Pakistan bans Facebook over Draw Muhammad Day, also ban Youtube

[GoSkins561]

Heck, even the fans of the Oakland Raiders claim to be apalled at the Eagles' fans boorish and uncivilized behavior.

Back to the issue, it was a dumb stunt and if it were a dumb stunt perpetrated against my religion I would likely be upset and angry myself... or if done cleverly I would laugh... the line is at violence. It shouldn't go there, but honestly, the guys who wanted to provoke this reaction (and they knew it was coming) are pretty guilty themselves.

Maybe if Muslims didn't react with such extremism when Mohammed is drawn, they wouldn't get a reaction from those looking to get a rise out of them.

[Dan T.]

This is an intereting social experiment. It's probably a rough time for moderate Muslims, but it also holds up a mirror to the extremist element of the religion.

I can understand a religious edict against depictions of Muhammed. I can't abide a fatwah of death against anyone who violates that, and neither can civilized society.

[GibbsFactor]

We really need aliens right now. I'm super serial.

[SkinsHokieFan]

We really need aliens right now. I'm super serial.

My opinion- draw away as you please. I tend not to worry about trivial details, it just shows me the ugly character of quite a few people

[Prosperity]

I think it was a plot to get Tom killed

wrong social media network grandpa

[Koala]

It really exposes a lot of them, and shows how divided they really are when it comes to being peaceful or violent in the face of opposition.

This is not opposition, this is juvenile incitement, this is an offense that exists only for the sake of being offensive.

The founding fathers did not lay Freedom of Speech out as a right just so idiots could dream up ways to be as offensive as possible and see if they could get away with it.

Every freedom comes with responsibility. This facebook page is irresponsible, and is a clear abuse of freedom. Thousands/millions of american soldiers did not die so you could make a mockery of the rights they died protecting. Its your RESPONSIBILITY, as the inheritor of their sacrifices, to use the rights they gave you in a positive, responsible manner that seeks to promote peace and justice, and convey your personal beliefs in an adult manner. THAT is the intent of the right, not so you could act like a child and insult people just to get a rise out of them.

Im sure you can find ways to disagree or criticize Islam in a responsible manner. Plenty of people do all the time. You dont see muslims demonstrating en masse against westerner's rights to critique Islam, do you? Plenty of people have publically stated that they think Islam is mistaken, oppressive, backwards -- hell just watch Fox news -- and yet no demonstrations on that. They only seem to demonstrate when they think westerners go out of their way to insult them or their religion.

The Supreme Court long ago ruled that freedom of speech does not cover obscene speech, which was noted as being inherently subjective. I think that muhammad page has a LOT of obscene speech on it (depictions of him being sodomizing animals, etc.). Do you really support that? Do you really think that was the intent of the founding fathers?

Finally, I find it interesting that you read the comments on that facebook page, and only deemed it necessary to denounce the over-the-top comments by muslims espousing violence. Yet you somehow ignored or forgot the just-as-numerous comments supporting violence against muslims. Granted I dont take the "lets turn the middle-east into a sheet of glass" comments very seriously myself, but I dont take the muslim "kill all the kafirs" comments seriously either. So why do you only take one side's threats seriously? Like I said, interesting.

[GoSkins561]

Muslims don't need to visit the page, the same way I wouldn't visit a page that depicts Jesus in negative ways.

[Tweedr01]

Maybe if Muslims didn't react with such extremism when Mohammed is drawn, they wouldn't get a reaction from those looking to get a rise out of them.

This is exactly right. On a lesser scale this is like one person saying something like a 'your mama' joke, and the other person punching them in the face. It's called being an adult, someone does something you don't like you don't go looking for a fight. Anything short of them initiating a physical confrontation means just grow up, they'll look like idiots for trying to get a rise out of Muslims.

[jpyaks3]

I can't think of any other religion that so forcibly demands anything opposing its beliefs be completely destroyed.

The Quran says in Sura 2 verse 256

[2:256] There shall be no compulsion in religion: the right way is now distinct from the wrong way. Anyone who denounces the devil and believes in GOD has grasped the strongest bond; one that never breaks. GOD is Hearer, Omniscient.

http://www.submission.org/suras/sura2.html

Thats a pretty strong demand to NOT forcibly convert any other religion.

Now Christianity on the other hand has a long long history of forcible conversion and destruction of native cultures.

[jpyaks3]

Its pretty obvious what these guys were trying to do, provoke outrage so they could paint all Muslims as violent. I don't know if any violence will actually come from this but I still think its a pretty stupid and insensitive stunt. Also to those comparing this to depictions of Jesus depicting Jesus isn't expressly forbidden in the Bible like depicting Muhammad is in the Quran so it is entirely different.

Edit: I also don't think they did this to protest free speech or whatever I think its pretty clear they did this to provoke outrage among the Muslim community and reaffirm their beliefs regarding Muslims.

[Blackest Eyes]

Not a huge fan of the idea of everyone drawing Muhammad just to piss off the Muslims or prove a point or whatever. Totally immature and stupid.

I do approve of free speech and freedom of expression. If someone feels like drawing Muhammad, they should be allowed to do so without fearing some crazy Muslim trying to kill them or delivering death threats. If South Park shows Muhammad and Muslims do not want to see Muhammad, turn the damn TV off.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Its pretty obvious what these guys were trying to do, provoke outrage so they could paint all Muslims as violent. I don't know if any violence will actually come from this but I still think its a pretty stupid and insensitive stunt. Also to those comparing this to depictions of Jesus depicting Jesus isn't expressly forbidden in the Bible like depicting Muhammad is in the Quran so it is entirely different.

Edit: I also don't think they did this to protest free speech or whatever I think its pretty clear they did this to provoke outrage among the Muslim community and reaffirm their beliefs regarding Muslims.

Agree. And there are enough ignorant idiots in Pakistan and elsewhere in the middle east that it really makes no sense to go out of your way to provoke them. Just makes no sense to me

Not a huge fan of the idea of everyone drawing Muhammad just to piss off the Muslims or prove a point or whatever. Totally immature and stupid.

I do approve of free speech and freedom of expression. If someone feels like drawing Muhammad, they should be allowed to do so without fearing some crazy Muslim trying to kill them or delivering death threats. If South Park shows Muhammad and Muslims do not want to see Muhammad, turn the damn TV off.

Pretty much how I respond to these things

[Dan T.]

This did not arise out of a vacuum. It arose as a very specific response to the violent overreaction, death threats, and actual attempts on the life of Swedish cartoonist Lars Viks after he drew images of Muhammed.

I can understand the position of the organizers that this is taking a stand for freedom of expression, against violent threats of those who are offended.

[Koala]

Oh God jypaks, enough already.

Stop condemning Christianity for the same acts you absolve Islam for.

The truth is, neither the Bible nor the Quran give a green light for conversion by force. However, both muslims and christians have attempted at times to convert by force, and to use violence to spread their beliefs; history is clear about that. The followers of both religions are often guilty of ignoring religious commandments or being ignorant of their own religion.

So, when you make a blanket statement about Christianity and forcible conversion, you do realize this is the exact same thing as making blanket statements about Islam and terrorism or forcible conversions. Deciding that the mistaken actions of its most ignorant followers are the best way to define a religion is plain dumb. If you're gonna be offended when people do it to Islam, perhaps you should first quit doing it to Christians.

[GoSkins561]

Also to those comparing this to depictions of Jesus depicting Jesus isn't expressly forbidden in the Bible like depicting Muhammad is in the Quran so it is entirely different.

.

Wrong

1 Timothy 6:1 Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. • Against the Holy Ghost, unpardonable.

Matthew 12:31-32 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

[jpyaks3]

Oh God jypaks, enough already.

Stop condemning Christianity for the same acts you absolve Islam for.

The truth is, neither the Bible nor the Quran give a green light for conversion by force. However, both muslims and christians have attempted at times to convert by force, and to use violence to spread their beliefs; history is clear about that. The followers of both religions are often guilty of ignoring religious commandments or being ignorant of their own religion.

So, when you make a blanket statement about Christianity and forcible conversion, you do realize this is the exact same thing as making blanket statements about Islam and terrorism or forcible conversions. Deciding that the mistaken actions of its most ignorant followers are the best way to define a religion is plain dumb. If you're gonna be offended when people do it to Islam, perhaps you should first quit doing it to Christians.

I apologize, I didn't mean that last bit to be offensive although I can definitely see how it could be. I was just trying to point out that Islam does not call for the coercion of others to Islam like the person I quoted claimed. I just wanted to point out that people had been forcing other people to convert to Christianity for a lot longer time period and over a lot larger area than Islam could ever dream of.

It was not meant to be an insult to Christianity or even a comment of Christian doctrine more of a comment on forced conversion from a historical perspective.

[Bang]

Maybe if Muslims didn't react with such extremism when Mohammed is drawn, they wouldn't get a reaction from those looking to get a rise out of them.

Maybe if people would realize WHY they get so upset, maybe there would be some sort of stop to this stupid stuff. But since people seem to think that because they don't believe in the Islamic religion that they should not show them the basic human respect that means trying to NOT be a dick for no reason other than to be a dick. Drawing his likeness is expressly prohibited by their religion. How hard is that to

A/ figure out, and

B/ respect?

It really doesn't seem that hard to me, and courtesy is easy to give. (even if the other guy doesn't return it.. I think that is one of the things Jesus tried to teach all of you guys, right?)

"Freedom of speech" is just that. That doesn't mean freedom from repurcussions of your speech. It is also the freedom to know when to not purposely offend for no reason other than to offend. It's just being rude for the sake of it.

Freedom of speech means I can loudly speak of sexually suggestive things to your mom at the bus stop. But it would be damned rude of me, wouldn't it? It means I can make a sign that says "God Hates Fags" and go stand outside of a soldier's funeral and yell at his parents in their worst moments, doesn't it? But damn if that isn't just a ****ty thing to do.

Try and turn it around and see it from their perspective (you know, treat them like human beings not so different from yourself) . Maybe if people didn't disrespect their religion and purposely try to be rude, maybe they wouldn't get so pissed off about it.

~Bang

[jpyaks3]

Wrong

1 Timothy 6:1 Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. • Against the Holy Ghost, unpardonable.

Matthew 12:31-32 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

So are you saying that any depiction good or bad of Jesus is blasphemy and forbidden?

[GoSkins561]

No I am saying you shouldn't blasphemize Jesus, however if that's what you want to do, feel free do it, I am not the one that makes the final judgement.

[Burgold]

Oh God jypaks, enough already.

Stop condemning Christianity for the same acts you absolve Islam for.

The truth is, neither the Bible nor the Quran give a green light for conversion by force....

Really, I thought one of the highest missions of the Christian was to spread the word and convert? Or is it only the force bit that is objectionable?

I'm not trying to be a smart ass here. I'm honestly asking because my understanding of Christianity is that one of it's primary desires is that everyone see the light and become Christian.

I do get a big difference between enlightenment via teaching and good deed and enlightenment with a knife at one's throat, but I want to ask about conversion. In Judaism, Conversion is not a high goal. In fact, it's very hard to convert to the religion and you have to go through incredible ammounts of study and testing to do so.

[Koala]

Also to those comparing this to depictions of Jesus depicting Jesus isn't expressly forbidden in the Bible like depicting Muhammad is in the Quran so it is entirely different.

That above statement is false. The Quran says just about nothing on depicting Muhammad. The injunctions against depictions of ALL PROPHETS comes from the HADITH.

Thats an important distinction. The issue isnt as cut and dry as you and other muslims make it seem, you make it seem like not depicting the prophets is a core belief of Islam, when in fact, since it is a hadith, it is by definition a secondary belief that is not even necessarily accepted by all muslims.

[Bang]

No I am saying you shouldn't blasphemize Jesus, however if that's what you want to do, feel free do it, I am not the one that makes the final judgement.

I get that, but the difference here is that the thing the muslims are complaining about is forbidden.

Christianity has no such forbbiddance (as far as i know) and as such doesn't carry the same connotation with you. As a Christian you don't like it, you are offended by it, but it's not forbidden, so you're kind of obligated to turn the other cheek, so to speak. (Even as a non christian i don't like it. I see it as just poking people for no real reason.)

They're under the opposite obligation, and granted, I think that is crazier than a bucket of bat****, it is still the basis of the anger, and that is legitimate, whether we like it or not.

I think the idea of drawing Muhammad just for the sake of being a jerk and trying to provoke people is completely counterproductive to any sort of peace on earth. If we willfully thumb our noses over something as simple as that.. well, what can we expect? Not everything has to be a confrontation. We can be respectful of others without looking like a coward. It's simple courtesy.

Now, that said, I don't think it should be forbidden to us to draw what we feel. I will defend that cartoonist's cartoon to the death, i thought it made a great point, and a fair point considering the time it was done.

But this isn't what the facebook thing was about. It was just about being a jerk when you don't have to. the dog is sleeping. No sense poking it with a stick so you can lecture it on barking.

Just let it sleep, and everyone is happy.

~Bang

[jpyaks3]

That above statement is false. The Quran says just about nothing on depicting Muhammad. The injunctions against depictions of ALL PROPHETS comes from the HADITH.

Thats an important distinction. The issue isnt as cut and dry as you and other muslims make it seem, you make it seem like not depicting the prophets is a core belief of Islam, when in fact, since it is a hadith, it is by definition a secondary belief that is not even necessarily accepted by all muslims.

Just wanted to point out that I am not Muslim, but thats a fair point that it isn't a core belief but it is still something that a majority of Islam follows and I think its pretty clear from the rhetoric of the people who created "draw Muhammad day" (at least on the facebook group) that their intention was to provoke Muslims for no reason other than they could. Which in my opinion is a pretty ****ty thing to do, I would say the same thing about any attempts to provoke anyone based on their religious beliefs.

[Burgold]

I'd also like to remind people about the Maplethorpe exhibit. Remember Jesus being placed in urine and how violently angry and upset people got over that... how many tried to shut down the National Endowment of the Arts for funding that Brooklyn museum that wound up choosing to exhibit that work.

Rage over scandelous depiction is not unique to one set of beliefs.

[Koala]

Really, I thought one of the highest missions of the Christian was to spread the word and convert? Or is it only the force bit that is objectionable?

I'm not trying to be a smart ass here. I'm honestly asking because my understanding of Christianity is that one of it's primary desires is that everyone see the light and become Christian.

I do get a big difference between enlightenment via teaching and good deed and enlightenment with a knife at one's throat, but I want to ask about conversion. In Judaism, Conversion is not a high goal. In fact, it's very hard to convert to the religion and you have to go through incredible ammounts of study and testing to do so.

I think you answered your own question -- the force part is whats objectionable. But conversion and spread of the word is the ultimate goal of Christianity (and Islam, for that matter). Jesus came to offer the light of God to all people who would believe, not just those who were born into faith.

I think, Im not a religious scholar, I just stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night....and took some theology classes...