They're in big trouble now: the atheists chalked portraits of Mohammed on sidewalks all over campus. Allah will be offended, and there might even be nothing but a yawning chasm where Champaign and Urbana once stood. Any UI students should write in and let us know if there are any omens, portents, unusual flights of birds, widespread crankiness, etc.
As you can see, the images are detailed and explicit. That's obviously Mohammed — it even has a name and an arrow pointing to the figure.
(via Phil Ferguson)
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Via Kate Clancy on Twitter, a news story about how one Illinois legislator wants to save his state some money. As reported in The News-Gazette
State law allows employees who have worked for one of the Illinois' public universities for seven or more years to receive a 50 percent waiver of their…
Sacrilege can get people killed. It can cause riots and economic mayhem. People die over a sense of offended propriety. And whose fault is that?
You know what I'm talking about. Almost all religions have odd proscriptions that are taken with extraordinary seriousness by their followers — they are…
PZ Myers is disappointed. There's a massive oil gusher in the Gulf of Mexico, BP is incapable of stopping it, as is the federal government, and the Gulf Coast from Louisiana to Florida (and soon on to Georgia and the Carolinas) are being coated in a chocolatey rainbow of crude oil. This is bad,…
Karl Giberson, who I've bashed once or twice, has a fresh new pile of nonsense on the Huffington Post. Jerry Coyne has already tackled it, but it pushes a few of my buttons, so I've got to say my piece, too.
To summarize the Giberson nonsense briefly, he claims that Intelligent Design creationism…
Definitely a graven image...
It's about time more of this happened.
One way of taking on the death threats for images of Mohammed is to make it so prolific that it's entirely impractical, and there's a possibilty that they realise how nonsensical it is.
An unfortunate side effect is that they may actually try and kill everybody. This would just move the planned schedule forward.
I wonder how close you can put the letters "Muhammed" to stick figure without making god angry. These magical beings sure are fickle and insecure for someone who is omniscient and omnipotent.
That's Champaign, not Champagne. Common mistake.
We should encourage more people to draw images of Mohammed. We need every newspaper to publish pictures of him and every book to have his likeness on the cover.
The only way to stop the silly muslim overreaction is to overwhelm them with images of Mohammed.
Letter from the Muslim Students Association at UIUC, and a response.
https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AQfJl07PRgw_ZGN6cnI2M3hfMmZzOWZuYmh0…
Hmmmm. Mohammed doesn't seem to have any fingers, toes, or sex organs. In fact, Mohammed looks a lot like a UFO alien with that big head. Might explain a few things.
It isn't just a free speech issue. It is also freedom from being murdered by deranged religious fanatics because they feel like killing someone.
Mr. PZ Myers, why did you along with your pal Richard Dawkins, completely ignore this Viacom banned video on this issue(video is in the description below).
I can not believe that you missed it since you haven't missed his video titled "Internet: Where religions come to die".
What a cowardly behavior, both you and Richard Dawkins.
You haven't mentioned it, not once.
Coming up next: Artist draws Muhammad + Jesus + FSM tentacle rape port. Let's make it happen.
Mr. PZ Myers, why did you along with your pal Richard Dawkins, completely ignore this Viacom banned video on this issue(video is in the description below).
I can not believe that you missed it since you haven't missed his video titled "Internet: Where religions come to die".
What a cowardly behavior, both you and Richard Dawkins.
You haven't mentioned it, not once.
So...how are we supposed to know that this is a representation of a certain ancient mythical hero, as opposed to a representation of a certain modern sports hero of mythical stature? I refer, of course, to a certain gentleman with lepidopteran aerobatic abilities and hymnopteran offensive techniques.
Cheers,
b&
--
EAC Memographer
BAAWA Knight of Blasphemy
``All but God can prove this sentence true.''
Er... Fortknox. Explain yourself.
Mr. PZ Myers, why did you along with your pal Richard Dawkins, completely ignore this Viacom banned video on this issue(video is in the description below).
A very important video with a great potential to become viral.
I can not believe that you missed it since you haven't missed his video titled "Internet: Where religions come to die".
What a cowardly behavior, both you and Richard Dawkins.
You haven't mentioned it, not once.
Fortknox are you high?
(...psssst... smitten.)
Huh? Was there a specific reason to mention it? Is it so newsworthy that Viacom is behaving in an indefensible way?
Mr. PZ Myers, why did you along with your pal Richard Dawkins, completely ignore this Viacom banned video on this issue(video is in the description below).
A very important video with a great potential to become viral.
I can not believe that you missed it since you haven't missed his video titled "Internet: Where religions come to die".
What a cowardly behavior, both you and Richard Dawkins.
You haven't mentioned it, not once.
I'm always disappointed in the moderate muslims who first point out that it's only the extremists who are the bad guys, and then they follow it up with, "but you should really keel over and comply with their irrational demands, you guys, because... we sorta think they're right."
The principle of freedom of expression trumps your bronze age nonsense. So on that note, fuck your bronze-age nonsense and the prophet it rode in on.
LOL!
Quadruple post? Really? Is the Internet too hard for you? Why don't you try it on an easier level first.
Fortknox, I'm pretty sure he did. Use that nice little search box in the upper left corner.
And even if he didn't, he's not the gatekeeper of all atheism on the internet. Start your own blog.
From the letter co linked to:
Well, Mr. Fareedi, I’m afraid you’ve failed right off the bat. You see, I’m offended by people who wish to protect me and others from being offended. Deeply offended by it, in fact; I hold the right to give and take offense to be at the heart of free speech, and it is freedom of speech which I hold most dear. You are using your delicate sensibilities to inhibit the expression of others. You would have others starve themselves so you might be spared from the annoyance of smelling their food.
And, for that, I feel only one response is appropriate. Tough shit, motherfucker. Eat shit and die.
Cheers,
b&
--
EAC Memographer
BAAWA Knight of Blasphemy
``All but God can prove this sentence true.''
Interesting reading in the two letters, thanks, co.
Fortknox appears to be a troll, what with the multiple posts of the same thing. Grow up, Fortknox, PZ didn't post my new bedroom furniture pictures, either; I shall never forgive this cowardly conduct. :(
Interesting videos, though. Thunderf00t rocks!
There’s one thing worng with…no make that two things…
Sorry. I’ll come in again.
Amongst their other failings, these Muslims (like so many other theists) are sorely lacking in both humor and imagination.
The proper response was not, of course, intimidation and thinly-veiled threats. Instead, they should have spent a couple bucks on a few boxes of chalk, followed the freethinkers, waited for the completion of the drawings, and then scrawled “This is not a picture of” right next to the stick figure’s name.
Cheers,
b&
--
EAC Memographer
BAAWA Knight of Blasphemy
``All but God can prove this sentence true.''
You sir, are a freaking idiot!
You actually compare the huge out-of-character omission of a topical pertinent content to a posting of your new bedroom pictures.
You incredible moron.
Yes, while the death threats are frightening, the actual issue is the demand of censorship of free expression, which even the most liberal Muslim groups seem to support. I suppose we should be grateful that the liberals don't actually want to kill people, but that's kinda beside the point.
Fortknox @#24
Wow, what a dick!
Last night there was a tornado watch here, and we were a bit worried that Allah was going to smite us with tornadoes. But apparently all he could manage was a few clouds...
Fortknox just got an upgrade from troll to crazy.
Let's see if he will go for clinically insane and locked up next.
Or to "newbie poe".
You guys, if you like that, you should all buy this stick Mohammed shirt. I know I want one. http://amorphia-apparel.com/design/stick/
Uh... I can't comment much. I'm in a hotel room about to leave for my flight but...
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/04/i_guess_ill_have_to_watch_so…
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/04/south_park_evades_a_positive…
Here's what PZ said on the matter, so I hardly think he's withholding out of hear. I imagine Dawkins doesn't care. It's hard to imagine him watching South Park, and I would guess he's probably not fond of it as it just *seems* contrary to the personality he puts forth. I don't know the man, so maybe that's a lie but whatever.
Though I disagree with the writer of the letter, I would say that he is still worthy of respect as he is actually willing to have an open discussion about it that does not involve threats. I would say that people have a right to say offensive things, and you have a right to make your case for if/why they are false.
Fortknox, not only has PZ addressed the issue (see links Ol'Greg provided in #31, but Thunderf00t is quite capable of taking care of himself, and of responding effectively.
Viacom did force the removal of Thunderf00t’s video -- and the removal was illegal. The use of South Park images was covered under Fair Use.
Thunderf00t’s video is mirrored: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACDaKUNMCF0
Thunderf00t posted a video showing Viacom is in the wrong, and detailing their cowardly actions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OWaZVMBw1E&playnext_from=TL&videos=cjws…
fortknox, What the hell?
It's a beautiful day (er, at least here in the northeast). Can't you find a sandbox to play in or something?
@#6, co, the AAF response to the MSA letter is very well written. Thanks for sharing it.
If anyone here would like to draw Mohammed, there is a Facebook venue.
I particularly like this piece of art! (Hopefully you can open the link)
Some of the submitted work is hilarious!! Some spot on.
#8 Fortknox - Er, Thunderfoot's video was posted on April 30 - that was yesterday! Maybe PZ took the Trophy wife out to dinner last night or slept in this morning and didn't had a chance to see it yet.
The right thing to do, instead of acting like an asshole, would be to send him a link to it to bring it to his attention. I mean, that's if you don't want to act like an asshole.....
@Fortknox - Deep breaths, Spammy McSpammerson.
@Ol'Greg - Dawkins probably doesn't like South Park very much after "Go God Go," and he's hinted as much a couple times. I recall a video of him at a lecture getting quite irate when someone asked him to sign a DVD of the show.
No, it was not posted yesterday, that was the video that addressed the banned video, you lazy idiot.
Anyone feel like testing the waters with an "iDrawMuhammed" iPhone app submission?
@Fortknox
Thunderf00t has handled similar situations before. And I'm sure if he really needed PZ or Dawkins' support, he would've contacted them himself.
Where the fuck is this hostility coming from?
Seriously, dude, chill the fuck out. Maybe you should limit you intake of caffeine and consider counting to 10 and reviewing you behavior. Unless you like being a dickwad, but then I can't help you.
What, and have Apple break into my house? Nah, I'd rather risk eternal damnation than Apple.
When I attended UIUC, I did a similar thing as well, and got a brick hurled through my window (I wasn't in town at the time, so I didn't know about it until a day later). But then, I also did a more detailed picture and put down a dialogue balloon that said "MUHAMMAD SAYS : SHOOT FIRST AND NEVER ASK QUESTIONS ANYWAY."
Nonetheless, I think the sort of furor that arises right now is only there because Muslims feel they can get away with it more easily. I did my bit before there were the Dutch cartoons or Theo Van Gogh or LittleBigPlanet music and so on. I think the existence of those emboldened Muslims to react by saying anything and everything is offensive and we can do anything we want to censor it.
Granting, for the moment, that there was a historical Mohammed who wrote a Qu'ran and spoke many hadiths and so on:
The injunction not to create depictions of the prophet, in the iconoclastic milieu of the seventh century C.E., was a specific reaction to the idol-worshiping practices of local Christians and pagans. Much like the Hebraic commandment(s) against graven images, this was an attempt to raise the discourse by underlining the abstract nature of cosmic principles/entities, and a rebuke to those who more simplistically devoted all their emotional commitments to magic statues, paintings, etc (a huge issue in the Byzantine Christianity of that era, in which territory the Arabian peninsula was found).
The cheap and easy shot here - and when have I ever let such opportunities pass unexploited? - would be to point out that the UICI infidels, having no intention of worshiping their artwork, seem in no danger of falling into idolatry. (As for their other sins: well, I couldn't find anything about Champaign in any of the major party school rankings, and hardly a mention of any Illinois campus in the also-ran lists. Hang in there, folks - U of Florida evangelical teams for the Holy Trinity of sex, drugs & rocknroll are on their way!)
Back to the Islamic point: in reacting as they do ("... offensive!") to these sketches, aren't these so-called Muslims doing exactly what Mohammed told them not to do? Guys, it's the message from the angel to the camel-trader, and your own behavior, you purportedly want to focus on. By treating some lines of chalk as if they are sacred and have magic power, you are the ones confusing the holy and the profane, the ineffable and the merely symbolic, here.
I think Foxknox needs to take a deep breath and relax, or take a vacation. It looks like his blood vessels are about the burst if he gets any angrier than that.
Ben Goren has already pointed out that the stick figure could be the eminent former pugilist Mr. M. Ali, but in fact "Mohammed", if we include all its trivial variants (Mohammed, Muhamed, Mohamed, Mahmud...) is by far the most common personal name in the world. To make the intended identity unambiguous, one could add "prophet of Islam" or similar. It's only common courtesy to make your blasphemous intentions clear!
Fortknox: fuck off, m'kay?
Well, then at least we'd be rid of him.
Mr. PZ Myers, why did you along with your pal Richard Dawkins, completely ignore this video on this issue(video is in the description below).
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100501/ap_en_ot/us_film_batman;_ylt=AiuNqa…--
What a cowardly behavior, both you and Richard Dawkins.
You haven't mentioned it, not once.
Ah those Muslims - they just resort to violence without any cause whatsoever. They need to be enlightened into the ways of the West.
They should just accept the legitimacy of being stopped whilst Arab or bearded or wearing funny clothes. It's their fault if they have problem being jailed without just cause, or tortured, or disappeared into black prisons. So a few of their relatives are blown away at wedding parties - shit happens and they should just get over it. So their friends are shredded by 30mm canon fire from an Apache helicopter - hey they shouldn't have chosen to live in a war zone. What's the problem if a load of them are starved in the world's largest open air prison. Those white phosphorus weapons fired at the school - hey, they were real pretty if you regard at them as fireworks.
What an absolutely ungrateful lot they are.
I love the smell of category error in the morning.
@ #45 PRB -
Yes, the graven images thing is getting missed in this whole debate. That's a nice argument, that they are giving the images the power that they aren't supposed to have to begin with.
Mr. PZ Myers, why did you along with your pal Richard Dawkins, completely ignore this video on this issue(video is in the description below).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhTsuGgUo3k
What a cowardly behavior, both you and Richard Dawkins.
You haven't mentioned it, not once.
Smat. The tense you want is "smat".
Christian Bale as Batman?
BUCKETS OF BLOOD.
Mr. PZ Myers, why did you along with your pal Richard Dawkins, completely ignore this video on this issue(video is in the description below).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLQ2eh5LfZY
What a cowardly behavior, both you and Richard Dawkins.
You haven't mentioned it, not once.
@knockgoats #47:
They're a step ahead of you, at least in one instance:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/uiucatheists/4566968930/in/set-72157623965…
Mr. PZ Myers, why did you along with your pal Richard Dawkins, completely ignore this video on this issue(video is in the description below).
http://weebls-stuff.com/songs/kenya/
What a cowardly behavior, both you and Richard Dawkins.
You haven't mentioned it, not once.
I participated in this event and blogged about my experience here:
This was a great experience, and I was amazed the entire time that something so important and powerful could be achieved with something so mundane and childish (chalk). Kudos to all who participated and supported the event!
Mr. PZ Myers, why did you along with your pal Richard Dawkins, completely ignore this video on this issue(video is in the description below).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnAeuSvyh70
What a cowardly behavior, both you and Richard Dawkins.
You haven't mentioned it, not once.
Fortknox, I understand you think this video is noteworthy. However, coming here bashing PZ and Dawkins isn't going to win any friends and will not get them to pay any more attention to your rantings. Rather, if you feel that strongly, then a nice post saying, "hey, did anyone see this and what do you think?" would suffice. I guarantee you would get a better reaction from PZ, Dawkins and the rest of the skeptical community. Otherwise you come off as a total raving lunatic and for what? Because you feel so strongly about something that may have been overlooked.
No one here ever claims to be able to keep up with every little bit of news that happens. We all understand that free speech is next to non-existent when it stands between a big corporation and its $$$$. That's not really news...
My 2 cents.
Is Fortknox trying to lampoon the polemical rhetoric of Dr. Myers? Who knows!? Who cares?!
Speaking of, the very blog you linked above, PZ, has an article entitled Is PZ Myers a Crank? in regards to the whole De Dora thing. The writer asserts that you are deliberately polemical and calls your tone "petulant," which I found interesting because he himself said he had no problem with that tone when it was directed at people he also thinks are wrong.
I'm a big fan of your writing but sometimes I think that's because I have always written in a similar fashion. What do you think? Is "petulant" fair?
Speaking of Mohammed, I took a dump this morning and looked and thought it resembled Mohammed. Then I flushed Mohammed and washed my hands of him.
Oops, PZ, I hope your blog doesn't get smited.
Just now we were playing outside and my younger daughter ran in to get chalk. I was like a little kid - I choose a pretty green, drew a stick figure, and wrote "Mohammed" with an arrow.
My 13 year old daughter, who declares she has no belief in God, got upset with me. She said it was disrespectful, and it didn't impact my life so why did I care. I asked if it was respectful for people to be killed and threatened for drawing a cartoon, and wouldn't she stand up for other people being discriminated against or threatened even if it didn't directly effect her.
She said, "I didn't say it was right, but THEY think it is. It is what THEY believe. You have to respect their beliefs!" She's young, but I was disappointed. I clearly need to have more conversations about this with her.
Maybe we should all just routinely image our dumps and submit them to a service that compares them to images of idols. There could be a current "top matches" under various categories.
We could call it some variant of "holyshit.com" which is, alas, already taken by an apparently useless site.
Perhaps you should ask her if they are respecting your belief in free speech.
If you feel so strongly about it, FortKnox, start your own blog and post it yourself.
PZ is not a god. He does not know all or see all. Nor is he obligated to post about anything, just because you want him to. Even if he wanted to post about everything noteworthy in the world about religious insanity, to do so he would need an army of 20000 ghost writers and a time dilation device.
But the monotonous insipidity of your posts makes me wonder if you are a bot. If you are not a bot, then I apologize to bots everywhere for the unflattering comparison.
@ marylynne7 #64
I think it's a wonderful thing that you have at least created an environment for your daughter in which she feels comfortable disagreeing with you and thinking about that sort of thing. I have always thought that, were I to have kids, I'd make sure they felt they could think and talk and debate absolutely anything. I'm glad to see that works for at least some people.
At least she sounds like a thinker. She may even have some interesting things to say on the subject! Nothing wrong with having more conversations with your daughter.
Side note: Is it weird that I'm excited to make mini-mes specifically to have intellectual discussions with them?
@Fortknox That's Dr. P.Z. Meyers to you bud.
And it's done by the Army Air Force...say, didn't that become the USAF after WWII?
To make the picture even more of an insult to the tender sensitivities of Islamicist fucktards, the picture isn't wearing any clothes. Oh, for shame (yawn).
1) Fortknox is completely out to lunch, and I say this as that rarest of metazoans - a conservative Pharyngulite.
2) I was gonna take apart the letter from the MSA president, but Ben Goren pretty much bull's-eyed it.
If you haven't yet clicked the link, please do. The letter is worth reading if only to see that oleaginous mendacity is not limited to Christian apologists; would it be rash as this point to declare it inherent to the theistic mindset?
3) I completely agree with the others here that what is called for now is nothing less than saturation-bombing of Mohammad images. Every magazine, newspaper, website or what have you should place the infamous "bomb turban" drawing or it's equivalent in plain sight, permanently.
PS...
Mayhem,
I believe the US Army Air Corps was transformed into the US Air Force as part of the National Security Act of 1947.
Spamming under another user's name is about the biggest dungeon-earning sin there is. Say bye bye to Fartnoxious.
No.
Just be prepared for the fact that they won't actually be mini-yous.
Mr. PZ Myers, why did you along with your pal Richard Dawkins, completely ignore this video on this issue(video is in the description below).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj-x9ygQEGA
What a cowardly behavior, both you and Richard Dawkins.
You haven't mentioned it, not once.
I have little more to add to the topic that hasn't been said already. I also think that images of the prophet should appear everywhere as a marker of free speech. Islam still holds first place for worst religion in the world (Catholicism is a close second) but I don't want my criticism of it to be confused with the anti-immigrant hatred sweeping through Europe. I want to challenge Islam as a religious philosophy to be demolished by reason, I don't want to destroy muslims. (Offend them, yes, nuke them, withhold their freedom of religion, ban them from seeking better lives in another country, no.)
As to your side note, Wholly Cymbal (great name btw) I'm pretty excited about the whole "intellectual conversation with a person I birthed" part of parenthood. I'm reminded of this smbc comic though... (Of course, I'll contribute the egg, so maybe it'll work.)
I'm resisting the urge to worship that image, but it's difficult.
As a UIUC alumna, this reminds me of the the editor-in-chief of the Daily Illini (main student newspaper) being fired just a few years ago for publishing the Kurt Westergaard Mohammed cartoon.
I can not overstate how much that decision disturbed and upset me at the time. The cowardice of the Anglo-American press in general really shook my faith in the future of religious freedom (namely freedom from religion).
It's not an anatomically correct mohammed though - unless of course the real one had no balls either.
Wow, not only did those blasfimists draw the prophet on the pavement, they drew him in the nude!
I've been trying to draw him using just the keyboard, but I kinda suck at it. Here's one of him with his hands behind his back.
O-=
He's dead, by the way.
Also gay, as I accidentally pressed the Alt key when I drew him. ;-)
"Every magazine, newspaper, website or what have you should place the infamous 'bomb turban' drawing or it's equivalent in plain sight, permanently."
I really think a more neutral portrayal is called for.
Which is why the stick figure is so nice.
Hey, fartknocker of the many impersonated pseudonyms- don't you know how important my new bedroom furniture is? Sheesh...and you call me a moron?
Does mommy know you're playing in the street with the big kids, little fartknocker?
OMG!!! OMG!!! OMA!!!
How did you know that? This is amazing!!!
That's EXACTLY what he looks like!!!!
Both alive and dead.
I can't even tell which way is which.
"lazy idiot"...? Gees, I'm crushed. How did you know I was too lazy to make my bed this morning?
Ya' know, botting a thread that has pictures and links that fight Moslem censorship, to call the man who posted them a coward, is just plain weird.
Blake Stacey@53:
ROF,LMAO, except I found meself singing the words…
Its probably not that unusual for someone her age to hold this view. There is a popular notion in government, schools and Australian society in general that obsequious 'tolerance' trumps critical thinking and free speech. I imagine it is the same in many other parts of the world.
A close family member is the CEO of a large local government over here and he is always talking about the importance of 'tolerance' in government policy. I asked what he meant by tolerance and why it was important but I couldn't get a straight answer out of him. It's even more disappointing to hear this milquetoast rubbish parroted by an otherwise intelligent adult.
Shit. Now I'm not sure anymore. But earlier, when moved by the spirit, I was sure. Am I mixing religions? Do Muslims have spirit? I'm losing confidence here ... struggling to hold on.
But I'm pretty sure he had a brush cut, so the right-hand-side is on top, and you have to rotate the image 90 degrees counterclockwise.
And he's smiling. And has a narrow nose.
Yes, that's right. I'm sure again. Praise Allah.
Pearls before swine (mmm, bacon...sucks to be Muslim or Jewish).
Where was I? Oh yes, you bozos don't appreciate modern art.
Head O
Torso -
Legs =
Put it all together and you have a dead prophet lying down with his head to the left.
O-=
Meh, it's like having to explain a crap joke.
Here's one of him with a stiffy.
O-!=
No, I liked it a lot. Thought it was a great post.
You hurt my feelings, though.
Where's that butthurt form?
The situation is summed up by the reply to the Muslim linked by co in #7:
@ Kirk
I'm very sensitive about my work, sniff. Art without angst isn't art, it's graphic design, after all.
Now, excuse me while I stare off into the distance and commune with my muse.
OK, I'm all recovered now. Sorry for your bottom pain.
Have a free masterpiece of Jesus by way of recompense.
+
I call this one, "Being a bit cross."
Also available in a triptych, called "Being Very Cross."
+ + +
@Fil
OK, thanks. I had the form part way filled out but I'm throwing it away now.
I don't claim to know all that much about great art, but would claim that great art is open to multiple interpretations.
To be honest, I originally interpreted your art exactly as you said, but in the last post made that all up about him having a brush cut, and a narrow nose, and smiling.
And that was wrong, because he's grinning. A big wide mouth grin.
Join the "Everybody Draw Mohamed Day" FB group!
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/event.php?eid=113257775375783&ref=ts
@Marylynn7 -
As a former tone-troll, here are some thoughts for your daughter. I try to be tolerant of other people's beliefs, even if I think the beliefs are silly or wrong, partly because life is just too short to fight with everyone I think is wrong.
I do, however, have some core values that are non-negotiable, and especially that killing or harming other people is wrong and that free speech trumps almost every other value. Accordingly, I am deliberately intolerant and even offensive when people's beliefs are held up as so totally special that they justify killing or otherwise harming others. So I will offer as much support for those drawing the stick figure Mohammad as I can. It's not about Islam per se - Islam isn't any more wrong as far as I can tell than any other conservative theistic religion. It's about insisting that drawing pictures of Mohammad is so offensive that it gives Muslims the right to kill other human beings. It's the same reason that I oppose the RCC when it makes pronouncements about abortion, gay marriage, or the pedophilia scandal.
Actually as I write this it sounds hopelessly weaselly, but I prioritize my anger to cases where silly belief really hurts people. I think, for example, that Nascar in the US is a ridiculous waste of resources and time. I don't get all bent out of shape, protest, and boycott Nascar because on balance it doesn't cause all that much harm. It doesn't get much more harmful than killing someone because of a cartoon, so I'll gladly support the drawing of offensive cartoons. If the Islamic world were to issue condemnations without killing people, I'm sure there would be lots of other silly beliefs that would be above that on the "I need to offend someone about that" list.
So it's weaselly, but that's how I prioritize my list of people to piss off. When I was busy being a tone-troll, I was way less clear on why and when I might wish to deliberately offend someone.
Hmm, who can do the best ascii Muhammed?
|O<-< <=Muhammed, prophet of Islam, lying down and thinking holy thoughts (hence the halo).
Drat! I forgot what happens to the less-than sign! Let's try again:
|O<-< <=Muhammed, prophet of Islam, lyinfg down thinking holy thoughts (hence the halo).
&O|<
crap, let's try again
&O|<
>|O&
Now why didn't the first one work?
0:-d-+--< <=Muhammed, prophet of Islam, lying down thinking holy thoughts (hence the halo).
ASCII version of bomb-turban Mohammad:
*~O@:-(
Jadehawk,
Following the <- immediately with anything (like that) seems to cause a problem!
MATTIR, #95,
That was a good explanation, with unnecessary (in my view) apologies for being "weaselly". What you wrote is reasonable, relatively comprehensive, and (perhaps this is obvious), exactly consonant with my thinking.
And anyone who disagrees is a douche-nozzle.
For some reason Tim Minchin has been on my mind the last few days. FIL @89 made me think of his solution to the Palastine problem.
@ Patricia08 #104
I'm pleased that I reminded you of the talented Mr Minchin (and I did enjoy that clip btw).
I feel rather guilty though, as I've just had a fry up for lunch and am currently licking the last of the bacon fat out of my choppers.
The dog got some too. Mmm bacon...
Burp. :-)
P.S.
Priest to Rabbi, "Be honest now, you ever eaten bacon?"
Rabbi, "OK, yes I have. You ever had sex?"
Priest, "Er, well yes, I have."
Rabbi, "Beats the shit out of bacon, don't it?"
They're just stick figures.
O-!=
Now, that one has a wide grin.
They should just accept the legitimacy of being stopped whilst Arab or bearded or wearing funny clothes. It's their fault if they have problem being jailed without just cause, or tortured, or disappeared into black prisons....
I don't think anybody can condone racial profiling or revels in the violence in the middle east, but that doesn't mean that we should treat their beliefs with kid gloves. Using that argument we can't discuss catholicism because of the millions of catholics that live in extreme poverty.
I, too, would like to see moderate muslims protesting the actions of the extremists. I would like to see moderate muslims speaking out enmass against the brutalities committed in the name of their faith. I would especially like to see female muslims doing this.
Ever notice that most pictures and videos of groups of muslims don't include any women? I for one will not be sensitive of the belief systems of a philosphy that sees me as less than human, and want to stifle my rights to freedom, never mind free speech!
@Knockgoats #96
Does this count?
But of course not! That would be boring! As boring as saying "children" instead of mini-mes... :)
Zach Weiner makes a compelling and biologically accurate point, as usual, but fortunately I do not like philosophers as a general rule.
And thanks! I'm glad someone else around here appreciates horrible, horrible puns delivered with complete sincerity.
I vote for tristan.croll's (#101) ASCII Mohammed as the best ASCII Muhammed *~O@:-(
Or maybe meta-Mohammed:
.O
/|\
./\ This is not Mohammed
The only appropriate response I can think of to this is "Goats on fire!!"
Yeah, except that the prophet paedophile was never known for his sanguine nature as here depicted smiling. Major fail that!
Give him a hard-on, and it is more representative of Muslims when seeing a female of any age, and nearly exploding of sexual excitement.
Amodeo...
I'd like to see moderates speak out as well.
The tricky thing is: the extremists are not really, well, extreme in their position.
Their position is doctrinally correct. What makes them extreme is what they intend to DO about it.
The problem for the moderate is: How do I take on the extremist without sawing off the branch both of us are sitting on?
To which the atheist promptly replies, "Saw it off, then. Hell, chop the whole tree down and build something useful with the wood." :)
An attackcartoon.com commentary on drawings of Mohammed.
How is the extremist position doctrinally correct?
My understanding is that the Koran says little. There is the Abrahamic injunction against worshipping graven images. There are hadiths that don't allow images of any living thing.
The "no images of the Prophet" is a construction that follows from these. If I'm mistaken, please enlighten me.
Muslims who are offended by depictions of Mohammed should also be offended at a picture of a squid - but they know that that they couldn't get away with death threats over a picture of an animal.
Echidna, Depictions of Muhammad.
In short, there's a lot of Islamic art depicting Muhammad, but most of it is historical.
Thanks John. Either I'm falling for confirmation bias, or the whole hoo-ha over depictions of Mohammed is a control issue rather than a religious issue.
pcarini's is good, but the effect:effort ratio of tristan.croll's is much higher!
Nah, the only effort on my part was pasting one URL into that ascii art thing.
I still would vote for tristan.croll's over the one I linked, 'cause it made me laugh.
amphiox @ # 67: PZ is not a god.
There's a heretical blasphemer cruisin' for a mighty Myers minion smiting!
At least, like most other deities, Prof. M. is available as a model for artwork. Better yet, so far (aik) no such images include a single nipple*.
* Tentacles, yes, but that's just to titillate the drooling retards.
Um, Pierce, there is just such an Obscenity!.
I wonder if this will cause earthquakes to tear up the midwest? Probably not.
John - Ye gads, I had somehow managed to scrub that from my memory.
Now I've got to do it all over again - expect reports of shortages of mind-altering substances across the southeastern US...
gothatfunk's stick-man Muhammad campaign: Have You Seen This Man? spreads.
I know this thread has fallen off the main page, but this seemed an appropriate place to mention that today UW-Madison AHA (that's Atheists, Humanists, & Agnostics) has followed AAF's lead and chalked stick-figure Muhammads at UW campus. I didn't bring a camera, so I can't provide pics myself, but others did. I'll see about linking the results once they're in.
The experience was interesting. The local Muslim Student Alliance followed us around and did some chalking of their own. It was all very civil (well, mostly). They mentioned that what we were doing was offensive to them, but they wouldn't stop us or chalk over our drawings. They did alter them, however, doing things like adding boxing gloves and adding an "Ali" to the name. I'm grateful that they didn't just scribble over our work, though I'm a wee bit offended that they opted to change it (tempted to use the more charged verb "deface"), rather than simply letting the statements stand on their own.
Part of me feels like that's a fairly normal give and take of a pluralist society in which freedom of expression is valued. We are free to offend them, they're free to offend us... the system works! Or something. Part of me is sad that they couldn't simply tolerate what we were doing. And part of me simply boggles at the fact that a frackin' labeled stick figure is so intolerable that it has to be immediately amended.
If you're wondering why the MSA knew what we were up to, it's because the president of AHA@UW gave them a heads-up as a sign of good faith (er, bad choice of words maybe, but you know what I mean). The MSA's response letter is fairly civil, but also pretty much what you'd expect. In a nutshell, they respect our freedom of expression--within their prescribed limits. To me, that's why it was so important to go ahead and make some Muhammad drawings anyway.
AHA's blog about the event: link
Friendly Atheist's coverage: link
AAF of Illinois' coverage: link
Less than 24 hours later, someone (or someones) has/have scrubbed off the names from many of the drawings. It was very clearly targeted toward only the names, as the rest of the illustrations and text are still intact.
So we went from soft censorship to hard censorship, just like that.