The Wahhabi/Salafists seem to be ascendant now, and pushing their hegemony everywhere.
Here's a couple cross-cultural examples of Muhammad images:
`
`
`
`
Posted on 04/03/2018 10:48:12 AM PDT by detective
An image of the San Damiano Cross, showing Jesus in glory, “reigning from his cruciform throne,” has been rejected by Facebook because of its “shocking content.”
“This is what the monitors at Facebook consider excessively violent, sensational, and shocking,” said a statement from Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
“They would NEVER EVER ban pictures of Mohamed”......
Honestly, I don’t recall every having seen a picture of that hoax Mohamed. I’d suggest people ask to see such a picture, posted on Facebook to see who’s photo appears. Throw down the gauntlet.
Just part of Facebook's protection of Islam by covering up its essential difference from Christianity:
Jesus was crucified => ChristianityMohammed beheaded infidels => Islam
Not a realistic looking Moooooooohomid.
I’ve had a picture of the crucifixion on my facebook page since Good Friday. It is still there.
Nope. Had one posted all weekend long. Now I have an open tomb picture.
I posted a picture of Jesus on the Cross, and its there where I posted. Strange?
“They would NEVER EVER ban pictures of Mohamed”
Actually most of Islam is opposed to images of Mohammed or other religious figures such as Jesus.
Even though Islam is dramatically anti-Christian, it also considers Jesus to be a prophet. And, as a prophet, Islam generally opposes images of His likeness.
In spite of this, quite a few Muslims have seen Passion of the Christ. So, it is tolerated in some cases. Just like within Christendom, there are many viewpoints within Islam.
The Wahhabi/Salafists seem to be ascendant now, and pushing their hegemony everywhere.
Here's a couple cross-cultural examples of Muhammad images:
`
`
`
`
The problem is that an image of a man nailed to a cross is a violent image. At least, I think that is the excuse they are going to use.
That being said, I’ll be concerned when they ban the symbol of the cross or the fish. No violence there.
Well, they are correct - it IS shocking - at least it should be.
That God gave up his glory, and came to earth in the form of a man, and though he was completely innocent, suffered and died the death of a criminal - in our place; a death that EACH ONE of us deserves because of our sin against a Holy God. That Christ would do this for us, even though we don’t deserve it, and more incredible yet, that he would do it for those of us who would revile, curse - or ignore him; that he would do all of that - at no cost to us, save that we accept his gift, *SHOULD* shock us to the very core of our beings.
I saw many pictures of Jesus on the Cross on FB this past weekend.
PFL, thanks.
Bookmark: Facebook (etc.) alternatives.
Thanks!
they would indeed, but out of _respect_ for that false and twisted religion
Check your Christian privilege, brah.
I Like nothing better than sticking it to the liberal nazis.
Are there any knowledgeable adults working at Facebook?
Or is it all snowflakes with zero education in world and national history?
Well, actually muslims don’t like pictures of Mohammed so they probably would do that.
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.