This is, without question, the best Muhammad cartoon I've ever seen. Not offensive, either.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

Which, of course, doesn't keep the fanatics from throwing their usual hissy fit.

http://www.mg.co.za/zapiro/fullcartoon/2525

[tabatha]

1. Here is a news article about it:

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=3015&art_id=iol1274423415813C635

[JuniperLea]

2. I like it!

However, they feel any picture of Mohamed is offensive... no graven images of him allowed at all. The Bible says the same thing, but the plethora of Jesus pictures is over the top...

[Codeine]

5. This summer Arnold Schwarzenegger IS Jesus Christ. nt

[rfranklin]

8. Republican Jeezus smites the Moose-lims!

And favors the rich for they are worthy!

[Liberal_in_LA]

6. Christ has been pumping weights

[JuniperLea]

59. He's got his swell on, yo!

:rofl:

[tjwash]

9. WTF?? Is that them aryan-steroid Jesus?

Don't make me come down there and kick your ass... :rofl:

[SCantiGOP]

15. Hey fundies

That dark skinned guy who said you had to take care of the sick and give money to the poor wasn't Obama - it was Jesus.

[ieoeja]

20. According to them it *was* Obama. They called him "the Messiah" all throughout the election. nt

[pinboy3niner]

18. "the plethora of Jesus pictures is over the top"

No kidding! You never see Mohamed's image in fruit, produce, pancakes, waffles . . . . :)

[JuniperLea]

27. I'll be checking my toast carefully from here on out!

Surely we've just missed it! Maybe my tortillas too...

My favorite is the Mother Teresa biscuit! AKA Nun Bun...

[geardaddy]

22. Here's a painting that was at a fundie bank.

[JuniperLea]

28. Of course...

Because you know how much Jesus LOVED the moneychangers...

That one is particularly disgusting.

[blondeatlast]

69. Apparently, the dimwits at the bank missed the Book of Matthew completely. nt

[geardaddy]

24. I guess Jesus has gotten an endoresment deal.

[JuniperLea]

25. hahahahaha!

:rofl:

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

29. I thoroughly approve all of the above toons.

:rofl:

(Because I am a consistent atheist, like Richard Dawkins.)

[customerserviceguy]

60. Fundie pornography, if I ever saw it. n/t

[Codeine]

3. And he's pointing the soles of his shoes at me!

A grave insult! I DECLARED DOUBLE-DOG FATWA!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

4. Ergo: Muslims do not have a sense of humor.

Yeah, fuck that.

[Quantess]

7. I tried to recommend it.

[Ms. Toad]

10. I disagree that it is not offensive.

For many Muslims, any image of Muhammad is offensive.

As a parallel, as far as I'm concerned the flag is a piece of cloth. I don't particularly care what is done to it, freedom of speech gives me a right to do whatever I want to it, and I can even envision creating a cartoon about flag desecration that many would find downright funny if they had similar beliefs to mine about the flag.

None of that diminishes how offensive desecrating the flag is to many Americans (including probably quite a few here on DU).

Doesn't mean I might never do it - or think that it was never appropriate - but I would never suggest that it wasn't offensive.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

11. I meant not offensive to people who aren't batshit crazy. -nt

[nichomachus]

12. What I find funny

Is that a lot of the people who foam at the mouth over real or imagines flag desecration are the biggest offenders. The GOPers who wear flag shorts and then plunk their sweaty ass down on the red, white and blue -- or wear flag hats and jackets. Or the car dealers who use super-gigantic flags as a way around local sign ordinances.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

14. It's blaming the victims for being offended by bigotry.

[NutmegYankee]

21. It's hypocrisy. Conservative Muslims draw many nasty cartoons about other faiths.

They can dish it but they can't take it.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

31. Some black men rape white women.

Therefore we can attack black people over raping white women. Right?

[NutmegYankee]

32. Non sequitur

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

33. Nope. Valid analogy.

You're disparaging a billion people because of the actions of a few.

[NutmegYankee]

35. I doubt all 1 billion are conservatives.

Your comment was way off. It's more like a man makes fun of my house, but states that I can't do the same back to him. I challenge this absurdity by mocking his house and he responds by using government power to muzzle me and threatens to kill me.

Any faith can be mocked in a free society. If your society isn't free, well...

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

36. "Any faith can be mocked in a free society." Allow me to follow that with another statement:

"Having a right means precisely nothing if it isn't actually exercised."

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

37. Exactly my point.

These cartoons aren't targetting conservative muslims in specific, but all muslims in general.

[NutmegYankee]

42. The hypocrisy is this:

Countries ban web pages that mock Islam and powerful Individuals make threats over an insult to Islam, but neither does anything to prevent the same treatment to other faiths. That is the hypocrisy I spoke of!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

43. Then your issue is with the people that ban web pages.

Not the billion muslims, most of whom have never banned anyhthing.

There's more in common between the people who draw and enjoy these cartoons and the conservative muslims who ban facebook, then can be said of muslims in general. Talk about hypocrisy.

[NutmegYankee]

44. See, you miss the point. We (collectively) HAVE the right to post these cartoons.

Just as they have a right to joke us back in an equal fashion. But instead, there is censorship and violence - And that generates the response like the OP posted. What good is free speech if we fear using it?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

45. You have a right to put on klan robes and burn crosses.

Pakistani officials have the right to ban Facebook.

That doesn't meant you people should do those things.

[NutmegYankee]

47. Not the same. One is a display of speech (albeit for violence), the other censorship.

The government is engaged in banning speech. I stand unrelenting in support of free speech, even if I disagree with it. Hell, since I follow a faith, I'm often subjected to far worse right here on DU.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

48. You argument was that because it was legal, therefore it's justified.

If you'd like to retract your claim, fine.

[NutmegYankee]

49. Please show me where I made that claim.

[PurityOfEssence]

63. Religion is not "special"; it needs to answer for its actions

The bellyaching that believers or their belief system should be granted a presumption of goodness is a grotesque bigotry. Religion is NOT undeniably good. That is an opinion, and to DEMAND a virtual blank check is an expression of aristocratic privilege.

The person who is unable or unwilling to see the difference between criticizing a subset of a religion (conservatives) and criticizing the religion itself holds the rest of us hostage for not bending to a demand for superiority. This kind of demand for dialectical immunity is a sign of selfishness and sociopathic behavior.

Religion is the handiest tool known for hiding moral ickiness, and it's not to be treated lightly. Those who demand such exalted status slap the very face of pluralism.

[Rage for Order]

70. I don't know what you're going on about

You generalize about groups of people all the time, yet now you purport to be a champion of seeing individuals rather than groups.

:shrug:

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

34. So, am I a bigot for having posted this cartoon and said I like it? -nt

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

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

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

40. Actually, I have none.

The Muslim population in Rio is exceedingly small.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

41. Yeah, I know you don't.

[MajorChode]

58. Most anything can be offensive to someone

The only meaningful metric you can use is the reasonable person standard which is found in criminal and tort law, but also applies well here. For instance, it's pretty easy for a reasonable person to determine that showing a crucifix floating in a bowl of piss would be offensive, even if someone wasn't Christian. You could just as easily substitute most any highly held symbol religious or otherwise and get the same effect. I don't believe the same applies for caricatures of religious figures. So in the case of this cartoon, I would say it is NOT inherently offensive, even though some may be offended by it. Your flag burning example doesn't meet that standard. It doesn't matter what nation's flag you're referring, it's easy for a reasonable person to see that's offensive.

[LibertyLover]

13. What I want to know is -

how do the Muslims who don't want depictions of Mohammed deal with the historic fact that earlier Islamic cultures have indeed drawn the Prophet? There are lovely Persian miniatures with depictions of Mohammed in them. Turkish art too, if I remember correctly. And apparently this prohibition on depicting humans does not come from the Quran but rather the Hadith.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

16. I also want to know how can the Hindus not demand a worldwide ban on beef advertising.

My guess is "less acute craziness", but that's just me.

[Hatalles]

75. It's about context.

These cartoons come at a time when many in the Muslim world feel under siege by the West -- wars in Afganistan, Iraq, unequivocal support for Israel. They're already under attack and now you try and piss on the one thing they hold dearest -- their identity and cultural history.

I think Reza Aslan summed it up best in 2006:
http://www.slate.com/id/2135661

[comrade snarky]

74. Just going to toss out a wild guess on that question...

Cause they're just as ignorant of the history of islam as the average christian is about the history of christianity?

Nah... that's crazy talk.

The Byzantine empire was almost torn apart by the Iconoclasm when some christians decided representational christian art was a bad thing. Lot's of people died over it.

[JCMach1]

17. The death threats have already started in South Africa and officials

are now worried about trouble surrounding the upcoming world cup.

[KonaKane]

19. But by all means, let's keep poking at them.

Because it's making us so many more friends, advancing tolerance and understanding, and helping to create a more secure and war-free world.

[NutmegYankee]

23. Right, lets just back down and let them have a special rule.

If people can mock my faith, people can mock their faith. I don't threaten to kill people over it.

It not bigotry to get annoyed over the antics. It hurts when my faith gets mocked, but I support free speech no matter what and will not back down because they got angry. It's time to stop throwing temper tantrums and grow up to join the 21 century.

[HuckleB]

26. +1

[TroglodyteScholar]

30. +1

It's as though any offense is equal to the worst offense, and there is no battle too small to fight. The world would be so much better if people everywhere would just lighten up.

[KonaKane]

50. What special rule?

There has been no legislation, either state or federal, proposed that Islam is off limits from public criticism in this country. I'm just telling you that it's a stupid and anti-social thing to do, to try and purposely piss off a sixth of the world's population.

You have the absolute right to do stupid things. You do not have the right to be admired for it.

[NutmegYankee]

52. Special in that no other faith is protected by government actions or threats.

Draw a horrible caricature of a Jew or mock Christians as apostles of Satan or believers of a fake sky fairy, and nothing happens from the government. Sure, you're probably an asshole, but no one tries to stab you or block your web page.

I hate the censorship and "special" treatment. I know exactly what you want to say. People shouldn't mock Islam as they shouldn't mock any faith. The reason the cartoons were posted and will continue to be is because people become violent and use the power of government for a tyrannical purpose.


No faith deserves to be mocked. But they are, and therefore, no faith should be "off limits" because it's special. No faith is special and above reproach with respect to free speech.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

53. "No faith is special and above reproach with respect to free speech." That is 100% correct.

"People shouldn't mock Islam as they shouldn't mock any faith." Welllllll... let's just say that I agree with Richard Dawkins about that subject and leave it at that.

[NutmegYankee]

54. I added a sentence after that to address that point...

[slackmaster]

46. Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_oiqX5n8r3SY/SmF9jFfnFHI/AAAAAAAAIxg/3Ds0kiC-zbE/s400/THE+RITES+-+FUCK%27EM+IF+THEY+CAN%27T+TAKE+A+JOKE+7%27%27+%281%29.JPG

[Leftist Agitator]

55. What the hell does "coeoiot" mean?

[csziggy]

62. It is supposed to be read as "coexist"

With the six pointed star being the "X".

[trotsky]

57. It offends many Muslims that we don't require women to be covered head to toe.

And that a lot of us eat pork, and drink alcohol.

Should we change all this so we don't "poke" at them, and advance tolerance and understanding?

[cliffordu]

68. Yep. Republicans offend the shit out of me. Can we ban them, to??

PLEEEEZE????

[pinboy3niner]

71. Don't worry, we've got it under control. (Keep this on the down-low:

. . . our FEMA camps will be up and running soon.):evilgrin:

:hi:

[cliffordu]

72. Mooooooost EEEEEEEExcellent!!!!!!

MUHWHAHHHHAHHAHSAHAHahhaaa

[Hosnon]

73. On this, the religion needs to be poked.

Sorry - in 2010, a religion cannot "coexist" and threaten to kill people for drawing its deity.

[mdmc]

39. well crafted

..

[UndertheOcean]

51. Cool !

[guardian]

56. Thanks. Gave me a smile. n/t

[cliffordu]

61. Oh, great, Now we're gonna have a Jihad on DU...

First grantcart and now this.

[Fumesucker]

64. Not jihad, fatwa..

It's important to use the correct terminology.

[cliffordu]

65. I'm not up on my murder contract language....

My bad.

[Fumesucker]

66. Neither jihad nor fatwa are necessarily a murder contract..

Jihad is used in Islam like crusade is in Christianity, it can mean things other than literal, physical war "Campus crusade for Christ".

And fatwa is similar to a Papal decree, it's not necessarily a death sentence, it can be on practically any subject which religion might touch upon.

[cliffordu]

67. I am aware of that part, but we were talking about Mohammed cartoons

and in general they have been subject to death threats, and the equivalent of murder contracts put out on the authors of the cartoons.

Here's my drawing of Mohammed:

@:~{

I want my fatwa, now!!!