The Perils Of Art In The New Millenium

brokenfingers said:

And it isn't a case of "sensitivity". It's a case of a religion seeking to control others outside it's realm. It's a case of a religion seeking to follow the literal word of Mohammed and spread the Faith by sword.

Click to expand...

And I already said, repeatedly, it's not just the fanatics who are offended; depicting Mohammed in any form that shows his face, is considered offensive to even the most moderate of Muslims. It's blasphemy and idolatry, according to their religion.

Religion is already a tough issue as it is without the idiots who make relations worse. That goes for both sides.

Idolatry: The worship of idols; excessive admiration or veneration. Don't think the Danes put the cartoon in the paper for people to worship. Fact is, it's idolitrous for a Muslim to venerate a picture of Mohammed, and it's blasphemy for a Muslim to insult Mohammed and/or break the rules of Islam.

They're just finding excuses. A terrorist is a terrorist is a terrorist. They will always and inevitably stir up their followers with screams of "Kill! Kill!" and will always and inevitably find an excuse, even a poor one. They are terrorists, and it is useless to equate them with non-terrorists, as the majority of Muslims are.

As a Christian, I find displays of Jesus in glasses of piss or in obscenities to be insulting, if stupid, but I'm not going to kill anyone over it. Muslims who don't approve of terrorism may or may not find the cartoon insulting; I suspect most shrugged it off. It would be good to not lump them together with the terrorists.

I'm reminded of the L.A. riots, when blacks who didn't participate, didn't loot, gave shelter, and prayed were lumped with the rioters and - worse - told they should have joined in the riot to protest the - well, basically, everyone who wasn't black. Don't do this to the Muslims.

It's no longer a question of whether or not the cartoon is insulting to a religion. The terrorists have ensured it's a question of whether or not one submits to terrorism for the sake of being tolerant.They aren't stupid; they've done this deliberately.

They're just finding excuses.

Click to expand...

Exactly. The outrage is useful as a tool to intimidate opposition.

For myself, I'm outraged by the head-chopping and wedding-bombing. But that's just me.

BarbJ said:

As a Christian, I find displays of Jesus in glasses of piss or in obscenities to be insulting, if stupid, but I'm not going to kill anyone over it. Muslims who don't approve of terrorism may or may not find the cartoon insulting; I suspect most shrugged it off. It would be good to not lump them together with the terrorists.

Click to expand...

Again, depicting Mohammad in any shape or form that doesn't obscure his face is considered sacrilege to even the most moderate of Muslims, not just the fanatics. They would not simply "shrug it off". That's a whole different ballgame than the depiction of Jesus, where it is not considered sacrilege to show Him in all His glory to many Christians.

Moderate Muslims may not threaten death over it, but that doesn't mean it won't piss them off, is basically what I'm saying.

InfinityGoddess said:

Again, depicting Mohammad in any shape or form that doesn't obscure his face is considered sacrilege to even the most moderate of Muslims, not just the fanatics. They would not simply "shrug it off". That's a whole different ballgame than the depiction of Jesus, where it is not considered sacrilege to show Him in all His glory to many Christians.

Moderate Muslims may not threaten death over it, but that doesn't mean it won't piss them off, is basically what I'm saying.

Click to expand...

Um, depicting Jesus in pee and obscenities is showing Him in His glory? I.G., I don't think you're reading the posts completely before responding. The Muslim family who discussed the matter with me, and consider themselves good Muslims (they drew a blank on "moderate Muslim"), are the ones who used the phrase " homicidal idiots looking for excuses". I'd let them know you consider them non-Muslims because of their views, but I like them. I disagree with their religion, but them I like.

Don't bother to answer if you unless you wish. This thread is worn out, and I won't be back to it.

BarbJ said:

Um, depicting Jesus in pee and obscenities is showing Him in His glory? I.G., I don't think you're reading the posts completely before responding. The Muslim family who discussed the matter with me, and consider themselves good Muslims (they drew a blank on "moderate Muslim"), are the ones who used the phrase " homicidal idiots looking for excuses". I'd let them know you consider them non-Muslims because of their views, but I like them. I disagree with their religion, but them I like.

Don't bother to answer if you unless you wish. This thread is worn out, and I won't be back to it.

Click to expand...

I meant showing Jesus in the manner of showing all of Him, not like pictures where His face is scratched off because it's blasphemy to show His face or something like that, as it is sacrilege to Islam to depict Mohammad's face.

Fanatics are people you can never please, of course, and of course, I don't agree with the death threats. But I also think it's unfair to say that they are the only ones who take offense at Mohammad's depiction. That's what I was saying.

I am too. But at the same time, if you want unity in the world, you can't go around offending people.

Click to expand...

Didn't Orwell have a category called, "Doublethink?" The ability, that is, to simultaneously hold two opposing views.

Dai Alanye said:

Didn't Orwell have a category called, "Doublethink?" The ability, that is, to simultaneously hold two opposing views.

Click to expand...

I am not "doublethinking". I am simply saying that if you want to make friends to the people who aren't extremists, but share the same religion, you can't go around offending them.

That doesn't mean that I'm against freedom of expression. It simply means that religious intolerance should not be tolerated by either side. That is all.

I am too. But at the same time, if you want unity in the world, you can't go around offending people.

Click to expand...

Again, depicting Mohammad in any shape or form that doesn't obscure his face is considered sacrilege to even the most moderate of Muslims, not just the fanatics.

Click to expand...

For the sake of unity in the world, then all muslims must change.

Why does the whole rest of the world have to bend over for their sensativities? Perhaps they should be more flexible, not the rest of us.

Like I said, this is only one thing which 'offends' them. Your very existence offends them. So, for the sake of unity with the muslim world, we should deal with lesbians/gays like Iran does?

That doesn't mean that I'm against freedom of expression. It simply means that religious intolerance should not be tolerated by either side.

Click to expand...

Your logic is less that superb. Here's a similar example from the '60s. "Join the Peace Corps or I'll kill you."