posts)their ridiculous Invisible Sky Fairy. People who hold to the fundie version of that religion want to turn the clock back a thousand years -- they are cordially invited to suck my cock.
Strange that a site that fights for gay marriage constantly wants to go to bat for a group of Bronze Age fucknuggets who want to stone gays for light entertainment.
The Midway Rebel
(2,191 posts)She gave us this link with lots of images of Mohamed. Islam is not all one thing just as Christianity is not all one thing. There are worlds between a Catholic and Presbyterian and an Essene.
The fundamentalist wave in Islam is kind of new and associated with Wahhabism. I like Sufism. I think it is far out and interesting. Wahhabis fucking hate Sufis.
http://zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/
It seems that even hep, hip, enlightened, educated, progressive, liberal, big tent DU could stand to learn a lot about the history of Islam and the Arabs. The misunderstanding and in some cases thinly veiled prejudice in this thread makes me sad.
sinkingfeeling
(51,438 posts)all these "liberals and progressives" have responded.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)We certainly go out of our way to rationalize offending other people. Might be easier to simply allow ourselves to rationalize being polite and respectful to other people instead.
But as that isn't quite as viscerally entertaining, doesn't fit on a clever t-shirt logo, couldn't be marketed into an Xbox game, and won't grab eyeballs on our bumper-stickers, it probably won't sell. More's the pity...