Everybody Draw Muhammad Day (May 20) Coming Up
Mormons are less than one percent of the english-speaking worlds population.
why so many mormons/former mormons on this site?
1) Mormons know each other and so things (like this site) spread though that community?
2) Mormons are more likely to be aspies.
a. genetics?
b. older mother hypothesis
3) Mormons are more likely to diagnosed with aspergers (cuz they are weird/ have insurance)
4) Mormons tend to have computers and so are over represented on the internet in general
Jews and Canadians also seem to be over-represented
Interesting observation, I never thought there were that many Mormons on this site, but if there are, points 1 and 3 seem like plausable explainations.
How would you feel if someone close to you was killed in a suicide bombing that happened as a result of this "Draw Mohammed" nonsense?
So what you're saying is that it is perfectly ok to threatening other people with violence if someone offends your beliefs? In that case, I should bomb a Mormon church for supporting prop-8, I have gay friends and am beyond pissed off that an organization would go through such great lengths to deny them equality. Next, I should shoot up anyone campaigning against Marijuana use, it's their fault for attacking my belief in self-determination. Maybe everytime a Christian is converted to Islam, and paraded through the streets to rub it in the Christian's faces, the Christians should target a few Muslims, then explain how it was their fault for making them mad.
Doesn't that sound ridiculous? I'd never tolerate that kind of behavior, no civilized person should. I don't think there's a person alive who can escape criticism, why not say something satirical about the person who is offending you instead of killing them?
Last edited by MDD123 on 10 May 2011, 4:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
It is not about winning any war, it is to bug and annoy those people out and to make a stand. It also has nothing to do with being patriotic, the cartoonists killed are not American, they are European.
People making death threats to people drawing Muhammad - They deserve to be mocked and ridiculed until they lose their sense of entitlement or go nuts.
Christians get mocked all day long by cartoons like Family Guy or even the Simpsons in which Jesus and Mr. G are drawn many times. Your point seems to be that because Muslims are more over-sensitive to these things we shouldn't do it. My point is that they are only over-sensitive because they are not used to it. They have a phobia of getting their views ridiculed, and the only cure I know for a phobia is to be exposed to it.
Check out my IMDB page!
Please use that in your signature.
To my knowledge there is no way of putting a hyperlink in your signature. If there is please let me know!
You windows generation are so used to buttons.
Type this in your signature:
Check out my IMDB page!
_________________
.
That doesn't seem to work in the signature.
That's strange, for a second I considered the possibility that maybe hyperlinks are not allowed in signatures, but then I saw JacobVirgyl's post and it clearly has an hyperlink in his signature.
So I guess, you will have to try:
Check my imdb page: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2474498/ !
_________________
.
Lamartine said about Muhammad;
"Philosopher, orator, apostle, legislator, warrior, conqueror of ideas, restorer of rational dogmas, of a cult without images; the founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire, that is Muhammad. As regards all standards by which human greatness may be measured, we may well ask, is there any man greater than he?"
"Philosopher, orator, apostle, legislator, warrior, conqueror of ideas, restorer of rational dogmas, of a cult without images; the founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire, that is Muhammad. As regards all standards by which human greatness may be measured, we may well ask, is there any man greater than he?"
Well, by said standards of how much cultural impact they had and how large a territory they gained, one can suppose Genghis Khan. While his Empire didn't last and he never founded a world religion, he effectively created the Mongol Nation by centralizing various warring tribes, created a central government in the Mongol region with scribes (his society was traditionally illiterate), and conquered the largest continuous land territory ever. Muhammad, by contrast, was born into an area where there already was trade, commerce, central governments, literacy, and philosophy for thousands of years, where various people had conquered the region for periods of time in the distant past. He was just one man in a long line of conquerors to gain control of the region and, after he died, his Empire fragmented.
"Philosopher, orator, apostle, legislator, warrior, conqueror of ideas, restorer of rational dogmas, of a cult without images; the founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire, that is Muhammad. As regards all standards by which human greatness may be measured, we may well ask, is there any man greater than he?"
Well, by said standards of how much cultural impact they had and how large a territory they gained, one can suppose Genghis Khan. While his Empire didn't last and he never founded a world religion, he effectively created the Mongol Nation by centralizing various warring tribes, created a central government in the Mongol region with scribes (his society was traditionally illiterate), and conquered the largest continuous land territory ever. Muhammad, by contrast, was born into an area where there already was trade, commerce, central governments, literacy, and philosophy for thousands of years, where various people had conquered the region for periods of time in the distant past. He was just one man in a long line of conquerors to gain control of the region and, after he died, his Empire fragmented.
You have no idea how flawed that statement is...
Actually after he died the Muslim empire reached further than it ever did, under the rule of Umar. It sounds to me like you just can't accept something good in someone you obviously have no respect for. I mean if you're gonna put a warlord like Genghis Khan ahead of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).
I quote from The 100, a Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History
by Michael H. Hart
Mr Hart ranked Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) no. 1. and he's not a Muslim.
I think if you read it you will see that your post is based mainly on what you would like to believe rather than what's true about him.
When Muhammad died, in 632, he was the effective ruler of all of southern Arabia. The Bedouin tribesmen of Arabia had a reputation as fierce warriors. But their number was small; and plagued by disunity and internecine warfare, they had been no match for the larger armies of the kingdoms in the settled agricultural areas to the north. However, unified by Muhammad for the first time in history, and inspired by their fervent belief in the one true God, these small Arab armies now embarked upon one of the most astonishing series of conquests in human history. To the northeast of Arabia lay the large Neo-Persian Empire of the Sassanids; to the northwest lay the Byzantine, or Eastern Roman Empire, centered in Constantinople. Numerically, the Arabs were no match for their opponents. On the field of battle, though, the inspired Arabs rapidly conquered all of Mesopotamia, Syria, and Palestine. By 642, Egypt had been wrested from the Byzantine Empire, while the Persian armies had been crushed at the key battles of Qadisiya in 637, and Nehavend in 642. But even these enormous conquests, which were made under the leadership of Muhammad's close friends and immediate successors, Ali, Abu Bakr and 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, did not mark the end of the Arab advance. By 711, the Arab armies had swept completely across North Africa to the Atlantic Ocean There they turned north and, crossing the Strait of Gibraltar, overwhelmed the Visigothic kingdom in Spain.
For a while, it must have seemed that the Moslems would overwhelm all of Christian Europe. However, in 732, at the famous Battle of Tours, a Moslem army, which had advanced into the center of France, was at last defeated by the Franks. Nevertheless, in a scant century of fighting, these Bedouin tribesmen, inspired by the word of the Prophet, had carved out an empire stretching from the borders of India to the Atlantic Ocean-the largest empire that the world had yet seen. And everywhere that the armies conquered, large-scale conversion to the new faith eventually followed. Now, not all of these conquests proved permanent. The Persians, though they have remained faithful to the religion of the Prophet, have since regained their independence from the Arabs. And in Spain, more than seven centuries of warfare, finally resulted in the Christians reconquering the entire peninsula. However, Mesopotamia and Egypt, the two cradles of ancient civilization, have remained Moslem, as has the entire coast of North Africa. The new religion, of course, continued to spread, in the intervening centuries, far beyond the borders of the original Moslem conquests. Currently it has tens of millions of adherents in Africa and Central Asia and even more in Pakistan and northern India, and in Indonesia. In Indonesia, the new faith has been a unifying factor. In the Indian subcontinent, however, the conflict between Moslems and Hindus is still a major obstacle to unity.
How, then, is one to assess the overall impact of Muhammad on human history? Like all religions, Islam exerts an enormous influence upon the lives of its followers. It is for this reason that the founders of the world's great religions all figure prominently in this book. Since there are roughly twice as many Christians as Moslems in the world, it may initially seem strange that Muhammad has been ranked higher than Jesus. There are two principal reasons for that decision. First, Muhammad played a far more important role in the development of Islam than Jesus did in the development of Christianity. Although Jesus was responsible for the main ethical and moral precepts of Christianity (insofar as these differed from Judaism), St. Paul was the main developer of Christian theology, its principal proselytizer, and the author of a large portion of the New Testament. Muhammad, however, was responsible for both the theology of Islam and its main ethical and moral principles. In addition, he played the key role in proselytizing the new faith, and in establishing the religious practices of Islam. Moreover, he is the author of the Moslem holy scriptures, the Koran, a collection of certain of Muhammad's insights that he believed had been directly revealed to him by Allah. Most of these utterances were copied more or less faithfully during Muhammad's lifetime and were collected together in authoritative form not long after his death. The Koran therefore, closely represents Muhammad's ideas and teachings and to a considerable extent his exact words. No such detailed compilation of the teachings of Christ has survived. Since the Koran is at least as important to Moslems as the Bible is to Christians, the influence of Muhammad through the medium of the Koran has been enormous. It is probable that the relative influence of Muhammad on Islam has been larger than the combined influence of Jesus Christ and St. Paul on Christianity.
On the purely religious level, then, it seems likely that Muhammad has been as influential in human history as Jesus. Furthermore, Muhammad (unlike Jesus) was a secular as well as a religious leader. In fact, as the driving force behind the Arab conquests, he may well rank as the most influential political leader of all time. Of many important historical events, one might say that they were inevitable and would have occurred even without the particular political leader who guided them. For example, the South American colonies would probably have won their independence from Spain even if Simon Bolivar had never lived. But this cannot be said of the Arab conquests. Nothing similar had occurred before Muhammad, and there is no reason to believe that the conquests would have been achieved without him. The only comparable conquests in human history are those of the Mongols in the thirteenth century, which were primarily due to the influence of Genghis Khan. These conquests, however, though more extensive than those of the Arabs, did not prove permanent, and today the only areas occupied by the Mongols are those that they held prior to the time of Genghis Khan. It is far different with the conquests of the Arabs. From Iraq to Morocco, there extends a whole chain of Moslem nations united not merely by their faith in Islam, but also by their Arabic language, history, and culture.
The centrality of the Koran in the Moslem religion and the fact that it is written in Arabic have probably prevented the Arab language from breaking up into mutually unintelligible dialects, which might otherwise have occurred in the intervening thirteen centuries. Differences and divisions between these Arab states exist, of course, and they are considerable, but the partial disunity should not blind us to the important elements of unity that have continued to exist. For instance, neither Iran nor Indonesia, both oil-producing states and both Islamic in religion joined in the oil embargo of the winter of 1973-74. It is no coincidence that all of the Arab states, and only the Arab states, participated in the embargo. We see, then, that the Arab conquests of the seventh century have continued to play an important role in human history, down to the present day. It is this unparalleled combination of secular and religious influence which I feel entitles Muhammad to be considered the most influential single figure in human history.
MasterJedi
Veteran
Joined: 22 Oct 2010
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,160
Location: in an open field west of a white house
I'm torn about how I feel about this.
On the one hand, I feel as if free speech is a precious thing but I think if the founding fathers considered that hate speech and defamatory remarks are hurtful, they might have worded it differently. I should be able to draw anything I like without fear of being killed. I suppose it's ignorant of me to be against hate speech but be for wanting to draw something that gets people riled up.
On the other hand, I wonder how I'd feel if I were Jewish and someone force fed me pork or spray painted a swastika on my temple. It would hurt more than any fist.
I think if you're going to do this to piss someone off then you shouldn't do it. If you're truly exercising your freedom of speech...
_________________
That is my spot, in an ever changing world, it is a single point of consistency. If my life were expressed as a function on a four dimensional Cartesian coordinate system, that spot, from the moment I first sat on it, would be 0-0-0-0.
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Coming out as trans |
13 Oct 2024, 7:34 pm |
Coming out of the aspie closet |
28 Nov 2024, 6:47 pm |
Thanksgiving is coming. What would be an ideal dinner? |
27 Nov 2024, 3:33 am |
Well I gu Trump is coming out to Aurora Colorado...ha ha |
11 Oct 2024, 9:44 pm |