You don’t have free speech. Try denying the holocaust, for example, and see how far you get, especially in the EU.
I’ve thought about this whole thing for a while, and here’s my conclusion, as well as what seems to be the general thought amongst Muslims who I’ve discussed this issue with;
The guy had it coming. Everything that’s coming to him, we’re not going to decry, but we won’t encourage violence in the first place. We won’t condemn those who do attack him because it’s entirely justified and we can understand why his assailants were so angry, but at the same time it’s not recommended or required of us, and pacifism is the preferred route, but at the same time we’re not going to condemn attacks against this fellow because we understand the anger.
It must be a supreme irony to be accused of such a thing by a person whose religion literally means submission.
The source was already cited in the thread. It was the Sahih al-Bukhari, which you considered to be noncanon despite P. Gorath and others pretty much proving that it was (it’s part of the Hadith which has the same canonical weight as the Qur’an). I’m sure you’d like to make a red herring out of this by recycling that debate, but it’ll pretty much end the same way it did before.
Also you didn’t actually respond to any of the other objections I raised in my post. Here it is again so maybe you should try responding to the rest of it:
Also, the main point I was making doesn’t even have much to do with Aisha’s age. It was mostly about apologists generally conducting research in bad faith. I don’t believe they’re honestly trying to find out if the Qur’an is true or not when they look into claims like these. They’ve already come to the conclusion that it is the inerrant word of God before they crack open the first book on the subject. Apologetics, by definition, is the search for excuses, and not a search for truth.
It’s the reverse scientific method. You start with your conclusion, collect facts that support it, while disregarding those that don’t.
Sahih Al-Bukhari is ‘canonical’ to Sunni’s only, not to me. So don’t bring that up in a discussion with me.
And I’ve known Aisha was not six for some time. You’re just making conclusions about where and why I’ve done my research with no basis to believe those conclusions. And if that’s not a red herring I don’t know what is.
Ignoring the previous exhibitions of your myopia, it is not illegal to deny the Holocaust in the United States, nor is it in the majority of countries across the planet. Several EU countries have also rejected various pieces anti-Holocaust-denial legislation, and Spain has decriminalized it altogether.
My post was a not-so-subtle jab at you for your crying about the fact that you felt your freedom of speech was being attacked, because you use the fact that you can’t deny the Holocaust, of all things, as some sort of shining example thereof. Because, that’s what you really want to talk about, and shout from the rooftops?
I think there are a ton of cartoons he could’ve made to criticize muslim zealotry without depicting Muhammed, which is by itself extremely offensive. But he was trolling his hardest to get a response to prove himself right, and some weak minded tools who fell for his IRL trolling made bigots like Spudly look like they’re not just hatemongers.
edit: And you don’t have to go to the middle east or even find muslims who will check you physically for saying something they find offensive. I am from one of the worst areas of Chicago, and the thought that you can go in a public place and say incredibly inflammatory things without reprocussion is a bit bizarre to me. I grew up my whole life not walking up to drug dealers saying “YOU ARE POISONING OUR OWN PEOPLE AND DRAGGING OUR WHOLE COMMUNITY DOWN YOU FUCKING PIECE OF SHIT, GET A REAL JOB AND WORK YOUR WAY UP”, and yeah I suppose my “freedom of speach” was impuned by these drug dealers’ guns and superior numbers, but that is how life is period, it is not an islamic thing, it is a people thing.
Interesting, I was unaware that this was illegal in some countries. While I can see the point of making it illegal I don’t believe that to be the best option and strongly disagree with it. Although I fail to see what that has to do with what we are talking about. There are no Swedish laws preventing this man from drawing a picture of Mohammad.
Of course he was trolling his hardest, that’s the point. He wanted to get reaction and focus attention to a situation, which is what he did and it worked. It’s about progression and not being afraid to talk about silly taboos. While that may not be what is right for Muslims (and I think they are free to do/believe in whatever they want) this is what he thinks is right so he made a statement about it, fully aware of the effects. Does this make him a douche? Yes, he offended a billion+ people just to make a point of something, but it was something he thought needed to be done so he did it.
the great thing about the internet is that its designed in a way such that it cannot be taken down easily. its decentralized, so you’d have to take out a shitload of network nodes before it could be destroyed. so hopefully we’ll start seeing more and more offensive islam pictures floating around the internet. the muslims can riot and protest every single day over it, and hopefully they’ll try some terrorist attacks on internet backbones. that should bring the wrath of the modern countries down upon them with the quickness.
also i find this anger to be massively insecure. if muslims actually believed allah existed and was some super omnipotent powerful god, well such a god could easily smite blasphemers. cause hey, if i were a god, and some douche drew a pic of my beloved prophet as a dog engaging in homosexual sex, well i’d snap my finger, turn that douchebag into a dog, and then rape him myself with my level 99 godlike cock of the infinite. then i’d let him burn in hell for an eternity. if god exists, he can take care of blasphemers himself. stop worrying about it. if your god is so weak that he cant even punish blasphemers, well he’s too weak to deserve being worshiped.
why, are you going to suicide bomb me if you dont? calm down bro, i’ve never drawn a pic of your prophet, not because i give a shit about your religion, but because i dont want to get beat up by angry muslims okay?
yeah and those drug dealers are evil scumbags who should be in prison, what’s your point? The point isn’t that what happened was unexpected, it’s that it was wrong.
I think this is the problem. You are placing the importance of an image/symbol over peace. You (as a collective) have the power to condemn these attacks and at the very least slow the violence but choose not to because you also agree that this symbol/image is more important than peace? That’d be like me getting offended whenever someone talked bad about HDR even though I don’t play the game.
If we just accepted how things are there wouldn’t be much progress. Yes, saying certain things will result in violence. By pushing these boundaries we can change them. We can say a lot of things now that weren’t possible back in the dark ages because of people that did push the boundaries and accepted the consequences.
The artist chose to instigate by drawing the image. He placed freedom of speech above peace. It goes both ways. Again, pacifism is the preferred route, but we’re not going to pretend that this asshole isn’t intentionally pushing buttons to get a reaction.
No, they ARE just drawings. I am NOT muslim. Arguing that drawing a picture = headbutt worthy is like me saying that every time I hear about a muslim woman being sold/traded to a man, I should be allowed to go headbutt him because I believe in everybody being equal.
You fail to see that freedom of speech has created the greatest known society in the history of the world. What have muslims done aside from constantly create the stigma that they’re nothing but a bunch of violent religious zealots? I completely agree that people SHOULDN’T be drawing pictures of mohammed, especially in risque situations, but there is a massive difference between SHOULDN’T and FORBIDDEN. If you want muslim countries to continue that backwards archaic primitive bullshit, fantastic, but once you leave those countries and come to a country that supports free speech:
GROW
THE
FUCK
UP
seriously, you have every right to complain about it (the mere fact you’re allowed in this thread, is proof of free speech), but violence is a no-no. DHEvil, you’ve done little but make me suspect that more than just ‘radical’ muslims are a problem.
Man, I wish I could go to EVO and wear a mohammed T-shirt
When have you heard of a Muslim woman being sold/traded to a man? And if you have, I would walk right up with you and headbutt the man responsible. That is not how we do things, unfortunately for your side of the argument.
