They Just Can't Help It Can They
News1 min ago
Why insult Mohammad?
135 Answers
There seems to be a lot of effort in recent years to insult Mohammad, seemingly just for the heck of it. This has led to a lot of unpleasantness due to Muslims feeling they need to protest against this sort of thing and so in and so forth.
So why bother insulting him in the first place, what does it achieve?
So why bother insulting him in the first place, what does it achieve?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by flobadob. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
<show bad muslims>
what are bad muslims??
if you mean muslims doing bad things such as killing innocent people in Iraqi street markets it is the event that is the 'news'
muslims doing 'good things'; giving money to charity, winning a medal at the olympics etc get coverage to the extent those events are newsworthy
what are bad muslims??
if you mean muslims doing bad things such as killing innocent people in Iraqi street markets it is the event that is the 'news'
muslims doing 'good things'; giving money to charity, winning a medal at the olympics etc get coverage to the extent those events are newsworthy
I'll try to respond to chakka35 's point @17.52 ( i'm a bit late , i went out for a couple of hrs.)
I'll try to make a non religious analogy .Supposing I meet somebody in the street and get talking to them , not about religion ,about any subject , and I find something that he's sensitive about , something that irks him .
Supposing that I keep on and on about it , really winding him up . Supposing i realise full well that he may end up punching me on the nose , but I still keep ranting away . He eventually punches me on the nose . Under those circumstances I would not expect anyone to defend my right to free speech .
I stand by what I said , insulting somebody is not freedom of speech . I expect people will disagree and criticise me - that's fair enough .
(I must stress that I am not justifying the violence - I'm just trying to make an analogy with what's taken place) .
I'll try to make a non religious analogy .Supposing I meet somebody in the street and get talking to them , not about religion ,about any subject , and I find something that he's sensitive about , something that irks him .
Supposing that I keep on and on about it , really winding him up . Supposing i realise full well that he may end up punching me on the nose , but I still keep ranting away . He eventually punches me on the nose . Under those circumstances I would not expect anyone to defend my right to free speech .
I stand by what I said , insulting somebody is not freedom of speech . I expect people will disagree and criticise me - that's fair enough .
(I must stress that I am not justifying the violence - I'm just trying to make an analogy with what's taken place) .
Wharton -
I posted, “... Please elaborate. Simply saying, '...sounds very subjective...' is not good enough...”. Your reply to me was, “... 'insult' 'hair-trigger' 'frightened' 'risk' 'violence' - not words of objectivity...”
You are quite correct. None of those words you cherry-picked from my post are words of objectivity. Neither are they words of subjectivity. They are just words. Context is everything. Your response to me when I asked you to elaborate is nothing more than lazy nonsense. If you can't be bothered to explain yourself when you criticise others I would suggest that you refrain from posting.
I posted, “... Please elaborate. Simply saying, '...sounds very subjective...' is not good enough...”. Your reply to me was, “... 'insult' 'hair-trigger' 'frightened' 'risk' 'violence' - not words of objectivity...”
You are quite correct. None of those words you cherry-picked from my post are words of objectivity. Neither are they words of subjectivity. They are just words. Context is everything. Your response to me when I asked you to elaborate is nothing more than lazy nonsense. If you can't be bothered to explain yourself when you criticise others I would suggest that you refrain from posting.
Lightbulb247 - “... yes, but for muslims even showing the prophet is an insult...” and, “... There are certain boundaries you should not cross, otherwise than you say that islam is violent, when in fact you're doing everything that goes against their religion...”
Your first point that it is an 'insult' to muslims to show an image of mohammed completely ignores the fact that not everyone is a muslim and therefore islamic law does not apply to them. If a non-muslim wants to make fun of mohammed then they should be able to do so without having to fear for their lives.
Which bring me to my second point – you say that there are, “... certain boundaries you should not cross..”. Why should us non-muslims not cross those artificial 'boundaries' that your religion has put in place? For fear of violence? You accurately say that islam has a reputation in secular countries for being violent when its adherents feel that they have been insulted. Why do you think that is? I'll give you a few clues: the recent violent (and ultimately murderous) protests in the Middle East over the pathetic 'Innocence of Muslims' trailer; the murders and threat of murders over the publication of the 'Danish Cartoons'; the threatened murder of Salman Rushdie and the actual murder of people involved in the publication of his book 'The Satanic Verses'; etc.
Do you get it Sith... sorry Lightbulb?
Your first point that it is an 'insult' to muslims to show an image of mohammed completely ignores the fact that not everyone is a muslim and therefore islamic law does not apply to them. If a non-muslim wants to make fun of mohammed then they should be able to do so without having to fear for their lives.
Which bring me to my second point – you say that there are, “... certain boundaries you should not cross..”. Why should us non-muslims not cross those artificial 'boundaries' that your religion has put in place? For fear of violence? You accurately say that islam has a reputation in secular countries for being violent when its adherents feel that they have been insulted. Why do you think that is? I'll give you a few clues: the recent violent (and ultimately murderous) protests in the Middle East over the pathetic 'Innocence of Muslims' trailer; the murders and threat of murders over the publication of the 'Danish Cartoons'; the threatened murder of Salman Rushdie and the actual murder of people involved in the publication of his book 'The Satanic Verses'; etc.
Do you get it Sith... sorry Lightbulb?
//Your first point that it is an 'insult' to muslims to show an image of mohammed completely ignores the fact that not everyone is a muslim and therefore islamic law does not apply to them//
ok, say then if i drew an image mocking jews (not that i am going to) then people would complain. If you say "no they wont" than it has been proven that in the past it has happened and i bet you if i started saying rude things about jews or drawing insulting images i would be arrested or fined.
If i drew an image mocking black people, same thing, i could be arrested or fined.
It seems like this law does not apply to muslims however, and they can be mocked as much as people like.
ok, say then if i drew an image mocking jews (not that i am going to) then people would complain. If you say "no they wont" than it has been proven that in the past it has happened and i bet you if i started saying rude things about jews or drawing insulting images i would be arrested or fined.
If i drew an image mocking black people, same thing, i could be arrested or fined.
It seems like this law does not apply to muslims however, and they can be mocked as much as people like.
Lightbulb (Sith), Not such a good link. The author of the blurb is ignorant of Islamic depictions of Mohammed – as, it would appear, are many Muslims.
//The Prophet is a sacred figure for Muslims and he’s not to be depicted even in books or movies.//
Scroll down here to ‘Figurative visual depictions’.
http://
//The Prophet is a sacred figure for Muslims and he’s not to be depicted even in books or movies.//
Scroll down here to ‘Figurative visual depictions’.
http://
Lightbulb - “.... if i drew an image mocking jews... then people would complain [and] if i started saying rude things about jews or drawing insulting images i would be arrested or fined. If i drew an image mocking black people, same thing, i could be arrested or fined. It seems like this law does not apply to muslims however, and they can be mocked as much as people like...”
You seem to misunderstand the situation. You are attempting to draw a parallel with 'disrespecting' a religious figure and insulting an entire group of people based on their ethnicity and/or religious beliefs. It would appear to have escaped your notice that no one is actually insulting muslims as a group as you have suggested in your above post.
The 'insults' were directed at Mohammed specifically – not at muslims. For example, it is not illegal to 'insult' Jesus nor any of the prophets of judaism. Some christians and jews may not like it but there's nothing illegal about it and you cannot be arrested or fined for doing so.
Your above argument is simply invalid.
You seem to misunderstand the situation. You are attempting to draw a parallel with 'disrespecting' a religious figure and insulting an entire group of people based on their ethnicity and/or religious beliefs. It would appear to have escaped your notice that no one is actually insulting muslims as a group as you have suggested in your above post.
The 'insults' were directed at Mohammed specifically – not at muslims. For example, it is not illegal to 'insult' Jesus nor any of the prophets of judaism. Some christians and jews may not like it but there's nothing illegal about it and you cannot be arrested or fined for doing so.
Your above argument is simply invalid.
The fact still applies, and i for one am finished after saying this, if you know they are going to over react (they being muslims) than why do it? yes, of course, you will say free speech and right to free expression and all that. But if they know its going to put innocent lives on the line and that there will or may be bad consequences afterwards, than why do it? and you cannot simply say free speech yet again as due to this, a few muslims out there have taken upon themselves to kill innocent people, taking away their right to life. And i for one believe that if you know people might suffer due to this, dont do it as right to life is far more important than their right to speech. Yes, you will say its muslims killing those people, but as a result of what? this video is indirectly affecting it.
I will respond to this if anyone replies, otherwise i am finished.
I will respond to this if anyone replies, otherwise i am finished.
Lightbulb -
Your above argument is risible. You might have well have said, “Why would someone deliberately insult the religion of peace when they know that it'll react violently?”
Do you understand what free speech really means? Assuming you don't, allow me to enlighten you. Free speech means allowing people to openly criticise the actions and motives of individuals (either living or dead) or concepts without fear of retribution from governments and their agencies or from individuals or 'lynch mobs'. If you do understand that concept then what you are advocating is religions fascism. In fact, you have already shown your true colours when you said, “... life is far more important than their right to speech...”, which is really just another way of saying, “Shut up or people will be killed and it'll be your fault.”.
I find your post utterly repugnant. You're effectively trying to justify the murder of innocent people by claiming that it is the fault of those who criticise islam. You are using your right to free speech to call for other people's free speech to be curtailed. Shame on you.
Your above argument is risible. You might have well have said, “Why would someone deliberately insult the religion of peace when they know that it'll react violently?”
Do you understand what free speech really means? Assuming you don't, allow me to enlighten you. Free speech means allowing people to openly criticise the actions and motives of individuals (either living or dead) or concepts without fear of retribution from governments and their agencies or from individuals or 'lynch mobs'. If you do understand that concept then what you are advocating is religions fascism. In fact, you have already shown your true colours when you said, “... life is far more important than their right to speech...”, which is really just another way of saying, “Shut up or people will be killed and it'll be your fault.”.
I find your post utterly repugnant. You're effectively trying to justify the murder of innocent people by claiming that it is the fault of those who criticise islam. You are using your right to free speech to call for other people's free speech to be curtailed. Shame on you.
Latest Posts
Motoring2 mins ago
News3 mins ago
Bouncer By A Long Take At First
Crosswords9 mins ago
News11 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.