Apologies from this cartoonist? No way ("What Would Mohammed Drive?")

Fort Worth Star-Telegram ^ | 1/5/03 | Doug Marlette

[aruanan]

Well, maybe he should act in the manner described in the Torah, and kill them first.

Better check your chapter and verse.

[nightdriver]

"My only regret is that the thousands who e-mailed me complaining felt that my drawing was an assault upon their religion or its founder. It was not. It was an assault on the distortion of their religion by murderous fanatics and zealots."

I wonder if Mr. Marlette knows that it's the moslem fanatics who are true to the moslem scriptures, not the "peaceful" moslems he's thinking of.

[reg45]

I kept thinking Camel.

[desertcry]

I can't remember CAIR or any other muslim group apologize laudly for what their murderous muslim brothers did in the name of Allah on 9.11.01. It's well over a year now, and we are still waiting.

[wcbtinman]

Don't have a Torah handy, but somewhere in there I have read that (paraphrasing) 'if an enemy comes to kill you, you should rise up and kill him first'.

Maybe someone of the Jewish persuasion can enlighten me.

[DeFault User]

I believe that's found in Bush 42:10.

[ChemistCat]

The far right side of that cartoon isn't showing up on the screen. Would you be so kind as to tell us what should be there?

I hope the cartoonist happens by to look at this thread about his letter. I think he's brilliantly correct.

[Howlin]

That's it. Just the winner, just like in basketball!

[Eala]

IMHO, Doug Marlette is a great cartoonist (FAR better than, say, the unfunny what's-his-face who draws Doonesbury). (My church wound up on his skewer list at least once but it doesn't really count, I guess, because it echoes a joke we make about ourselves). It was a sign, though, that the local paper was turning left when, sadly, they dropped his "Kudzu" strip. Now I have to read it online.

[pupdog]

No one is less tolerant than those demanding tolerance.

That's the most devastatingly succinct description of the left that I've heard yet.

[aruanan]

Don't have a Torah handy, but somewhere in there I have read that (paraphrasing) 'if an enemy comes to kill you, you should rise up and kill him first'.

The Torah, in its most specific meaning, refers to the Pentateuch, ie., the Books of Moses, the first five books of the Bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. Given the specificity of instructions in the Pentateuch of what does or doesn't constitute a murder (see Numbers 35), a preemptive strike scenario based on an assumption of intent seems to be inconsistent with what is actually there.

[maestro]

"What Would Mohammed Drive?"

'BMW'......................!!!

:-(

[snowstorm12]

b

[wcbtinman]

If a man points a gun at my head, and I somehow overpower him, and then kill him to stop the threat, then I have made a pre-emptive strike under the rule you propose. I don't think that God ever intended us to remain passive in the face of a mortal threat.

The Bible is full of common sense laws, and I have no doubt that to kill someone who has announced their intention to inflict death and mutilation is within the purview of permitted actions in the Bible, notwithstanding the legal system.

We don't seem to take the Bible in the literal terms as I suppose it used to be, or we wouldn't have the homosexual problem that is so 'in your face' today.

[dcwusmc]

bump.... and Mohammed drives a goat. Female, of course. He's not a perv, after all!

[aruanan]

If a man points a gun at my head, and I somehow overpower him, and then kill him to stop the threat, then I have made a pre-emptive strike under the rule you propose. I don't think that God ever intended us to remain passive in the face of a mortal threat.

If you attempted to overpower him in an effort to protect yourself from a contemporaneous attempt on your life and he got killed in the attempt, you wouldn't be guilty of murder. However, if you managed to overpower him, disarm him, and had control over him and then shot him to prevent any future attempt on you, this would be premeditated murder.

[TigersEye]

It was not. It was an assault on the distortion of their religion by murderous fanatics and zealots.

The author of this is ignoring the evidence of thousands of e-mails that it is not a distortion of their religion.

[arielb]