Posted on 02/04/2006 1:31:43 PM PST by dennisw
Edited on 02/04/2006 2:03:39 PM PST by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
Saturday, 4th February 2006 UK
Sat 4 Feb 2006
Why Muslims are so sensitive to images of Prophet being used BASHIR MAAN MUSLIMS hold the Prophet in such high respect and reverence that he is only after God. He is regarded more respectfully than one's parents.
Believers think of him as the prefect human being in the world.
Islam forbids images of anybody. Images are forbidden in the Koran. There are many verses in the Koran which condemn worshipping idols. From that we draw that idols are paintings and pictures, and particularly pictures of the Prophet.
There were no paintings in his life of how he looked. There are descriptions of how he looked and explanations of his facial features, but no pictures. It is regarded as idolatrous.
That is the reason that the Prophet prohibited images in the house.
But the Prophet is more defended because of the respect and reverence that we have for him.
There are some people who say that photographs are acceptable because that is not a painting. They say that a photograph does not come into that category.
But, on the whole, Muslims do not like photographs or idols. Veneration starts from the photographs and causes idolatry.
It will never change because it covers everything. Islam is a way of life. It covers every aspect of human life. There is no room for innovation or changes there. Everything is proscribed.
The best thing is the template of the life of the Prophet.
Everything was written down, it was history. But there is no rigidity, there are no extremes in Islam, no right or left.
Those who protest can protest peacefully. As they have the right to print, so they have the right to protest.
There should not be any violence.
I don't think the pictures should have been published. It only widens the gulf between Islam and the West.
Maybe they don't appreciate the reverence Muslims have for the Prophet. Maybe it was mischievous of them.
No religious faith should be caricatured, because it will create offence.
This is an abuse of the freedom of expression.
Most of the people in Islamic countries are emotional because there is more illiteracy than literacy, and that is the reason why some people go to extremes.
That is why some people take it too far.
That is not good for Islam and not good for them.
I think there must be some sort of understanding between the West and Islam.
Bashir Maan is the Scottish spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain.
Related topic
Danish cartoon row http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=1381 This article: http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=179702006
[snip]
I am still trying to find pictures of the offensive cartoon(s). I haven't seen them yet and have looked. All the articles I have found discuss the cartoons and the outrage it has sparked, but I have yet to find one that actually shows a graphic of the offending artwork. Can anybody help me? Thanks in advance!
Thanks xcamel for the post..most excellent read.
Muslim Mr. Gay Norway
Wait a second. Hasn't South Park done Mohammed? Why do they get a pass?
For those who were disheartened to hear the State Department's official position regarding the Islamic cartoon matter, the press has misrepresented their official position (no surprise).
The statement in its entirety can be read here:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1571906/posts
Thanks to prairiebreeze for this:
Please take a look at some further analysis about the State Dept statement.
Right Wing Nuthouse calls it more of an example of laziness and poor writing ability on the media's part. For instance he says:
So just where did the State Department get it wrong? They stand up for free speech. They recognize that the cartoons offended Muslims. They tell the idiots in the Middle East to look to their own portrayals of Jews and Christians before going off half cocked about the Mohamed cartoons. And they call upon everyone to settle down.
But all we got from press reports was the fact that the State Department seems to be condemning the Danes and other European publications for running the offending cartoons and an obligatory nod to the First Amendment.
Also on this Little Green Footballs link Charles posts the transcript from the actual briefing of Scott McCormack at State Dept. He gives a MUCH fuller explanation to the State Dept's stance on the situation with Denmark than was initially reported by the press. AND, btw, reported word for word by three different reporters.
He's one of the Super Best Friends.
Mohammed: | Jesus, we've been working hard since we got your distress call! |
Loa Tse: | Who the kid? |
Jesus: | Stanley, I want you to meet some of the super best friends [they are shown when mentioned]: Buddha, with the powers of invisibility; Mohammed, the Muslim prophet with the powers of flame [he raises his hands palm up and a blast of flame emerges from each hand]; Krishna, the Hindu deity; Jospeh Smith, the Mormom prophet; Lao Tse, the found of Taoism [performs some martial arts moves with his cane]; and Sea-Man, with the ability to breathe underwater and link mentally with fish. |
Stan: | So you mean to tell me that even though people fight and argue over different religions, you guys are all actually friends? |
Mohammed: | More than friends, young boy, we are super best friends, with the desire to fight for justice. |
"Religion of Peace" Ping...
I think he meant "pervert".
Do Muslims know that Mohammed has a regular role on a potty mouthed film in the US? Apparently not.
How's about a picture of Larry, Curley, and MAD MO!
I'm offended that Jesus is wearing flower power pants
What a crock!
Since they parade photos of their religious leaders, they are committing the unspeakable, idolatry.
The dog buggering Mo was really a snort
because they are liberals at heart and liberals operate from emotion, rather than fact or logic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.