why is any of this even being targeted at Islam?
If people are worried about losing freedom of speech in the West because of Muslims [sic!!!], wouldn't it be better to protest Comedy Central or the other organizations that are willing to censor such images?
Muslims have the right to protest and request media not be shown, in the same way everyone has the right to draw cartoons in protest.
All this could possibly do is make moderate Muslims even further sensitive to what they would see as deliberate offense toward their religion, and make broadcasters much more likely to placate to them in the future.
Ultimatly this issue has nothing to do with freedom of speech. There is no risk at all that you would lose your right to draw mohammed, and for a list of things you could do, because god damn it, it is your right as a free American, why not start with shitting your pants on the bus. C'mon guys, this is free speach, lets get creative!
or wait, its not free speach, its mockery dressed in its finest "conflict of civilizations" attire, and put to whatever narrative is attracting viewers to the 24 hour "news" networks.
Originally posted by King Kandyb/c ur not suppose to idolize anyone but god.. and i was joking which is why i posted bull at the beginning of my post for laughs seeing as god open a can of righteous judgment on moses ppl..
If that's what you believe than IDK why you were ever trying to argue the graven images thing... obviously I was talking about christianity...
Originally posted by Ms.Marveli usually say judeo based then the religion in question example: judeo/christian... if you want i can say Zoroastrianism root based religions of the modern world. the core religion that birthed Judaism and its various variations..
why do you guys say "Christianity" as if it is a universally held belief in Christianity that jesus is god?
I think in both the cases of Mohammed and Christ, the rules regulating their depiction are more something that has evolved over time, rather than having specific scriptural reference.
I've heard that some older Catholics are against taking photos of the Pope or such things, but there is probably little (graven images?) scripturally to reference that.
Depicting Mohammed goes back to the time of Mohammed. iirc, there are images of him during his life, and especially in Turkey, there has always been a tradition of drawing him in certain ways (admittedly, many times his face is either veiled or clouded, which is an important cultural consideration when talking about veiling in Islam).
Originally posted by King Kandy
I'd call it more like "i'd rather discuss things relevant to many than things relevant to a few". Potato Potahto I guess.
well as long as you preface your posts with that specification i guess its all good. its silly to make sweeping statements like "Christianity believes", though, considering there are many Christians, millions in fact, with different ideologies.
idealogy isnt the word im going for. "core beliefs? meh you know what i mean
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
No, no, my point is that Islam actually has it as a commandment of some sort that you're not supposed to depict Mohammad. You can't really draw a parallel to Christianity since no such rule exists within the religion about Jesus.
It doesn't. Not depicting Mohammed is just a choice artists have made throughout the centuries so people don't worship him instead of God. Some Muslim art freely depicts him.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/Mohammed_kaaba_1315.jpg
http://arefe.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/tekeste-2.jpg
http://facesofmohammed.an3.es/muhammad/american-painting.jpg
Originally posted by One Free Man
I believe you, but i'd like to have a look at that verse, or is it the one right between "blow yourself up for 72 virgins," and "Women must wear masks over their faces." and "We must wear turbans even though that's hindii."
Exactly, none of those verses exist. And the turban is actually Sikh.
Originally posted by Ms.Marvelchristianity as pertaining to fundamentalism and the consensus is that Jesus is god. some weird other thing isn't exactly the consensus. Also, according to the bible, he is the inherent son of god. Claims it himself. why would he claim that when he's an angel?
there is an entire christian sect that shares the belief that jesus is not god but just an angel. so "Christianity" is a little too broad.
Originally posted by One Free Man
I believe you, but i'd like to have a look at that verse, or is it the one right between "blow yourself up for 72 virgins," and "Women must wear masks over their faces." and "We must wear turbans even though that's hindii."
FYI - "Hindi - [note: one "i"] is a language.
And as Quiero Mota already corrected, the turban is part of the Sikh religion.
Didn't read your PM, probably won't, if I do, i'll make it public depending on how fun it will be to rip apart with my massive intellect.
Someone had already stated that the turban thing was sikh, although turban wearing IS IN FACT common in Hindus as well, although not required by their religion. This makes you a piggyback know-it-all. Also redundant.
Someone else was smart, and you pointed it out. See how clever you look? If I could just get credit (while adding to my post count) as a genius on this forum while effectively wasting ten of your earth minutes in as eruditely of a fashion as you have.
I know, What I will do is make a 500 word post on how stupid you look when you just copy/paste someone elses post! this will effectively piggyback off of your supreme idiotic douche-baggery, giving me ultimate power and diverting attention from the fact that I made a slight mistake in cultural awareness!
Oh wait, I sort of just did that! So here's what I'm going to have to do, give you some much needed guidance and supply you with this instructional link: http://www.cracked.com/funny-2724-trolls/ Alright? now recognize yourself as the "Professor" on that chart. I mean, and that's a compliment, you didn't even use the net! you just used someone else's post. So now, just accept that you are a troll sock, and move on.
Also, if you want to qualify this topic as "Off-topic," mr. Admin, as I'm SURE Your going to pass by when this nubfail runs out of options and reports me, I will provide PLENTY of on-topic content:
this is a hindu man.
another hindu man.
another hindu man.
They're all wearing turbans. Sure, they aren't required, but they are worn ALOT by hindu people as well.
EDIT (noobfag's angry strong worded pm, i'm just going to edit out the bullshit and leave the good parts):
[quote]BECAUSE IM A WOUNDED PERSon. My soul is scarred by people like you who go on the internet and try and be smart.
Hey, thanks for [rage-bullshit] rude.[/quote] This post is sarcasm as you would know if you knew what 4chan was. You're uneducated about the internet too, now? wow.
Yep, telling someone who is pointing out a minute, minor error unnecessarily after it has been pointed out to stfu certainly is uncalled for.
This is nothing to so with smartness, it's just pointing a minor error which you made a great deal about and told me to "STFU". Thanks for that btw.
I mispell "hindi," mistakingly using hindi as the adjective form of "hindu" and in one of his amaizingly instructional spelling lectures INCLUDES A MISSPELLING of the words "childishness," "wasting," "apology," and "ment."
I have no time for your childness, and I'm not wasing my time demanding for an appology for misunderstanding what I ment.
also, he's not wasting his time asking for an apology, but rather spending it sending me a long-worded misspelled lecture, expecting no results. Hmmm. I wonder what that's about.
Enjoy your life.
