Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Doofy · May 19, 2010, 02:56 PM

Pakistan bans Facebook in outrage over online competition to draw Prophet Mohammed | Mail Online

I agree with the ugly medieval tards! Filthy Facebookisities.

This appears to be over some kind of competition to draw Mo.

So let's have a go at that:

❂
/|\
/\

^ Mo ^

What did I win?

andi*pandi · May 19, 2010, 02:58 PM

Is this where we correct their english?

That daisy for a head is insulting.

The Final Dakar · May 19, 2010, 03:01 PM

Doofy likes Muslims over Facebook users.

That's pretty sad.

SpaceMonkey · May 19, 2010, 03:05 PM

And long as this doesn't clutter my feed.

Railroader · May 19, 2010, 03:09 PM

Islam is such a religion of peace. Can you feel the love?

Railroader · May 19, 2010, 03:10 PM

I am searching for the true Muhammad to friend, but there seem to be a lot of impostors.

lpkmckenna · May 19, 2010, 03:32 PM

Yes, uneducated and impoverished Muslims parrot the hate of their masters. You won't find this attitude among westernized Muslims.

Atheist · May 19, 2010, 03:38 PM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

Yes, uneducated and impoverished Muslims parrot the hate of their masters. You won't find this attitude among westernized Muslims.

But westernized Muslims aren't "real" Muslims.

OAW · May 19, 2010, 03:50 PM

Making any image or visual depiction of the Prophet Muhammad is strictly forbidden in Islam. Muslims of all stripes consider it blasphemous to say the least. It's my understanding that the reason for this was to prevent Muhammad from being "deified". Regardless, this is one those circumstances where just because you CAN do something ... doesn't mean you SHOULD. It's unnecessarily provocative ... to say the least. I recall many people being highly inflamed over the Piss Christ exhibit. Many Christians considered it blasphemous ... regardless of the intent of the artist.

The way I see it ... people should at least show a minimum level of respect for other people's hot button religious sensitivities. And if they don't ... then at least be an equal opportunity offender (e.g. South Park). But for those jumping on this latest bandwagon all I will say is that if you would take offense to people (especially foreigners) making a mockery of things you consider blasphemous in your own religion ... then perhaps you should check yourself. You know ... the Golden Rule and all that jazz.

OAW

ort888 · May 19, 2010, 03:59 PM

I heard that everyone who has every drawn Mohammed has also walked in the street, so we should also get rid of streets.

Doofy · May 19, 2010, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

Yes, uneducated and impoverished Muslims parrot the hate of their masters. You won't find this attitude among westernized Muslims.

London:

lpkmckenna · May 19, 2010, 04:08 PM

I said westernized Muslims. Brand-new immigrants from sh!tholes in the desert aren't westernized.

BTW: Someone pipebombed a mosque in Florida. Probably a teabagger.

lpkmckenna · May 19, 2010, 04:09 PM

Originally Posted by Atheist

But westernized Muslims aren't "real" Muslims.

Says who?

Doofy · May 19, 2010, 04:10 PM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

I said westernized Muslims. Brand-new immigrants from sh!tholes in the desert aren't westernized.

Most of the gnarly ones in the UK's cities are third gen.

lpkmckenna · May 19, 2010, 04:11 PM

Originally Posted by OAW

Making any image or visual depiction of the Prophet Muhammad is strictly forbidden in Islam. Muslims of all stripes consider it blasphemous to say the least. It's my understanding that the reason for this was to prevent Muhammad from being "deified". Regardless, this is one those circumstances where just because you CAN do something ... doesn't mean you SHOULD. It's unnecessarily provocative ... to say the least. I recall many people being highly inflamed over the Piss Christ exhibit. Many Christians considered it blasphemous ... regardless of the intent of the artist.

The way I see it ... people should at least show a minimum level of respect for other people's hot button religious sensitivities. And if they don't ... then at least be an equal opportunity offender (e.g. South Park). But for those jumping on this latest bandwagon all I will say is that if you would take offense to people (especially foreigners) making a mockery of things you consider blasphemous in your own religion ... then perhaps you should check yourself. You know ... the Golden Rule and all that jazz.

Guess what: Muslim rules aren't binding on non-Muslims. I can eat pork, nap thru prayer time, and draw Mohammed. Because I'm not a Muslim.

lpkmckenna · May 19, 2010, 04:13 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Most of the gnarly ones in the UK's cities are third gen.

Most of the religious right in the US have been here for dozens of generations, but they still wanna live in a Christian theocracy. Guess what: losts of people who live in western democracies don't believe in western democracy.

Doofy · May 19, 2010, 04:16 PM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

Most of the religious right in the US have been here for dozens of generations, but they still wanna live in a Christian theocracy. Guess what: losts of people who live in western democracies don't believe in western democracy.

Guess what: The US isn't a democracy.

lpkmckenna · May 19, 2010, 04:18 PM

In at least one appropriate use of the term, it is. Stick to the friggin' subject.

lpkmckenna · May 19, 2010, 04:20 PM

Doofy · May 19, 2010, 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

In at least one appropriate use of the term, it is. Stick to the friggin' subject.

The subject of this thread is: Kill Facebookers and draw a pic of Mo.
So either kill a Facebooker and draw a pic of Mo or get out of my thread.

SpaceMonkey · May 19, 2010, 04:22 PM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

Guess what: Muslim rules aren't binding on non-Muslims. I can eat pork, nap thru prayer time, and draw Mohammed. Because I'm not a Muslim.

Sure. But even by my non-Muslim standards, many of the images posted to this Facebook group (you should check it out) are very offensive. It doesn't justify calling for anyone to be killed, but it speaks to what OAW is talking about. A lot of people seem to be into this just to be jerks, which is certainly protest-worthy.

lpkmckenna · May 19, 2010, 04:27 PM

Protest-worthy? Protesting a facebook page is an utter waste of time. I have no doubt many of the images are offensive, because when people are free they sometimes do offensive things.

SpaceMonkey · May 19, 2010, 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

Protest-worthy? Protesting a facebook page is an utter waste of time. I have no doubt many of the images are offensive, because when people are free they sometimes do offensive things.

Oh, I agree with you. But complaining that other people find something else offensive is also a waste of time. If you have a live-and-let-live attitude, then who really cares about any of this?

Doofy · May 19, 2010, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey

If you have a live-and-let-live attitude, then who really cares about any of this?

I care. We should ban Facebook. And MySpace, just in case.

Why have you lefties turned my exciting mickey-taking thread into a snoozefest?

lpkmckenna · May 19, 2010, 04:48 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Why have you lefties turned my exciting mickey-taking thread into a snoozefest?

Listening to tiresome whining about one religious group from another religious group is always a snoozefest.

OAW · May 19, 2010, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

Guess what: Muslim rules aren't binding on non-Muslims. I can eat pork, nap thru prayer time, and draw Mohammed. Because I'm not a Muslim.

Indeed that is the case. You get no argument from me on that note. All I'm saying is that this particular situation is not a very good idea IMO. I mean seriously ... what purpose is this Facebook thing serving really? Other than to incite Muslims around the world? Let me come at this from a different angle. It's like this ....

Here in the US we have "freedom of speech" and all that. And that's a good thing. But at the same time it's really not a good idea for a white person to walk around calling random black people "n*gger" to their face. One could do it if they chose to ... but they really shouldn't be shocked if at some point they catch a beat down in the process. I mean .... I'm just saying.

Same principle applies with this Facebook situation. Those who deliberately stir up a hornet's nest shouldn't be surprised if somebody gets stung.

OAW

lpkmckenna · May 19, 2010, 04:54 PM

I think this Facebook stunt is very worthwhile. Some members of a religious group thinks they can impose their prohibitions on the whole world, and they need to be reminded that they can't.

If I had started this facebook group, I would have moderated it in such a way to limit pointless bigotry, but it's not my group so that's that.

imitchellg5 · May 19, 2010, 04:54 PM

Here's my go. Thoughts?

Doofy · May 19, 2010, 04:55 PM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

Listening to tiresome whining about one religious group from another religious group is always a snoozefest.

Facebook is a religious group now?

Doofy · May 19, 2010, 04:56 PM

Originally Posted by imitchellg5

Here's my go. Thoughts?

It's lovely Mitch.

OAW · May 19, 2010, 05:03 PM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

I think this Facebook stunt is very worthwhile. Some members of a religious group thinks they can impose their prohibitions on the whole world, and they need to be told that they can't.

And that is certainly one way of looking at it. But consider this ....

Some might interpret this as people (e.g. Westerners) imposing their notions of "freedom of speech" at the expense of other people's deeply held religious beliefs. And to be fair ... you don't really see Muslims overseas getting too bent out of shape about what we do in the West when it involves us ... even when it is in contravention to their mores. I just don't find it necessary to deliberately antagonize people like this. Just to tell yourself that you have "freedom of speech" ... something you already know?

OAW

SpaceMonkey · May 19, 2010, 05:20 PM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

I think this Facebook stunt is very worthwhile. Some members of a religious group thinks they can impose their prohibitions on the whole world, and they need to be reminded that they can't.

That isn't really the point, though, is it? I mean, these protesters are demanding that their government block access to Facebook because of its "blasphemous" content, not that Facebook be shut down.

Jawbone54 · May 19, 2010, 05:42 PM

I don't care if they ban Facebook in their country. I don't care if they get upset. What I do care about is rabid, 7th-century violence that often takes place anytime someone draws Mohammed. Sure, plenty of Christians were offended by the aforementioned Piss Christ exhibit, but I don't recall any riots or assassinations.

I also won't be joining the group (or even visiting the page), because I have no intention of stirring up trouble and doing nothing to help the situation, although irking people who are easily offended is a cherished human past-time.

Lastly, I can't read the word "Karachi" without thinking of Modern Warfare 2.

sek929 · May 19, 2010, 05:48 PM

We can always call in a Harrier Strike to calm those terrorists down some.

Wiskedjak · May 19, 2010, 09:07 PM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

Yes, uneducated and impoverished Muslims parrot the hate of their masters. You won't find this attitude among westernized Muslims.

It's a good thing that uneducated and impoverished *Westerners* don't parrot the hate of *their* masters.

Railroader · May 19, 2010, 09:18 PM

I don't know why the terrorists don't just take down the whole intra tubes.

SpaceMonkey · May 19, 2010, 09:28 PM

Originally Posted by Railroader

I don't know why the terrorists don't just take down the whole intra tubes.

The tubes are too central to their recruiting and fundraising.

CRASH HARDDRIVE · 11:20 PM

The flap over "Piss Christ" was the fact that it was funded with public money, a $15,000 NEA grant. Religious or not, people were right to oppose public funds being used for such things, otherwise, make dumb art all you want. Also, as has been pointed out, people didn't riot in the streets and kill anyone over it. So once again, the kneejerk attempt to mount a moral equivalence excuse (with the usual tactic of leaving out relevant details) fails.

Meanwhile, once again, passively exposing the ignorance of ignorant people by 'provoking' them with your own freedom, isn't really an effective argument against free people enjoying the benefits of a free society. Sorry. If anything on freakin' Facebook (really, Facebook!) makes the Muslim world go apeshit... guess what? It's not Facebook users that have the problem. It's the ignorant people going apeshit over something that doesn't really matter a hill of beans to anyone that have the problem. This is just a simple way of pointing it out.

It's a bit like if you had whined at Charlie Chaplin for making "The Great Dictator"

"Oh no Charlie! You'll 'provoke' ignorant people and make them act like brutal, ignorant, backward-ass jerks, by making fun of their regime that outlaws such things!!!!!"

Yeah. Exactly.

pooka · May 20, 2010, 01:37 AM

Sorry. Gotta give pwnage to Crash on this one. Seriously. ****in' Facebook?

mattyb · May 20, 2010, 05:49 AM

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

Lastly, I can't read the word "Karachi" without thinking of Modern Warfare 2.

lol

Originally Posted by sek929

We can always call in a Harrier Strike to calm those terrorists down some.

Followed by AC-130 and Nuke of course.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Anybody here lived in a Muslim country? I have. 2 in fact. Non-muslims have to stick to certain Muslim rules in the countries that I was in. In fact, if you were a non-Muslim, you probably had to adhere more to the Muslim rules than the Muslims did.

Railroader · May 20, 2010, 07:19 AM

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

The flap over "Piss Christ" was the fact that it was funded with public money, a $15,000 NEA grant.

Actually, I think the outrage was also over the $15,000 period. I mean c'mon, $15,000 for a small cross and a glass. That's like $45 tops! (pee is still free).

Shaddim · May 20, 2010, 03:28 PM

OAW · May 20, 2010, 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

The flap over "Piss Christ" was the fact that it was funded with public money, a $15,000 NEA grant. Religious or not, people were right to oppose public funds being used for such things, otherwise, make dumb art all you want. Also, as has been pointed out, people didn't riot in the streets and kill anyone over it. So once again, the kneejerk attempt to mount a moral equivalence excuse (with the usual tactic of leaving out relevant details) fails.

I fear you are trying to make an either-or situation out of a both-and situation. My only point was that there were those who considered Piss Christ to be "blasphemous" or "sacrilegious". And that was WHY they opposed public funding for it. But make no mistake about it ... they were also in opposition to the subject matter itself.

In 1989, Donald Wildmon of the American Family Association held a press conference attacking what he called "anti-Christian bigotry," in an exhibition by photographer Andres Serrano. The work at the center of the controversy was Piss Christ, a photo of a plastic crucifix submerged in a vial of the artists' urine. Republican Senators Jesse Helms and Al D'Amato began to rally against the NEA, and expanded the attack to include other artists. Prominent conservative Christian figures including Pat Robertson of the 700 Club and Pat Buchanan joined the attacks. Republican representative Dick Armey, an opponent of federal arts funding, began to attack a planned exhibition of photographs by Robert Mapplethorpe at the Corcoran Museum of Art that was to receive NEA support.

It certainly wasn't like they thought it would be cool if it weren't for such funding.

Originally Posted by Crash Harddrive

Meanwhile, once again, passively exposing the ignorance of ignorant people by 'provoking' them with your own freedom, isn't really an effective argument against free people enjoying the benefits of a free society. Sorry. If anything on freakin' Facebook (really, Facebook!) makes the Muslim world go apeshit... guess what? It's not Facebook users that have the problem. It's the ignorant people going apeshit over something that doesn't really matter a hill of beans to anyone that have the problem. This is just a simple way of pointing it out.

Well it seems to me that there isn't anything "passive" about going out of your way to organize an "Everybody draw Muhammad day" on Facebook. And it's not that I disagree with the rest of what you said. All I'm saying is that I could think of quite a number of things that people could do on Facebook regarding Jesus that would make the religious right in the US go apesh*t. Fairly easily at that.

OAW

Shaddim · May 20, 2010, 03:31 PM

Originally Posted by Railroader

Actually, I think the outrage was also over the $15,000 period. I mean c'mon, $15,000 for a small cross and a glass. That's like $45 tops! (pee is still free).

That's about right. I thought it was kinda pretty, with the golden glow and all that. No way is it worth $15k, though.

hyteckit · May 20, 2010, 04:28 PM

Muslims blames it on the liberal media. Damn internet!

Muslim concerns trigger Pakistani Web bans - Yahoo! News

Reminds me of Christians and their book burning. Evil Harry Potter!

Railroader · May 20, 2010, 06:43 PM

Originally Posted by hyteckit

Muslims blames it on the liberal media. Damn internet!

Muslim concerns trigger Pakistani Web bans - Yahoo! News

Reminds me of Christians and their book burning. Evil Harry Potter!

Wait, you are reminded of Christians burning Harry Potter books when muslims start wanting to kill people? While I agree that burning Harry Potter books is foolish and hardly Christian behavior, your association of the two is pretty far fetched. Burning the books wasn't even on the edge of illegality or immoral, whereas killing some one is both.

pooka · May 20, 2010, 08:55 PM

Originally Posted by OAW

All I'm saying is that I could think of quite a number of things that people could do on Facebook regarding Jesus that would make the religious right in the US go apesh*t. Fairly easily at that.

All I'm saying is that I'd be the first (or 19th) one here to point and laugh at them too. Well, I may actually draw some funny pictures because the chances of me getting killed over it are much lower. C'mon, Christian fanatics are smack-talking pussies.

lpkmckenna · May 20, 2010, 09:44 PM

Originally Posted by mattyb

Anybody here lived in a Muslim country? I have. 2 in fact. Non-muslims have to stick to certain Muslim rules in the countries that I was in. In fact, if you were a non-Muslim, you probably had to adhere more to the Muslim rules than the Muslims did.

The opposite is true also: in Indonesia, Muslims are legally prohibited from things like alcohol, but non-Muslims are free to indulge.

CRASH HARDDRIVE · May 21, 2010, 01:49 AM

Originally Posted by OAW

I fear you are trying to make an either-or situation out of a both-and situation. My only point was that there were those who considered Piss Christ to be "blasphemous" or "sacrilegious". And that was WHY they opposed public funding for it. But make no mistake about it ... they were also in opposition to the subject matter itself.

Nothing of the above in any way compares with threatening to kill people over drawings on Facebook. (I mean, does it get any more trivial? To say nothing of the fact that the whole thing is just a parody of the sort of trivial things like cartoons that the radical Islamic world goes apeshit over quite often.)

Your 'point' it seems to me is the usual tact of for some odd reason wanting to say "See? Christians behave just like radical Muslims!!" as an attempt to excuse the insanity of radical Muslims. And yet you can never point to an actual non-stretched to breaking point example, because as anyone can clearly see, most Christians (and most other religions as well) even on their worst days rarely behave anywhere near as badly as much of the Muslim world seems to delve into every other day. Those not suffering from P.C. disease can simply recognize this fact and move on.

Well it seems to me that there isn't anything "passive" about going out of your way to organize an "Everybody draw Muhammad day" on Facebook.

Sorry, but:

Facebook itself is nothing but a bunch of people sitting around PASSIVELY posting inane NONSENSE on the Internet to amuse themselves. The whole thing is like a textbook definition of PASSIVE!

Hello- it's 2010! Anyone 'provoked' over Facebook (or YouTube, or stupidcrapwhateverthehell.com) in this day and age has a SERIOUS F'ING incompatibility problem with the modern world, and it ain't the people sitting on thier duffs in their skivvies posting inane crap that virtually anyone *sane* can figure out to merely IGNORE that have the freakin' problem.

All I'm saying is that I could think of quite a number of things that people could do on Facebook regarding Jesus that would make the religious right in the US go apesh*t. Fairly easily at that.

Well gee whiz, I hope that it comforts you to INVENT a ridiculously lopsided moral-equivalence scenario that somehow excuses the REALITY of radical Muslims making death threats and going crazy over Internet drawings. Again, I have to ask what is even the purpose of such a fruitless exercise, other than an inability (brought on by Political Correctness) to deal with reality?

auto_immune · May 21, 2010, 08:55 AM

Woof!