Please Help Me Find More Of These.....
Jokes17 mins ago
Why insult Mohammad?
135 Answers
There seems to be a lot of effort in recent years to insult Mohammad, seemingly just for the heck of it. This has led to a lot of unpleasantness due to Muslims feeling they need to protest against this sort of thing and so in and so forth.
So why bother insulting him in the first place, what does it achieve?
So why bother insulting him in the first place, what does it achieve?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by flobadob. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
> thank God Christians didn't take "The life of Brian" seriously
There was uproar at the time. But it was minor compared to:
The Last Temptation of Christ (1988)
http://
On October 22, 1988, a French Christian fundamentalist group launched Molotov cocktails inside the Parisian Saint Michel movie theater while it was showing the film. This attack injured thirteen people, four of whom were severely burned. The Saint Michel theater was heavily damaged, and reopened 3 years later after restoration. Following the attack, a representative of the film's distributor, United International Pictures, said, "The opponents of the film have largely won. They have massacred the film's success, and they have scared the public." Jack Lang, France's Minister of Culture, went to the St.-Michel theater after the fire, and said, "Freedom of speech is threatened, and we must not be intimidated by such acts." The Archbishop of Paris, Jean-Marie Cardinal Lustiger, said "One doesn't have the right to shock the sensibilities of millions of people for whom Jesus is more important than their father or mother." After the fire he condemned the attack, saying, "You don't behave as Christians but as enemies of Christ. From the Christian point of view, one doesn't defend Christ with arms. Christ himself forbade it." The leader of Christian Solidarity, a Roman Catholic group that had promised to stop the film from being shown, said, "We will not hesitate to go to prison if it is necessary."
There was uproar at the time. But it was minor compared to:
The Last Temptation of Christ (1988)
http://
On October 22, 1988, a French Christian fundamentalist group launched Molotov cocktails inside the Parisian Saint Michel movie theater while it was showing the film. This attack injured thirteen people, four of whom were severely burned. The Saint Michel theater was heavily damaged, and reopened 3 years later after restoration. Following the attack, a representative of the film's distributor, United International Pictures, said, "The opponents of the film have largely won. They have massacred the film's success, and they have scared the public." Jack Lang, France's Minister of Culture, went to the St.-Michel theater after the fire, and said, "Freedom of speech is threatened, and we must not be intimidated by such acts." The Archbishop of Paris, Jean-Marie Cardinal Lustiger, said "One doesn't have the right to shock the sensibilities of millions of people for whom Jesus is more important than their father or mother." After the fire he condemned the attack, saying, "You don't behave as Christians but as enemies of Christ. From the Christian point of view, one doesn't defend Christ with arms. Christ himself forbade it." The leader of Christian Solidarity, a Roman Catholic group that had promised to stop the film from being shown, said, "We will not hesitate to go to prison if it is necessary."
doctordb and dibble have hit the essence of it: the West and the offended Muslims define 'insult' a little differently.
But even if they didn't, the right to insult Mohammed if we want to is very important. Some people deserve to be criticised, or spoken of in terms that are anything other than adulation. Islam has the right to worship Mohammed, but there are many followers of Islam who don't seem to understand that people do not share their faith, and that it is they who are obliged to extend tolerance to us on this matter. Nonbelievers in the West should be able to say whatever they please about Muhammed without being bullied by theocratic thugs or manipulated by the "I am offended" argument.
Now, there's no denying that sometimes, the insulting is done by bigots and racists whose opinions are extremely badly thought out - but that's not a reason to disallow it. There are plenty of perfectly intelligent Westerners with heavily critical views of Islam and/or Muhammed that are well-reasoned and thought out, and they deserve to be listened to - not cajoled into thinking they are irrelevant.
But even if they didn't, the right to insult Mohammed if we want to is very important. Some people deserve to be criticised, or spoken of in terms that are anything other than adulation. Islam has the right to worship Mohammed, but there are many followers of Islam who don't seem to understand that people do not share their faith, and that it is they who are obliged to extend tolerance to us on this matter. Nonbelievers in the West should be able to say whatever they please about Muhammed without being bullied by theocratic thugs or manipulated by the "I am offended" argument.
Now, there's no denying that sometimes, the insulting is done by bigots and racists whose opinions are extremely badly thought out - but that's not a reason to disallow it. There are plenty of perfectly intelligent Westerners with heavily critical views of Islam and/or Muhammed that are well-reasoned and thought out, and they deserve to be listened to - not cajoled into thinking they are irrelevant.
It doesn't take much effort to 'insult' Islamic sensitivities. They're pretty much on a hair-trigger already.
What I find lamentable is the number of people who think that it is wrong to insult or even criticise the Islamic religion. If you're not Islamic and you are not living in a country governed by Islamic law then those Islamic 'laws' do not apply to you and nor should they.
A person living in a free democracy with the right to free speech is not governed by Islamic law. They can say whatever they please about Islam and any other religion for that matter, just as those religious adherents in those same countries have the right to criticise and insult secularism and freedom of speech if they so desire.
No one living in a free secular society should be frightened of speaking out against any religion – totalitarian or otherwise. But they are. And the reason is the omnipresent threat of violence that permeates the Islamic faith. If you publicly criticise it in any way, you run the very real risk of being subjected to physical violence.
What I find lamentable is the number of people who think that it is wrong to insult or even criticise the Islamic religion. If you're not Islamic and you are not living in a country governed by Islamic law then those Islamic 'laws' do not apply to you and nor should they.
A person living in a free democracy with the right to free speech is not governed by Islamic law. They can say whatever they please about Islam and any other religion for that matter, just as those religious adherents in those same countries have the right to criticise and insult secularism and freedom of speech if they so desire.
No one living in a free secular society should be frightened of speaking out against any religion – totalitarian or otherwise. But they are. And the reason is the omnipresent threat of violence that permeates the Islamic faith. If you publicly criticise it in any way, you run the very real risk of being subjected to physical violence.
-- answer removed --
Islam, like Christianity, is one of the fundamental ideologies that shape all our lives, like it or not.Religion is defensive of its ideology, often having or wanting blasphemy laws in place to protect their rituals and icons.
This runs counter to the principle of free speech.We all, in a free society, should have the right to express our views,provided the expression of such views is not hateful or an incitement to violence/ murder etc.
Individuals should have a measure of protection, even minor royalty or "celebrities", but ideologies are fair game. They are fair game because of the influence they exert over all of us.
The response to provocation, however offensive, is not mob rule, is not fire bombing, or murder, or terrorism, or storming of agencies or burning flags - the correct response of a "religion of peace" and its adherents is to reject and rebut, if they can do so - but to rise above the provocation.
To question whether we have the right or need to insult Mohammed mean that the fundamentalists are half way there with their fatwa on free speech...
This runs counter to the principle of free speech.We all, in a free society, should have the right to express our views,provided the expression of such views is not hateful or an incitement to violence/ murder etc.
Individuals should have a measure of protection, even minor royalty or "celebrities", but ideologies are fair game. They are fair game because of the influence they exert over all of us.
The response to provocation, however offensive, is not mob rule, is not fire bombing, or murder, or terrorism, or storming of agencies or burning flags - the correct response of a "religion of peace" and its adherents is to reject and rebut, if they can do so - but to rise above the provocation.
To question whether we have the right or need to insult Mohammed mean that the fundamentalists are half way there with their fatwa on free speech...
Consider yourself lucky this religion/political movement is'nt banned for all the trouble it causes People are scared of you & don't understand what you're about or what the hell you want or expect from us.Consider yourself very lucky to live in enlightened times in a country like this & stop with all the demands.
I would say that in recent years far more effort has been expended by Muslims 'showing just how insulted they are' than was ever put into the actual insulting.
The is an example of the 'law of least effort' - the person who gets the most effort returned to them whilst expending the least effort themselves actually holds the social power, watch it in action in the workplace or social setting.
In this case essentially it achieves a feeling of social dominance in the 'insulter'. Which is probably why the Muslims get so worked up, it is not because of the pictures/film/etc, althoug they may think that it is - it is really because they feel like they are not respected.
The is an example of the 'law of least effort' - the person who gets the most effort returned to them whilst expending the least effort themselves actually holds the social power, watch it in action in the workplace or social setting.
In this case essentially it achieves a feeling of social dominance in the 'insulter'. Which is probably why the Muslims get so worked up, it is not because of the pictures/film/etc, althoug they may think that it is - it is really because they feel like they are not respected.
// There seems to be a lot of effort in recent years to insult Mohammad, seemingly just for the heck of it //
I don't think there has. There's just been people in secular western democracies going about their normal way of life which includes a hefty dose of free speech, satire, criticism of, and debate on all sorts of issues including religion and politics.
It's the reaction to this when it touches on Islam that seems to have changed.
If anything there's probably been more effort put into avoiding insulting Mohammed because of this change in reaction. Personally I don't think there should be. We should carry on as normal, and I applaud people who are brave enough to do that given the violence and intimidation they risk facing as a result.
I don't think there has. There's just been people in secular western democracies going about their normal way of life which includes a hefty dose of free speech, satire, criticism of, and debate on all sorts of issues including religion and politics.
It's the reaction to this when it touches on Islam that seems to have changed.
If anything there's probably been more effort put into avoiding insulting Mohammed because of this change in reaction. Personally I don't think there should be. We should carry on as normal, and I applaud people who are brave enough to do that given the violence and intimidation they risk facing as a result.
Latest Posts
Octopus Energy - Worth A Punt?
Home & Garden37 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles45 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles47 mins ago
ChatterBank63 mins ago
Could The Nefarious Hand Of Antifa Be...
News92 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.