The cartoon question:

[donco6]

I haven't heard a decent answer yet to this question:

If the West really is at fault for being insensitive to Muslims and their prohibition against depictions of Mohammed (derogatory or otherwise), where does our requirement to sensitivity end?

What's to stop Muslims from protesting, say, the fact that we let women drive around in cars. That's not allowed in many Muslim countries - particularly the ones that are protesting. Are we required to be sensitive to that?

What about "lewd" movies? What if they protested Brokeback Mountain? Homosexuality is certainly condemned in Islam - hell, they're hanging kids in Iran over it. Are we being insensitive to their religious sensibilities by supporting the right to be gay?

Where does it end? And why did it start here - with this? It makes no sense to me at all.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

1. I'm wondering...

What if the tables were turned? What if it were sacrilege to depict Jesus in print? How would the Fundies be reacting?

[donco6]

2. I think we saw it recently with The Book of Daniel.

A reaction - yes, but not a violent one. Indignant. Superior. Condemnatory. "We'll show them and get it taken off the air." But I didn't see any buildings burning down.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Erika]

11. Jesus was not mocked as a terrorist. n/t

[donco6]

117. Mocked is mocked, Erika.

The "as a terrorist" part is moot.

[Erika]

8. Agreed n/t

[JI7]

62. Jesus in urine art and gay jesus

those things have been done which offended some Christians. yeah, they got a lot of conservative outrage but nothing near the level as with the muslim reaction to these cartoons.

[TahitiNut]

3. How can it be "offensive" for someone of another faith ...

... to violate the dogmas and precepts of Islam when they're NOT Muslim? Do I "offend" Jews every time I eat a ham and cheese sandwich with a glass of milk? Do I "offend" Amish when I drive my car?? Did I "offend" Catholics when I ate a hamburger on Fridays??

Sorry ... but I'm just not buying the "offense". As I understand it, the Islamic prohibition is based on the Abrahamic prohibition against idolotry. Well, I don't think those cartoons are a risk of being IDOLIZED.

[Erika]

14. To paint the Holy Prophet of Islam as a terrorist

has little to do with your menu selections.

I will repeat neither the Jews nor the Muslims have had the insensitivity or stupidity to portray Jesus as a terrorist.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Erika]

23. You are wrong. n/t

[elshiva]

31. Mohammed was a man, he was not perfect, but he was

NOT a terrorist.

[Hoping4Change]

135. However there are extremist Muslims who are committing

terrorist acts in his name and they are quoting the Koran to justify their actions. So as a result of their actions they have implanted in non-Muslims the idea that Muslims (symbolized in the cartoon as as figure of Mohammed) hide a violent agenda.

[tocqueville]

32. who are you kidding, Erika ? yourself only ?

Genocide in Turkey
1.5 million Armenian Christians and Syriac Christians (Assyrians) were killed by the Young Turk government between 1915 and 1917. The massacre, which became known as the Armenian Genocide, is considered the first genocide of the 20th Century, one of the biggest in terms of number of victims, and could have been a direct inspiration for Hitler's Final Solution. However, it was often ignored or given little significance by many Western governments for most of the 20th Century, due to political pressure from Turkey, one of the West's few allies in the Middle-East. And although Western governments have begun recognising the genocide in the past few years, Turkey still officially denies that it took place. However, Turkey has begun to debate the genocide in public as a result of pressure from the EU, recently (September 2005) holding a conference to discuss it.

Many Assyrians have fled from the Middle East during the last 100 years, most notably during the World War I. Many died in what some call the Assyrian genocide. There are however no verifiable figures for this nor proof that they were targeted as such like for the Armenian genocide. As some Assyrians had joined pro-British or pro-Russian military forces it is possible, but not specifically documented as such, that the Ottoman authorities specifically retaliated against Assyrian civilians in order to massacre and anihilate them, which would make it an Assyrian genocide.


Persecution of Christians in Sudan
It is estimated that over 1.5 million Christians have been killed by the Sudanese army, the Janjaweed, and even suspected Islamists in northern Sudan since 1984.

However, the conflict is not purely a religious one, as many black Muslims, as well as Muslim Arab tribesmen, have also been killed in the conflict. It is difficult to ascertain how many deaths are due to the conflict and how many are due to the numerous famines which have effected Sudan, costing thousands of lives.


Attacks on Christians by Islamists in Pakistan
Oct. 28, 2001 - Lahore, Pakistan - Islamic militants killed 15 Christians at a church. On 25 September 2002 two terrorists entered the "Peace and Justice Institute", Karachi. They separated Muslims from the Christians, and then executed eight Christians by shooting them in the head.


Attacks on Christians by Islamists in Indonesia
Religious conflicts have typically occurred in western New Guinea, Maluku (particularly Ambon), and Sulawesi. The presence of Muslims in these regions is largely due to Suharto's transmigrasi plan of population re-distribution. Conflicts have often occurred because of the aims of radical Islamist organisations such as Jemaah Islamiah or Laskar Jihad to impose Sharia. The following list is far from comprehensive:

1998 - 500 Christian churches burned down in Java.

November, 1998 - 22 churches in Jakarta are burned down. 13 Christians killed.

In Saudi Arabia, Christians can be arrested and lashed for practicing their faith in public. No non-Muslims are allowed to become Saudi citizens. Prayer services by Christians are broken up by the police, and people who convert to Christianity can officially be executed, although this has not in fact been done in many years. (cf. US State Department)

In Egypt, the government does not officially recognise conversions from Islam to Christianity; because certain interfaith marriages are not allowed either, this prevents marriages between converts to Christianity and those born in Christian communities, and also results in the children of Christian converts being classified as Muslims and given a Muslim education. The government also requires permits for repairing churches or building new ones, which are often withheld. Foreign missionaries are allowed in the country only if they restrict their activities to social improvements and refrain from proselytizing (US State Department). The Coptic Pope Shenouda III was internally exiled in 1981 by President Anwar Sadat, who then chose five Coptic bishops and asked them to choose a new pope. They refused, and in 1985 President Hosni Mubarak restored Pope Shenouda III, who had been accused of fomenting interconfessional strife. Particularly in Upper Egypt, the rise in extremist Islamist groups such as the Gama'at Islamiya during the 1980s was accompanied by attacks on Copts and on Coptic churches; these have since declined with the decline of those organizations, but still continue. The police have been accused of siding with the attackers in some of these cases<8>. Nevertheless, high-ranking government officials in Egypt have included Copts like Boutros Ghali and his grandson, Boutros Boutros-Ghali.

There has been a substantial amount of anti-Christian incidents carried out in areas governed by the Palestinian Authority. Many claim that this represents a pattern of deliberate mistreatment by the PA; others hold that these are isolated incidents that reflect the beliefs of the individuals involved, but not the society in general. Two American courts, one in Illinois and the other in North Carolina, accepted the threat of "religious persecution" as grounds for granting asylum to Christians fleeing PA territory. According to some Christian sources, Palestinian Islamists in the West bank are using violence and threats of terror to scare Christians out of Palestinian controlled area.

Though Iran recognizes Christians as a religious minority (along with Jews and Zoroastrians) after the Revolution, Muslim converts to Christianity have been arrested and often executed.

In Malaysia, proselytisation of Muslims is illegal. US State Department For more information, see Christianity in Malaysia.

In the Philippines, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front and Abu Sayyaf has attacked and killed Christians.<9>


Persecution in Kosovo
After its territory was conquered by Ottoman Empire, Christians in Kosovo (nearly all of them Serbs) were persecuted, as were other Christian subjects of the empire. However, here, unlike in most of the empire, they were also persecuted by Albanians, who have mostly converted to Islam. This accelerated during late 19th century, continued during most of 20th, especially during wars, and as a result Serbian population is now drastically reduced—from 95% in 15th century and around 60% at the beginning of 19th to less than 10% in 21st (see History of Kosovo and Demographic history of Kosovo for more details). Persecution of Christians also resulted in destruction of hundreds of Christian churches, monasteries, graveyards and other religious monuments (over 150 only in five years since the Kosovo War), some of them being of great historical and architectural importance. The latest wave of anti-Christian violence was in March 2004 (see Unrest in Kosovo). However, it should be noted that the majority of Christians in Kosovo are Serbs, and that this conflict may be more related to ethnic tensions following Milosevic's campaign of ethnic cleansing than pure sectarianism unrelated to the political climate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians

[The Magistrate]

36. The Problem With That, Sir

Is that these events take place ratyher long after the fellow himself had shuffled off this earthly coil....

They therefore cannot be precisely laid at his door.

[tocqueville]

40. my point is...

that persecution based on religious ideas happens in all religious spheres and even today. The time frame is not relevant. Tell me what's the difference in burning a Church and desecrating a picture Jesus ? Or blowing up a Buddha ?

Erika seems to assess over and over that it's wrong to make fun of Mohammed because other religions don't do it about Jesus. I try to show with facts that it is not true, haven't been true and sadly won't be true in the future.

Then if we agree on that, we might find ways to prevent it from all sides...

[The Magistrate]

42. There We Are In Agreement, Sir

It seems that what ensues as a religion and religious practice seldom bears much resemblance to the ways urged by those reputed to be their founders....

[deesy58]

126. Noble Religion?

I'm surprised! Nowhere in your review of Islamic history did you agree with our President that Islam is a "Noble Religion"! The West needs to wake up and smell the coffee. These Islamists are murderers with the goal of taking over the world.

deesy

[kisstheman]

156. Oh boy, you like stirring up the pot with garbage

[Liberty Belle]

34. We've seen offensive depictions of Jesus, ie Christ in a urine bottle,

but Christians didn't burn down the museum.

[Erika]

37. But the depictions were not done by Islamics

It makes a difference, doesn't it?

[TahitiNut]

125. No. It doesn't.

There is one and only one question regarding whether something is "heretical" and that is whether the person doing it subscribes to the tenets of the faith which proclaims such a heresy. Outside of that faith, the term "heresy" has absolutely no force. It is not a secular term but a sectarian assessment, only applicable to the adherents themselves. The dogmas of any faith have absolutely no force on me, not an adherent to them. Immersing an (purported) image of Jesus (regarded as Christ) in a container of (alleged) urine is of absolutely no more consequence to me than the immersion of ANY image in such a fluid.

I cannot help, for the life of me, but regard any 'faith' so fragile that its adherents are propelled to violence by mere cartoons or other depictions as a 'faith' of little consequence and appallingly shallow roots. I do not, for a minute however, regard those who're engaging in that violence as wholly representative of all of Islam. These are secular acts operating under the specious concealment of sectarian belief, imho.


It's been said before. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.

[kisstheman]

157. Nope

[rfkrfk]

99. in the era before explosives, there were no 'terrorists'

so what

the early period of Islam,
was plenty bloody, without
suicide bombers or airplane hijackings

[Hoping4Change]

134. If someone published a cartoon of Jesus as a terrorist the reaction

of most Christians who weren't a fundie wackos would be one of the following:

- nothing, it'd be water off a duck's back.

- acknowledge that many Christians through-out history have committed atrocities believing they were acting in god's name and in so doing distorted Christ's message.

[mark11727]

17. As I posted on another thread...

Some religions seem to operate with two basic rules of conduct...

(1) If you are part of our religion, you must follow our rules.

(2) If you are NOT part of our religion, you must STILL follow our rules.

[tatertop]

4. No graven images. ALL Muslims agree to this.

Whomever they are, wherever they are:
ALL Muslims agree to this.
Why not respect that?
It steps on no toes, ruffles no feathers,
subjugates no women, persecutes no homosexuals.
Why pull out that straw man?

Those cartoonists were looking for a fight.
Why are they surprised they have found one.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Erika]

18. We should never mock the Prophets of another religion

Especially as we invade and occupy their country without just cause. Just a touch too much irony.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Erika]

26. Huh? n/t

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hoping4Change]

137. Do you not think Jim Jones should mocked for being an egomanic

that lead to the death of hundreds of followers (he regarded himself as a prophet and so did his followers)?

[kisstheman]

158. This makes no sense

[The Magistrate]

Why, Sir?

Why should anyone have the right to impose their own religiosu scruples on people who do not share them? How is the point you urge different from stating that persons who are offended by homosexuality have a right to suppress expresson of homosexual affection, and the right to react violently if such affection is expressed?

[tocqueville]

13. the cartoonists weren't looking for a fight

they wanted to have a debate, which is completely different

the ones that started the fight are the islamic fundies and Syria (but for a completely different agenda). Why should the West "adapt" to beliefs from others. Why shouldn't "they" adopt our freedom of expression ?

Or put it that way : they don't have to adopt, but on the other hand they cannot force us to abandon our freedom of expression because of their beliefs.

[AGKISTRODON]

16. It must apply to all equally

If we get into this, we will all need to go around censoring everything we speak, or write. I won't post any of the Muslim cartoons depicting Jews here, they are disgusting.
The Muslims are just going to have to realize that they are no more a protected species than any of us are.

[Erika]

30. Were there any Muslim cartoons about Jews?

No.

[tocqueville]

38. Here you can choose a couple of hundred...

http://images.google.com/images?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLJ,GGLJ:2006-05,GGLJ:en&q=antisemitic%20cartoons&sa=N&tab=wi

Erika, your standpoint is unsustainable. As much I condemn any kind of persecution - from Christians included - I must react against your claim to DENY that religious persecution ftom teh Muslim side or even the Jewish side never happened or doesn't happen nowadays is nothing but preposterous...

[Erika]

43. When I see cartoons of Christ depicted in the worlds papers

I might give you some credence. My point is that we can never hope to make gains when we attack a Holy person of another religion. Never.

[Moochy]

104. "We Attack"

"we can never hope to make gains when we attack a Holy person of another religion"

Do you own a newspaper that published the pictures? I think you are not being very accurate. You lump all of the west into the 'we'; I think that is a rather gross oversimplification.

[donco6]

115. There's that "we" again, Erika.

I asked you about it in the other thread when you accused the "Danes" of offending Islam. It's an important point, because the "Danes" didn't do anything. It was a newspaper in Denmark. Some of the artists were Dane. But to say the "Danes" were responsible is akin to saying Americans are responsible for Ted Bundy.

[Hoping4Change]

138. What if you are an atheist who doesn't give credence to any

religion and doesn't acknowledge any historical figure to be holy? What if your mission as an atheist is to win over believers to your point of view? The only way to convince people not to believe is to tear down beliefs, claims that made by all religions that they possess special knowledge about ultimate truth.

[purduejake]

56. Are you defening the violent reaction?

I think that is what most of us seem to be opposed to. Be offended, but don't start torching stuff because somebody drew an offensive picture.

[JCMach1]

78. All racial/ethnic provation is wrong!

It's a moral issue...

and so not really about freedom of speech, or civil liberties.

For example many here are DU might say the Klan has a 'right' to march.

But, do we have a moral imperative to 'SUPPORT' that?

I would say, HELL NO!

[Hoping4Change]

139. There is no similiarity between the cartoons and the KKK.

The KKK and for that matter the violent protesters are no figment of someone's the imagination. The cartoons are imaginary.

[question everything]

47. Not true. Just convenient as an excuse to riot

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

And... Judaism does not allow graven images, too. But you do not see any Jews rioting because there are paining and statues of Moses (and with horns, to boot)

[Warren DeMontague]

61. Because people don't get to sanitize the entire universe according to

their personal religious beliefs. Don't like abortion? Don't have one. Think God hates Gays? Then don't have gay sex. Find porn offensive? Great, don't look at it.

Think making graven images of the prophet, or anyone else, is a sin?

ALL RIGHTY THEN. DON'T MAKE GRAVEN IMAGES.

But leave the rest of us alone, because WE don't live in YOUR head, and vice-fucking-versa.

I don't see why so many people on this facokta planet don't get that very simple concept. If everyone would stop trying so hard to control what everyone ELSE is doing, we might actually be able to get some productive shit done around here.

[breakfastofchampions]

96. Truer words

have been spoken, but not on this thread.

[Dutch]

121. Well said!

[Hoping4Change]

140. Well said. nt

[lynne]

133. All religions have something that they faithfully abide by -

- Jehovah's Witnesses do not celebrate birthdays. Should we give up celebrating birthdays in order to respect that? Same thing.

Who is to say that the cartoonists even had a clue that Muslims had a "no image" policy? Are we now expected to learn the rules and regs of every religion on the planet so as to not step on someone's toes?

There is no defending this violence and I do not understand why anyone would even attempt to defend such.

[Hoping4Change]

141. "Who's to say they knew Muslims had a no image policy."

The "no image policy" really got me. LOLOLOL.


:rofl:

[Hoping4Change]

136. All Muslims aggree to this but nobody else has.

[Wordie]

5. Here's a thread you may want to read:

"The ink of the scholar is more sacred than the blood of the martyr"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x327183

It's important to note that when we speak of "Muslims" here in the west, we tend not to realize that there are many sorts of Muslims, some more conservative, some more moderate. Some are educated, some are not. We should not presume that the actions of some tell us about all of them.

[donco6]

118. I do understand that, truly.

And I think in my OP, I specifically mentioned the protesters - knowing that not every Muslim on earth was burning down an embassy. But the question is not an issue with anyone other than the fundamentalist Muslims is it?

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[alittlelark]

12. It sounds like you are saying that diplomacy and open discourse

are BAD things.

Your generalizations are astounding.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Erika]

20. Huh? n/t

[alittlelark]

21. Sigh.

ALL human interaction requires compromise.

If the US LEFT the ME completely - left them w/ their oil resources for themselves... do you honestly think we would be having 95% of the problems we are now having in the region?

It will never happen - but lets try to come to a diplomatic agreement (one that does not involve us proping up US friendly dictators).

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[alittlelark]

33. I did.... perhaps you should THINK about what I posted.

Erradicate the programmed reactionary responses - think.

Thinking is good.

[Hamlette]

10. how is this different from what happened to Rushdie?

we all supported him when they issued the fatwa against him.

If Islam had issued a fatwa against Osama, I'll take them more seriously.

You point is well taken. People who are religious can't expect us to observe their views. We can not take it seriously or the time may come when I won't be able to drive and men will be expected to commit suicide.

[brainshrub]

25. I strongly suggest you read this:

I strongly suggest you read this:

Muslim Cartoon Controversy: What the Media Isn't Telling You

The most recent Hajj occurred during the first half of January 2006, precisely when the "outrage" over the Danish cartoons began in earnest. There were a number of stampedes, called "tragedies" in the press, during the Hajj which killed several hundred pilgrims. I say "tragedies" in quotation marks because there have been similar "tragedies" during the Hajj and each time, the Saudi government promises to improve security and facilitation of movement to avoid these. Over 251 pilgrims were killed during the 2004 Hajj alone in the same area as the one that killed 350 pilgrims in 2006. These were not unavoidable accidents, they were the results of poor planning by the Saudi government.

And while the deaths of these pilgrims was a mere blip on the traditional western media's radar, it was a huge story in the Muslim world. Most of the pilgrims who were killed came from poorer countries such as Pakistan, where the Hajj is a very big story. Even the most objective news stories were suddenly casting Saudi Arabia in a very bad light and they decided to do something about it.

Their plan was to go on a major offensive against the Danish cartoons. The 350 pilgrims were killed on January 12 and soon after, Saudi newspapers (which are all controlled by the state) began running up to 4 articles per day condemning the Danish cartoons. The Saudi government asked for a formal apology from Denmark. When that was not forthcoming, they began calling for world-wide protests. After two weeks of this, the Libyans decided to close their embassy in Denmark. Then there was an attack on the Danish embassy in Indonesia. And that was followed by attacks on the embassies in Syria and then Lebanon.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[donco6]

119. Very interesting.

Certainly seems to answer the "why Danish cartoons" question.

[Hoping4Change]

143. Very interesting thanks for the link. nt

[kisstheman]

152. I dont buy it

[question everything]

28. Last week there was a PBS Frontline story about the Jihadists

They just want to revive their days of glory - of 1000 years ago - when they ruled Spain and North Africa. They don't like the Western culture of, yes, women walking in the street with "exposed" bodies, of drinking alcohol and all our modern ways.

They are frustrated, poor, ignorant, and are looking for reasons to expel all that testosterone (no sex before marriage).

So it is Israel, it is the U.S., it is France and Germany, it is the British and now the Danes. No matter what the "cause" is, they want to riot and to shoot and to kill and to behead. Last year they murdered a Dutch film maker.

Perhaps these events will finally teach the West to tell the Muslims and the Arabs with their demands to get lost. But I doubt it. The West - Europe, mostly - will continue to bend backward until it will be too late.

[Erika]

35. None of this justifies cartoons about the Islamic Holy Prophet

Not at all.

[The Magistrate]

39. Why, Ma'am?

Why should a person who is not a follower of Islam be required even to regard the fellow as holy?

[Erika]

44. Because of respect for others beliefs

Religion is very powerful and deeply ingrained.

[breakfastofchampions]

45. Respect is a two way street

There is a tremendous amount of anti-semetic and anti-West cartoons in the Muslim world. They feel fine when reading those.

[Erika]

48. Please post such cartoons

Thanks.

[breakfastofchampions]

49. Two birds with one stone

Jews and Christians.

[breakfastofchampions]

52. Muslim Cartoonists

Muslim cartoonists have no problem using Nazi imagery to relate to the Jews, something that is obviously a painful subject for the Jewish people.

I'm not saying that it's right for them to do that. I'm saying they have no problem being offensive when they are on the other side of it.

[Erika]

Show us the depictions n/t

[breakfastofchampions]

57. They are very easy to find

this is nothing new. Muslim cartoons are constantly comparing Jews to Nazi's. Given the Jewish experiance with the Nazi's I'm sure you can guess how appropriate this is.

[Erika]

59. So tell us the newspapers who print and circulate these

Thanks.

[breakfastofchampions]

63. I don't get your point.

That cartoon was from the Algoria in Eygpt.

Do you want to know which forest comes the trees that the newspaper uses?

The fact is that these sort of offensive cartoons are extremely common in the Muslim world. Yet they do not mind making, publishing and reading them. Now that they find a cartoon that offends them, they are in an uproar. I find this extremely hypocritical. Don't you?

[Erika]

65. My point was "what papers show these"

and also where is Christ depicted in the negative manner as the Prophet is?

[breakfastofchampions]

67. See the above thread "Two birds with one stone"

My point is that Muslim newspapers have no problems with offensive cartoons. What's yours?

[NaturalHigh]

122. Erika, you refuse to even acknowledge another point of view.

You've been shown cartoons that are insulting to Christians and Jews, yet you continue to insist that only Muslims are defamed. You insist that we all recognize Mohamed as a "holy prophet" out of respect for Islam. I can show you plenty of examples of people whose religious beliefs are different than mine, even people who defame my religion, but I'm not out rioting and burning buildings. I've seen you try to agitate people in other threads about this same issue. In my opinion, you're just trying to provoke a flame war.

[Hoping4Change]

144. Erika you sound like someone who has been subjected

to mind control. You keep repeating the same points and nothing gets through. You seem to be here simply to reiterate the message that no matter what Mohammed must not be mocked.

[donco6]

120. Erika, give it up.

You've been given numerous examples which completely eradicate your supposed "point." Perhaps a different tack is in order?

[eggman67]

131. She's been beating the same dead horse

for some time now, it doesn't matter every time you respond she'll just change the conditions. Willfully obtuse.

[The Magistrate]

51. So Is Belief In Free Speech And Civil Liberties, Ma'am

Where is the respect shown for this in the current mob turmoil that seeks to hold non-believers to the believers' rule?

[Erika]

55. It is simply respect of another's religion

and not yelling "fire" by denigrating their Holy Prophet.

[Moochy]

58. shoulds and musts

People *should* respect other opinions, but *must* they?

[Erika]

60. That's up to individuals to answer, in my opinion n/t

[Moochy]

76. It's a particularly thorny issue

On one hand when I see these and other racist cartoons, they elicit nothing more than a shrug from me. I feel that tinge of self-awareness, at my feeling of superiority, in the sense that we in the "West" should be proud of the freedoms of religion that we've acheived in this country. We have clearly progressed from the days prior to 1776.

At the risk of sounding like an idealist, or an advocate for regime change, I feel that freedom of religion, and freedom of speech are two of a set of universal human rights. Yet as our recent misadventures painfully show, these values can not be exported at the barrel of a gun. Rather a more tolerant policy for the governments in the west, would be for open cultural dialogue and exchange with these closed societies that operate under Sharia Law. Respect of another's religion is a fine goal in a civil society, but being uncritical with despotic Monarchies, and Theocracies is not a progressive or liberal policy.

It's really important to make a clear distinction between the actions of states, and the actions of individual cartoonists, and political parties.

But that does not mean that the moderates in the middle east are won over by insulting their holy prophet, but these cartoons were not created by the states, but by individuals.

Exporting Sharia Law to non-muslim countries is about as quixotic of a cause that the people inciting the mobs could undertake. Which is why this stinks of agit-prop type campaign by pan-arab right-wingers who see this as a distraction, and a lightning rod to gain power and a mandate.

Lots of bigotry and stupidity to go around. However in no way does that justify the non-sequitor of burning the Danish and adjacent embassies as the crowds did. Whatever the cause, be it pent up rage, the "arab street" feeling helpless, defeated and surrounded as they are by the clash of civilizations, the furor is being fed by media: "Look, protest these blasphemous horrible evil Cartoons, but don't you dare speak out about the injustices here in Egypt/Lebanon/Syria/Saudi Arabia or you'll go to jail for a year or two of torture. And if you are gay? forget about it. Keep your eye on the birdy."

These protests can't help but be seen in the light of the diplomatic pressure being placed on Iran. Makes one wonder, at least this one.

:toast:

[The Magistrate]

68. That, Ma'am, Is Not Really Good Enough

People who believe in a religion have to understand and accept that not everyone shares their views, and that, indeed, a number of the beliefs they consider sacred strike many other people as anything from humorous to offensive to outright embodiment of evil, and that there is absolutely nothing the believer can do about it. Understandably, this may be difficult for people who believe themselves to be recipients of the One Truth, or whatever it is, but it remains necessary that they manage it. Toleration can be required; respect cannot: respect can only be earned.

[JCMach1]

77. You miss the point entirely...

sigh...

[Hoping4Change]

142. It is because religious feelings are so powerful that makes extremely

religious people dangerous. The danger is that extremely religious people caught up in their emotions are apt to sacrifice flesh and blood humans in the name of a god that is unseen that could be just a figment. Of course god could be real but the one thing every one knows for sure is human being do exist, suffer and die. But for people with a deep faith, god means more to them than humans especially humans who don't share the same idea of god so they are willing to dispense with those who don't feel the same way.

[question everything]

41. Depictions of Mohammed Throughout History

While the debate rages, an important point has been overlooked: despite the Islamic prohibition against depicting Mohammed under any circumstances, hundreds of paintings, drawings and other images of Mohammed have been created over the centuries, with nary a word of complaint from the Muslim world. The recent cartoons in Jyllands-Posten are nothing new; it's just that no other images of Mohammed have ever been so widely publicized.

This page is an archive of numerous depictions of Mohammed, to serve as a reminder that such imagery has been part of Western and Islamic culture since the Middle Ages -- and to serve as a resource for those interested in freedom of expression.

The images in the archive below have been divided into the following categories:

Islamic Paintings and Miniatures Showing Mohammed in Full
Islamic Depictions of Mohammed with Face Hidden
European Medieval and Renaissance Images
Book Illustrations
Dante's Inferno
French Book Covers
Various Eras
Contemporary Christian Drawings
Animated TV Parodies
Satirical Modern Cartoons
The Jyllands-Posten Cartoons
Recent Responses to the Controversy

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

Persian or central Asian illustration showing Mohammed (on the right) preaching.

[Erika]

46. But the question is whether the Prophet should be depicted

as a cartoon to be mocked. Have you done similar studies on Christ?

Thanks.

[AGKISTRODON]

53. Major Anti-Semitic Motifs in Arab Cartoons

An Interview with Joël Kotek



The main recurrent motif in Arab cartoons concerning Israel is "the devilish Jew." This image conveys the idea that Jews behave like Nazis, kill children and love blood. The similarity with themes promulgated by the Nazis is evident. Many Arab cartoons praise suicide bombing or call for murder. The collective image of the Jews thus projected lays the groundwork for a possible genocide.

A caricature may have as much influence on public opinion as an editorial.

Palestinian cartoonists often place emphasis on the anti-Semitic accusation of "ritual murder" of children. This is underscored by their claim that Israelis target Palestinian children. To dehumanize Jews, Arab cartoonists often depict them as malevolent creatures: spiders, vampires or octopuses.

Several Arab hate motifs also have permeated Western society as they resonate with the long-standing anti-Semitic prejudices of the Christian world.

http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-21.htm

[Erika]

54. And what U.S. and World papers show these exhibits?

Please answer.

[AGKISTRODON]

64. They are shown in the M.E.

I don't see your point. Why would Muslims print anti Jew, anti Christian cartoons in newspapers from Europe or the USA?
Did you check out the link I provided? There is more stuff all over the place, if you do a little bit of searching.
I have some examples, but it is nasty, gut wrenching stuff, a lot worse that what was printed in Denmark. I don't even want my screen name associated with it.

[Erika]

66. So they are not posted in the world's papers.

Thank you.

[AGKISTRODON]

69. They are printed

In the areas where they can best inflame hatred. Have you seen the 12 cartoons that started all of this? They don't come anywhere near the hateful level. Unfortunately, the Muslim over reaction almost guarantees that every smartass cartoonist wannabee is going to jump in to this, and there will be some really nasty stuff.

[The Magistrate]

70. The Cartoons Of Mohammede Ma'am,

Were first published in a newspaper in a very small country, and recieved wider circulation only owing to the reaction some had to them.

The point above is simple, and worth engaging: if newspapers in the near east routinely publish hatefull cartoons directed at people of other religions and ethnicity, what ground is there for outcry in that region that someone has done the same thing to them somewhere else? At worst it is simply a case of the biter bit, a thing that rouses little sympathy in most hearts.

[breakfastofchampions]

71. Yes they are

They are printed in the Muslim worlds' papers.

[Hoping4Change]

145. Mideast cartoons were published in the mideast. European

cartoons were published in Europe. Where do you get the notion they were published world wide?

[muriel_volestrangler]

123. How about Jesus in "Jerry Springer the Opera"

Depicted as a man in a nappy (ie diaper), who says "yes, I'm a bit gay", and is involved in an ongoing spat with Satan (who threatens to do something extremely rude with barbed wire to him), in which everyone (God Sr., Jesus, Satan, Adam and Eve) turn out to be just as screwed up as the average Springer guests. This was broadcast on national TV by the BBC. There were protests by some Christian groups, and general dismissals of it as tasteless by mainstream Christian sects, but it didn't degenerate into threats to do terrorist bombings, burnt buildings, and protests in which people end up dying.

[Hoping4Change]

151. From a Muslim Blog: "Stupid Cartoons, Even Stupider Reactions"

The post is in DUs Greatest Section (link below). btw Harper_is_Bush claims she is CIA psyops agent but lord amighty she has her picture and bio posted. You might want to check it out.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[Snivi Yllom]

132. my favorite, on the Supreme Court building

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/about/north&southwalls.pdf

[blurp]

110. The point is that, in a free society, you don't NEED justification.

Really, Erika. I don't understand how you can repeatedly defend people that are obviously using violence to try and shut up people they don't like.

Whatever the cartoonists have done, it's nothing compared to burning buildings and shouting "death to Denmark!"

Such people are a treat to free society and I just can't believe someone at DU could defend them. Free speech is one of the pillars of a progressive society.

[entanglement]

50. See my thread in GD, I have tried to lay out all my thoughts

about the 'insensitivity' question

[breakfastofchampions]

72. This is past being sensitive

How many civil librities are we willing to sacrifice to not offend the Muslims (or anybody for that matter)?

Personally, I pick zero.

[Behind the Aegis]

73. I agree!

[JCMach1]

75. It's not about civil liberties or freedom of speech--

but pure and simple racial/ethnic PROVOCATION...

[Behind the Aegis]

79. It is about freedom of speech and the press.

[breakfastofchampions]

80. It is freedom of speech

It is freedom of speech when Muslims make their cartoons about others, it is freedom of speech when other's make thier cartoons about Muslims. You are advocating a double standard.

[JCMach1]

86. absolutely not...!

Morality when it concerns issues like racism cross all lines...

[breakfastofchampions]

91. but why?

Why is the racism tolerable when the Muslim side is doing it?

[JCMach1]

112. It's not... !

and that IS the point.

For me, this is a moral issue about race/class/power/and religion... It is a smokescreen to call this an issue of freedom of speech.

To call it that completely ignores the race-baiting pre-text.

[JCMach1]

74. The main cartoon in question is the one of Mohd.

with a bomb in his turban. This is bad enough. What makes it much worse is the writing in Arabic that you find in the center of the turban "There is no God but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet."

The meaning of the cartoon: Terrorism and violence is THE PRIMARY tenet of faith for Muslims.

That's what raise this to the level of slur, racism, and provocation.

I would suspect that most DUers would be against racial provocation EVEN if you support the idea of freedom of speech.

Freedoms don't exist in a vacuum.

[breakfastofchampions]

82. Muslim cartoons

Muslim cartoons are just as nasty and hurtful.

[Behind the Aegis]

83. That doesn't seem to matter to some. n/t

[breakfastofchampions]

84. I don't understand why

[Behind the Aegis]

90. Because....the history is long and tedious...and still accepted.

Offend the Jews, freedom of expression. Offend the Muslims, major debate.

Notice in all this mess, that the Muslims in the countries where the cartoons were printed are not having the extreme outbreak of violence. Also notice that we should not refer to "all Muslims" as rioters (which is very correct), but some here, at DU, blame "all Danes and Norwegians" for the cartoons. It comes down to "collective offense" and "collective punishment."

[JCMach1]

85. Yes, the ones put out by racists...

And yes, there are also plenty of Jewish groups that monitor such things and speak out about them...

For example B'nai B'rith...

[breakfastofchampions]

89. You are correct

These cartoons appear in major Muslim newspapers that are racist. There are agencies that keep track of them so that people like me and you can find them and understand what is really going on. What these agencies don't do however, is burn down buildings, incite mass protests or make threats of war. That is the difference.

[Behind the Aegis]

92. Some of those "racists" are mainstream presses.

[JCMach1]

111. And this comes as a shock?

It shouldn't

[Hoping4Change]

146. There are extremist Muslims who are committing terrorist acts

in Mohammed's name and they quote the Koran to justify their actions. As a result they have implanted in non-Muslims the idea that Muslims, symbolized in the cartoon as the figure of Mohammed, hide a violent agenda.

I can't for the life of me understand why Muslims don't see the cartoon figure of Mohammed as symbolic of Islamic terrorists. Why the literalism? Do Muslims never use symbols, one thing to mean another?

[deesy58]

81. The West Should not be Surprised ...

The West should not be surprised by the reaction of some Muslims. They have been very open and explicit in their plans to reestablish the Caliphate and make the whole world subject to Islamic Law. We should be a little more circumspect in our characterizations of this religion. Many of its members (apparently including the Saudi Ambassador to the UK) believe that it is required for the Faithful to kill anybody at all who might insult Islam ... whether intentionally or accidentally! Peaceful religion? Compared to what!?

[Bluebear]

87. Who says that a child who curses his parent shall be put to death?

Leviticus 20: 9 For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.

20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

blah blah blah.

"Imagine no relgion..."

John had something there.

[breakfastofchampions]

93. Those lines are discomforting

But that does not happen with modern Christians. Certain dangerous lines in the Koran are being used as a justification for some very wrong acts.

[Bluebear]

97. God hates fags, I have heard.

The Westboro Baptist church in Kansas pickets funerals of soldiers...delights in Matt Shepard "burning in hell". Falwell says gays caused 9/11. Dobson said we deserved Katrina.

Are these examples of "modern Christianity" or not?

[breakfastofchampions]

98. There are whackos in every group

The Westboro Babtist church has about 200 members, most of which are related to Fred Phelps. Falwell is plain nutjob. However the whackos in the Muslim world are far more numerous and have far more power. All Falwell has done is told me I'm going to Hell, he's never tried to send me there immediately.

[Bluebear]

100. You underestimate the power of Falwell and company

They have run a long campaign to entrench themselves into our government and obliterate the separation of church and state.

PS I am not excusing the violence of some who follow Islam. I am frankly getting fed up with all extremist religions.

[breakfastofchampions]

101. The extremists

The extremists are much much MUCH more dangerous on the Islam side. If Falwell ever got some kind of power over me, I would rise up against him and his kind. Until then, I see what threatens my freedoms and I adress that.

[deesy58]

127. Oops!

Oops! Be careful what you say. Many people might believe that Falwell has already "got some kind of power over ." Isn't the current White House heavily influenced, if not totally dominated, by the religious right? Isn't Falwell a part of the religious right? Have your civil liberties been adversely impacted by that influence? Do you even know? Isn't it so secretive that we can't even find out?

deesy

[breakfastofchampions]

147. The differences

The differences are quite dramatic between us. Over here the religious do try to get ten commandments posted and some laws change, but in some areas of the world you can get killed for not following Muslim law.

[JCMach1]

88. You have no clue....

[deesy58]

128. But you do??

[Hoping4Change]

150. From a Muslim Blog: "Stupid Cartoons, Even Stupider Reactions"

The post is in Greatest Section (link below). btw Harper_is_Bush claims she is CIA psyops agent but lord amighty she has her picture and bio posted.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x339943

[PBass]

94. You're framing this in a fundamentally faulty way

(to the topic starter)

Spitting in someone's face is more than just "insensitive". That is what these cartoons do. I'm not defending the violent (over)reation but lets be clear about what started the controversey.

It's also not a "free speech" issue... just like printing a "holocaust denial" cartoon is not a "free speech" issue.

It's not about "the West caving in to fundamentalist demands"... it was some Western dipshits who started the controversey in the first place.

Again, I don't condone the violent response, but lets not forget who deliberately provoked the controversey to begin with.

[breakfastofchampions]

95. You are framing poorly as well

The Muslims are not above racist and hateful cartoons. It is quite common in major Muslim newspapers. Yet here they are in an uproar over cartoons that criticize them. It is very hypocritical. To call the Danish cartoons a delibirte provocation, when the Muslim cartoons do the same thing is just plain wrong.

[trigz]

102. Bloody good point

For example, what about anti semitic cartoons in Arabic newspapers? They're rife.

[PBass]

105. I guess that's a good rationalization

for shitty behavior?

"They did it too"

Lets have a race to the bottom of the absolute worst human behavior, then?

Anyway, you won't find me defending newspapers and their behavior. They don't speak for "the west" and I'll be surprised if they speak for Islam, either.

[Behind the Aegis]

106. missing the forest for the trees...

...How many Arab embassies are being razed because of the anti-Semitic shit published in Muslim mainstream press?

[breakfastofchampions]

107. It's not a rationalization

The point is that it is not a "deliberate provacation" as you put it. Offensive cartoons are commonplace in the Muslim world, and as they are expresions of the opinions of the Muslim cartoonsist they are accepted. It goes both ways.

[PBass]

108. Yeah it "goes both ways". So what.

Explain to me why no legitimate US newspaper has chosen to print these cartoons. It's just garbage and I'm not going to defend a newspaper that prints it, nor condemn someone who gets offended by it. I don't endorse the violent response but then I don't think either side is blameless.

[breakfastofchampions]

109. So what?

It's very hypocritical for Muslims to get so offended from cartoons when their newspapers print offensive cartoons all the time.

[eggman67]

129. Actually the Philadelphia Inquirer printed them

And that's as mainstream as it gets.

[Hoping4Change]

149. It didn't get published in the US becasue Bush came out against

the cartoons. Don't you get it. Bush would like nothing more than to have the same laws to protect extremist fundie christians.

[trigz]

124. That's hardly the point is it

The point is, well one of many points is, the double standards we're clearly faced with here. Anti-semitism ok, publishing drawings of Muhammed not? Why not? Not doing the old double standards act, surely?

I do not agree with the printing of the pictures, but I DO defend the freedom of expression as long as it doesn't break any laws or defame others. And the way the islamists have reacted is despicable.

[donco6]

116. From what I read, it was not provocation, . . .

as much as a somewhat timid approach to framing the question: Is Islam inherently violent? Is violence something demanded of its followers - maybe not officially, but influentially under the Imams?Isn't that the unspoken question on everyone's mind? It certainly is in northern Europe, with Van Gogh and Fortuyn. Maybe they could have framed it better, but I'm afraid they're going to believe they have their answer.

[deesy58]

130. Spitting?

Your analogy breaks down. These cartoons are not at all analogous to "spitting in someone's face" which, under most Western laws, would be considered an assault. A better analogy might be if I called you a jackass. Would that give you the right to kill me? That's a little twisted, isn't it?

deesy

[Hoping4Change]

148. Aristophanes poked merciless fun at Socrates in his play The Clouds.

The west has been poking fun at sacred cows since then. And what is more, despite Aristphones savage wit and cutting satire, was Socrates' reputation destroyed? No because his greatnes did not depend on his followers silencing the critics.

[W_HAMILTON]

103. "Offend an Atheist" thread

Even though I'm not an atheist, I'm an agnostic, and I figure I'm close enough to be lumped in with them :)

This whole issue with these cartoons, and the resulting violence that it caused, pretty much illustrates for me what's the best way to go about offending an atheist. Not this incident in particular, but this type of negative stuff that occurs in religion's name, no matter what the religion.

I just have to shake my head when I hear about something like this.

I'm just tired of religion, man. I'm tired of people getting upset over make-believe gods, or people that may or may have not existed thousands of years ago. How about if you want people to respect your gods and your thousand-years old religious figures, you start by respecting people that exist today? They'll speak hateful words against gay people, and women and their rights, and people of other religions, and "sinners" ... the list goes on and on. But if someone dares to say a negative word about Jesus, or Mohammed, or <insert your favorite religious character here>, and they go crazy.

If they want everyone to respect their religious figures who haven't been a part of this earth in thousands of years (if they were ever a part to begin with), then they should start by respecting the people living on this earth today.

And I'll acknowledge that not every religious person is like this, duh, I know that. But there's far too many of them that are, and those are the ones dominating the headlines, and they're the ones that are giving religions across the world a bad name.

[LWolf]

113. This is a sticky issue.

I don't think we can legislate things like common courtesy, respect, or common sense. I don't think anyone's particular sacred cow is off limits, yet I think our freedom of expression and freedom of the press should be tempered with some of those 3 qualities mentioned above.

Since we can't legislate those things, what should we do? What if Muslims honor freedoms, and object by writing LTTE and boycotting those publications that they see as lacking in courtesy, respect, or sense? I think it is reasonable to expect those qualities from all sides in any debate.

If it doesn't rise to an expression of hate that can be seen as encouraging hate crimes, I think the best way to express dissent is with the word and the $$$.

What ARE the laws regarding publishing, here and abroad? Is it legal to publish things advocating hate? Should it be? Just another question to ponder.

[ComerPerro]

114. Actually, I heard Savage Weiner say that very thing

That is, the muslims hate us because of Liberalism, because we support things that they hate like gay rights and allowing abortion.

This guy was actually saying things that not only suggested that we should appease the muslim extremists (which I thought conservatives said we definately should not do) but also seemed to indicate that extremist muslims and right wing Christians had the same values and beliefs...

[Senator Lamb]

153. i think it can be said

many a time, a Muslim group or paper or leader has said or depicted something pretty savage against Jews. And they never ever burn buildings down. Fundamentalist Christians are pretty annoying, but they didn't burn down the studio that produced Book of Daniel.

lets be honest. this is a clash of civilizations.

as liberals, muslim fanatics go against everything we stand for. heck, they probably hate us more they do conservatives, ie. social issues.

the population of Muslims in Europe is steadily increasing. Now I'm no racist. But if there is no assimilation to liberal values, what we will see is a decline of the West. After all these countries are growing older with shrinking generations. we may be looking at a new world order within the century.

[breakfastofchampions]

155. yes

why are so many liberals such ardent defenders of those with the most anti liberal values?

[HannibalBarca]

154. ...

...You have elucidated my main concern during this "incident", as the muslim populations of western nations grow should we then deprive some of our citizens their freedoms?, will there be muslim enclaves where all women who enter are required to wear traditional Islamic dress, where there will be no bars/clubs or music stores??, as you say where does it end?