Draw Mohammed - My Personal Opinion and Involvement
- Thread starter KrAzY3
- Start date
I think it does.
Somehow in today's american culture, it's totally ok to be islamophobic. It's totally okay to completely demonize a religion.
There are several protests around America against building Mosques. Why is this intolerance ok in America?
Somehow in today's american culture, it's totally ok to be islamophobic. It's totally okay to completely demonize a religion.
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/05/25/bret-stephens-religious-test-for-mosque-builders/
There are several protests around America against building Mosques. Why is this intolerance ok in America?
fatherofcaitlyn
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 82 (100%)
[quote name='KingBroly']I can think of 3 good reasons, 4 if you want to get technical.[/QUOTE]
The Holy Trinity and the Virgin Mary?
The Holy Trinity and the Virgin Mary?
[quote name='IRHari']You don't get any respect from anyone in this thread because of what you did. Instead of spreading pictures of Mohammed everywhere, which was the point of EDMD, you drew an offensive picture of him. You offended any decent person who saw that picture.[/QUOTE]
I said in this thread several times that I "drew" that years ago. It's like some people can't read, I even alluded to it in my last post... I didn't draw that for EDMD and once again, acting like EDMD is the beginning is like starting a book at the last chapter! That's not when the cartoon Jihad started. In either case I never asked for respect or even approval, merely that some see the need to resist themselves. I haven't even tried to "draw" anything for years, but I do try to continue looking into the issue and I do continue to find out disheartening things about how these artists are being treated. In either case, it's ridiculous to say "any decent person" would be offended by a
ing stick figure.
[quote name='Sporadic']
Let's see what you have this time.
[/QUOTE]
For the record I made that years ago as well and already posted it in this thread. I know I have 0 artistic talent of any sort, but as I've said I felt it was important to show some solidarity at the time.
[quote name='punklivz']Sure you want the right to do it, but at what cost? Is it worth all that to you, really? I don't feel censored, I feel as though it is respecting their religion personally (by not showing him). I don't see why it has to be such a huge deal.[/QUOTE]
It is a huge deal because the radicals made it a huge deal. Another thing I said a few times if that if the original cartoon jihad artists had not been threatened with death and had actual acts of violence committed. I never would have taken it upon myself to make any horrible drawings, or even address the issue at all. It's in that climate that I and others responded. If they win, they won't just say ok hey we won we'll leave everyone alone now. Molly is a perfect example, she said she was sorry! She backed down and they still want her dead.
I would hope that in the context of Molly being threatened with death, the person who threatened South Park having terrorist ties, the person who made a facebook page supporting Molly having the Mounties show up at her house warning her to take it down, etc.... some would start to see how far beyond EDMD this goes. It's a continuation of what artists like Westergaard have faced for years and it goes beyond that as well. This is about a right to live our lives without having a group of radicals tell us what is and isn't acceptable.
For instance, while I see the humor in this, here's what Gitmo detainees demanded be done to the foosball table:
Is that the next step? We start scraping the faces off of objects because it would be seen as idol worship (which is at the root of the problems with depicting Mohammed, I can assure any concerned individual I wasn't trying to worship Mohammed)? This violent and intolerant turn that Islam has taken isn't something that is necessarily inherent to the religion. In March 2001, the Taliban blew up the 165 foot tall Buddhas. They existed there for 1,700 years. Obviously, they were tolerated for that long, it was only when a group of radicals held enough power (or met with little enough resistance) that they were they destroyed. It won't end with a foosball table or priceless Buddhas either.
The high cost to me is the cost that would be required by giving in...
I said in this thread several times that I "drew" that years ago. It's like some people can't read, I even alluded to it in my last post... I didn't draw that for EDMD and once again, acting like EDMD is the beginning is like starting a book at the last chapter! That's not when the cartoon Jihad started. In either case I never asked for respect or even approval, merely that some see the need to resist themselves. I haven't even tried to "draw" anything for years, but I do try to continue looking into the issue and I do continue to find out disheartening things about how these artists are being treated. In either case, it's ridiculous to say "any decent person" would be offended by a
ing stick figure.[quote name='Sporadic']
Let's see what you have this time.
[/QUOTE]
For the record I made that years ago as well and already posted it in this thread. I know I have 0 artistic talent of any sort, but as I've said I felt it was important to show some solidarity at the time.
[quote name='punklivz']Sure you want the right to do it, but at what cost? Is it worth all that to you, really? I don't feel censored, I feel as though it is respecting their religion personally (by not showing him). I don't see why it has to be such a huge deal.[/QUOTE]
It is a huge deal because the radicals made it a huge deal. Another thing I said a few times if that if the original cartoon jihad artists had not been threatened with death and had actual acts of violence committed. I never would have taken it upon myself to make any horrible drawings, or even address the issue at all. It's in that climate that I and others responded. If they win, they won't just say ok hey we won we'll leave everyone alone now. Molly is a perfect example, she said she was sorry! She backed down and they still want her dead.
I would hope that in the context of Molly being threatened with death, the person who threatened South Park having terrorist ties, the person who made a facebook page supporting Molly having the Mounties show up at her house warning her to take it down, etc.... some would start to see how far beyond EDMD this goes. It's a continuation of what artists like Westergaard have faced for years and it goes beyond that as well. This is about a right to live our lives without having a group of radicals tell us what is and isn't acceptable.
For instance, while I see the humor in this, here's what Gitmo detainees demanded be done to the foosball table:
Is that the next step? We start scraping the faces off of objects because it would be seen as idol worship (which is at the root of the problems with depicting Mohammed, I can assure any concerned individual I wasn't trying to worship Mohammed)? This violent and intolerant turn that Islam has taken isn't something that is necessarily inherent to the religion. In March 2001, the Taliban blew up the 165 foot tall Buddhas. They existed there for 1,700 years. Obviously, they were tolerated for that long, it was only when a group of radicals held enough power (or met with little enough resistance) that they were they destroyed. It won't end with a foosball table or priceless Buddhas either.
The high cost to me is the cost that would be required by giving in...
[quote name='KrAzY3']I said in this thread several times that I "drew" that years ago. It's like some people can't read, I even alluded to it in my last post... I didn't draw that for EDMD and once again, acting like EDMD is the beginning is like starting a book at the last chapter! That's not when the cartoon Jihad started. In either case I never asked for respect or even approval, merely that some see the need to resist themselves. I haven't even tried to "draw" anything for years, but I do try to continue looking into the issue and I do continue to find out disheartening things about how these artists are being treated. In either case, it's ridiculous to say "any decent person" would be offended by a ing stick figure.
[/QUOTE]
Right, but the difference between you and most of the rest of us, is that we're not proud of the stupid things we did a few years ago. I had some goofy stuff up on old websites of mine. I elected to take them down because I matured.
I mean, does it tell you anything that the rest of us are sitting here rolling our eyes wondering why so many of your posts on this topic boil down to immaturewittery?
Just out of curiosity, any relatives of yours die a slow death by cancer or some dehibilitating disease. I think I have a really clever idea for a stick figure that would you know, be totally non-offensive.
ing stick figure.[/QUOTE]
Right, but the difference between you and most of the rest of us, is that we're not proud of the stupid things we did a few years ago. I had some goofy stuff up on old websites of mine. I elected to take them down because I matured.
I mean, does it tell you anything that the rest of us are sitting here rolling our eyes wondering why so many of your posts on this topic boil down to immature
wittery?Just out of curiosity, any relatives of yours die a slow death by cancer or some dehibilitating disease. I think I have a really clever idea for a stick figure that would you know, be totally non-offensive.
[quote name='berzirk']Just out of curiosity, any relatives of yours die a slow death by cancer or some dehibilitating disease. I think I have a really clever idea for a stick figure that would you know, be totally non-offensive.[/QUOTE]
It would only be non-offensive if you made it a few years ago, duh.
It would only be non-offensive if you made it a few years ago, duh.
[quote name='berzirk']Just out of curiosity, any relatives of yours die a slow death by cancer or some dehibilitating disease. I think I have a really clever idea for a stick figure that would you know, be totally non-offensive.[/QUOTE]
My mother and father both died a relatively slow death from cancer. If you want to try and depict that in stick figure form, go ahead because it won't come remotely close to what actually seeing them waste away was like.
Having said that, I'm not proud, nor ashamed of the depiction. I said all along, in every reference that it was intentionally offensive, as a show of solidarity (and horribly crappy artwork, I was amused when this search result led to it: "drawing of camel that looks like some rubbish guy has drawn it"). Even if I was ashamed, I wouldn't bring myself to remove it simply because I know others are living under threat of death, in the least I can take ownership of something I made years ago. I am proud of the Pakistan government banning my pathetic site though, simply because it was done to show solidarity and even if it was in a very small way I stuck my neck out to.
Some here want to make everything about the depiction. I made a post and referenced something I wrote, in which the stick figure was linked. It's been used as a diversion to avoid discussing the core issues here. Having said that, let's break this down a bit because some of you guys have a absurd view of this. Mohammed was in no way a deity. The reason depictions of him are taboo is not out of respect, but to avoid idolatry. It's important that he not be worshiped. While my depiction obviously shows a lack of respect for Islam, it's nothing like depicting Jesus in such a manner because Christians believe Jesus is God in the flesh and should be worshiped. If all I was trying to do was upset Muslims, I would have depicted Allah in a less than flattering light instead.
Further more, it was intentionally silly. I didn't try to do something based on historical evidence (there are some things even I wouldn't depict in stick figure form), I gave him a penis as long as his arm and so on. To be frank, I think it's a bit like a Rorschach test, if you look at it and it elicits a strong response you're probably the one with a issue. It's not depicting a deity, it's not depicting anyone that any of us ever knew, it's really nothing more than a silly and unrealistic depiction of a historical figure of religious importance. That was part of the point to, sure I wanted to offend the religious nuts, but almost any sane person would look at that and go on that's stupid and move on. It's odd you compare me drawing a fictitious depiction intentionally silly, unrealistic and even if it occurred virtually harmless even for the poor short camel, and compare it to depicting my parents dying a painful death. That's your issue...
Isn't it a lot more convenient to discuss my stick figure depiction than the fact that Molly Norris has the FBI warning her she's marked for death or that the person who threatened Trey Parker and Matt Stone has terrorist ties? Why so little concern for them? Earlier in this topic I was compared to the individual with said terrorist ties. The distinction here is that what I've done has been completely in a non-violent and non-threatening manner. It's sad some people don't seem to grasp this massive difference. At least the FBI does...
My mother and father both died a relatively slow death from cancer. If you want to try and depict that in stick figure form, go ahead because it won't come remotely close to what actually seeing them waste away was like.
Having said that, I'm not proud, nor ashamed of the depiction. I said all along, in every reference that it was intentionally offensive, as a show of solidarity (and horribly crappy artwork, I was amused when this search result led to it: "drawing of camel that looks like some rubbish guy has drawn it"). Even if I was ashamed, I wouldn't bring myself to remove it simply because I know others are living under threat of death, in the least I can take ownership of something I made years ago. I am proud of the Pakistan government banning my pathetic site though, simply because it was done to show solidarity and even if it was in a very small way I stuck my neck out to.
Some here want to make everything about the depiction. I made a post and referenced something I wrote, in which the stick figure was linked. It's been used as a diversion to avoid discussing the core issues here. Having said that, let's break this down a bit because some of you guys have a absurd view of this. Mohammed was in no way a deity. The reason depictions of him are taboo is not out of respect, but to avoid idolatry. It's important that he not be worshiped. While my depiction obviously shows a lack of respect for Islam, it's nothing like depicting Jesus in such a manner because Christians believe Jesus is God in the flesh and should be worshiped. If all I was trying to do was upset Muslims, I would have depicted Allah in a less than flattering light instead.
Further more, it was intentionally silly. I didn't try to do something based on historical evidence (there are some things even I wouldn't depict in stick figure form), I gave him a penis as long as his arm and so on. To be frank, I think it's a bit like a Rorschach test, if you look at it and it elicits a strong response you're probably the one with a issue. It's not depicting a deity, it's not depicting anyone that any of us ever knew, it's really nothing more than a silly and unrealistic depiction of a historical figure of religious importance. That was part of the point to, sure I wanted to offend the religious nuts, but almost any sane person would look at that and go on that's stupid and move on. It's odd you compare me drawing a fictitious depiction intentionally silly, unrealistic and even if it occurred virtually harmless even for the poor short camel, and compare it to depicting my parents dying a painful death. That's your issue...
Isn't it a lot more convenient to discuss my stick figure depiction than the fact that Molly Norris has the FBI warning her she's marked for death or that the person who threatened Trey Parker and Matt Stone has terrorist ties? Why so little concern for them? Earlier in this topic I was compared to the individual with said terrorist ties. The distinction here is that what I've done has been completely in a non-violent and non-threatening manner. It's sad some people don't seem to grasp this massive difference. At least the FBI does...
Last edited by a moderator:
bread's done