Love a Muslim: Seattle version

[G-spotter]

This is no place for rational dialogue. Clearly the only response when someone threatens you over your depiction of the Prophet is to photoshop his head onto a beastforum pic of someone fucking a pig, then mail it to the Saudi, Pakistani and Iranian embassies with a copy of the Koran laser printed on thinly sliced prosciutto.

[Nitrox]

I believe the principle is

 

"Hey, humorless, religious fundamentalists: Kiss my ass!"

 

a principle I wholeheartedly agree with.

 

Bullshit, you'd be backpedaling faster than a Mexican driving through Arizona without ID. The special interest groups are your fellow voters and making them the least bit unhappy makes Zero unhappy. You'd blow every last one of them in a desperate attempt to prove to the world your white guilt is real and you aren't a racist.

 

 

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

screw loose

[Nitrox]

screw loose

 

Yep, yours is loose (again). Once the nonstop calls to your house and employer started you'd crated big as fuck. How many times have we seen some smart ass liberal run his/her suck on TV or the radio and then do the apology tour? Thats you, tough as tough can be in your little corner of the internet but totally full of shit.

 

 

 

[whirlwind]

lol

harassing and getting someone fired for expressing his or her opinion, which btw is a god given right and inalienable according to our constitution, proves that you and who ever resorts to these tacktics are in fact mentally retarded, i don't really care what your religion is or why you insist on fucking sheep on fridays or what ever it is you happen to partake in, as long as you do it where i cant see it, and don't insist i join in.

 

and FYI liberals are not the problem, and neither are republicans. both parties are full of asshats that have there own agenda, and backed by retards that cant figure out bashing people, for their belifs, whether they be religious, or political, ADDS TO THE PROBLEM. for once I'd like to see a debate that was based on reason, not emotion, and had a clear agenda to solve a giving problem. Then maybe we can figure out how to fix and improve our country.I'm tired of seeing guys like Ron Paul deliver well though, easy to understand debate arguments, only to have their words either twisted or completely ignored.

Edited April 28, 2010 by whirlwind

[JosephH]

I believe the principle is

 

"Hey, humorless, religious fundamentalists: Kiss my ass!"

 

a principle I wholeheartedly agree with.

 

Oh, that would be the principle that South Park, Comedy Central, MTV, and Viacom failed. Molly is simply clueless, naive and at best 'unhelpful'.

 

But hey JayB and tvash, websites and blogs are dirt cheap dudes, hell it's your chance to pick up where Molly left off and jump on the kiss-my-ass bandwagon and fight for what you believe! Just crank up a site or blog and start compiling those iconic interpretations of the big man hisself: here's a link to get you started:

 

http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&source=imghp&q=mohammed&gbv=2&aq=5&aqi=g10&aql=&oq=moha&gs_rfai=

 

I would expect in two or three weeks max you could be a vertitable beacon for free minds everywhere. Please let us know when you're done and don't forget those press releases (you can get free widespread P.R. distribution here - http://www.prlog.org).

 

Can't wait, I'm feeling freer already...

 

 

[Stonehead]

“Justice will not come to Athens until those who are not injured are as indignant as those who are injured.”

--Thucydides

 

I was reading last night about Saint-Just and Robespierre and their deaths. They firmly believed in the ideals of the Enlightenment, yet their fervor to advance their revolution became their downfall. At some point, the propagation of Enlightenment ideals will cause the positive aspects to become negative.

 

Are we justified in believing that the world should adopt Enlightenment ideals against their cultural history? And this, at the point of the sword?

 

But right, we’re not the aggressor. Or are we?

 

I wouldn’t be so quick to judge this issue as simply as an offensive cartoon. It’s more like an onion….lots a layers to it. All I know is that the sayings of a long dead guy seem apt.

 

“War is a violent teacher.”--Thucydides

 

[Not a response to what you said, as much as a response in general to this thread]

[ivan]

This is no place for rational dialogue. Clearly the only response when someone threatens you over your depiction of the Prophet is to photoshop his head onto a beastforum pic of someone fucking a pig, then mail it to the Saudi, Pakistani and Iranian embassies with a copy of the Koran laser printed on thinly sliced prosciutto.

you missed yer calling...not sure what it shoulda been, but something...

[Fairweather]

I believe the principle is

 

"Hey, humorless, religious fundamentalists: Kiss my ass!"

 

a principle I wholeheartedly agree with.

 

[Fairweather]

JosephH = Cat Stevens? Converted whitey muuuslims are the absolute worst. With their fake accents 'n shit...

[prole]

 

The war on authoritarian religious fanatics begins at home.

 

Oklahoma enacts tough abortion laws requiring ultrasounds

 

(AFP) – 17 hours ago

 

CHICAGO — Oklahoma lawmakers overrode their governor's veto Tuesday to enact tough abortion laws that force women to undergo invasive ultrasounds and allow doctors to withhold test results showing fetal defects.

 

Even women who are victims of rape or incest will be required to listen to a detailed description of the fetus and view the ultrasound image prior to terminating a pregnancy.

 

They will also likely be required to undergo vaginal rather than abdominal ultrasounds as doctors are required to use the method that "would display the embryo or fetus more clearly."

 

The second bill shields doctors from "wrongful birth" malpractice lawsuits brought by parents who would have aborted a fetus had they been informed about its genetic or other defects.

 

The Center for Reproductive Rights filed a lawsuit Tuesday challenging the constitutionality of the ultrasound law, which it said "profoundly intrudes upon a patient's privacy."

 

A similar Oklahoma law was struck down last year.

 

"Politicians have no business making medical decisions," said Stephanie Toti, a staff attorney with the Center for Reproductive Rights.

 

"Another round in the courts won't change our strong constitutional claims against the law, it will only waste more of Oklahoma taxpayers' time and money."

 

Democratic Governor Brad Henry tried to block the bills last week, but the Republican-dominated Oklahoma legislature overwhelmingly overrode his veto with the help of Democrats.

 

Henry said that while he supports "reasonable" restrictions on abortions, the laws had serious constitutional flaws and represented an excessive intrusion of government into the private lives of its citizens.

 

"It is unconscionable to grant a physician legal protection to mislead or misinform a pregnant woman in an effort to impose his or her personal beliefs on his patient," the governor said in his veto message.

 

"State policymakers should never mandate that a citizen be forced to undergo any medical procedure against his or her will, especially when such a procedure could cause physical or mental trauma," he added.

 

Abortion foes hailed the veto overrides as a victory for the unborn.

 

"Ultrasound gives a mother a window to her womb," Mary Spaulding Balch, director of state legislation for the National Right to Life, said in a statement.

 

"It helps to prevent her from making a decision she may regret for the rest of her life and it empowers her with the most accurate information about her pregnancy so that she can make a truly informed 'choice.'"

 

In the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade case, the Supreme Court ruled that states could not prohibit access to abortions prior to fetal viability -- which is generally seen to be somewhere around 24 weeks -- or when the pregnancy threatens the woman's health.

 

However, the court has upheld a number of state laws that essentially restrict access such as requiring parental notification when minors seek abortion or imposing strict and costly regulations on providers.

[billcoe]

JosephH = Cat Stevens?

Not hardly. This is one of those "momma always said it takes 2 to tango" things.

 

 

....Cat Stevens? Converted whitey muuuslims are the absolute worst. With their fake accents 'n shit...

 

Most under reported story of the decade: former Cat had made the mistake of criticizing the Saudi government and in response the Wahhabi Muftis had pronounced a Fatwa on his ass for chanting religious verse's. Youssuf Islam (former Cat) avoided the Saudi country for some time. All that talk of swinging a dead Cat would have been right at home here as the Muftis and the Saudi religious police would have rammed the Peace Train up his converted ass san's lube. But they made up and moved on, which is a damned good thing, as he's since come out with some very UN-Islamic songs that would have upped the Fatwa anti.

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

This is no place for rational dialogue. Clearly the only response when someone threatens you over your depiction of the Prophet is to photoshop his head onto a beastforum pic of someone fucking a pig, then mail it to the Saudi, Pakistani and Iranian embassies with a copy of the Koran laser printed on thinly sliced prosciutto.

you missed yer calling...not sure what it shoulda been, but something...

 

That's got performance artist written all over it.

[tvashtarkatena]

The only way to deal with a bully is to call his bluff. That's precisely why our artists SHOULD expose these totalitarian fuckers for what they really are.

 

From a historical standpoint, the prohibition regarding the depiction of Mojo has nothing to do with the Koran or Islam. It's a completely man-made construct designed for crowd control through intimidation, and it begs for a punch in the fucking face as often and possible.

 

This issue is about people who choose to be assholes under the guise of a religion they reinvented, not beliefs. It's not about respect, it's about exposing the usurpation and corruption of a religion for political gain. We should not respect such beliefs: we should deplore them.

 

 

[JosephH]

I believe the principle is

 

"Hey, humorless, religious fundamentalists: Kiss my ass!"

 

a principle I wholeheartedly agree with.

 

It's always interesting when effectiveness and ignorance are confused, though admittedly the latter sometimes does have the appearance of the former. It's also rather amusing with otherwise educated folks can't distinguish between them due to "principle". Such lack of subtlety usually makes for fine orthodoxies and fundamentalists, but then of course you become no different then what you rail against.

[tvashtarkatena]

I believe the principle is

 

"Hey, humorless, religious fundamentalists: Kiss my ass!"

 

a principle I wholeheartedly agree with.

 

It's always interesting when effectiveness and ignorance are confused, though admittedly the latter sometimes does have the appearance of the former. It's also rather amusing with otherwise educated folks can't distinguish between them due to "principle". Such lack of subtlety usually makes for fine orthodoxies and fundamentalists, but then of course you become no different then what you rail against.

 

A lack of subtly makes you no different than what your rail against? What kind of absolute, meaningless bullshit are you trying to foist on us this time?

 

A lack of subtly gets the message out successfully. Artists have done a remarkable and very effective job (um...we're talking about it on an obscure climbing forum, duh) of exposing the religious tyranny of a minority of Muslims for what it is. It's a job politicians are often too hamstringed to do, but it needs to be done, nonetheless. Your conflation of the two sides (they're both fundamentalists, right?) is a tired, tired, rhetorical trick, and one that is much overused by the far Right. Fortunately, there probably isn't a poster here who's dumb enough to buy it. There's a slight difference between a cartoonist willing to remove the religious cloak from usurpation, corruption, and tyranny and the death-threat-issuing tyrants themselves.

GET

FUCKING

REAL,

and stop insulting our intelligence with this kind of crap. I know you hate losing an argument (you may not even believe such an eventuality is even possible), but your desperation here is, frankly, embarrassing. You can do better than that.

 

Finally, which 'delicate flowers' are you protecting, Joseph? Do you even know?

Edited April 28, 2010 by tvashtarkatena

[tvashtarkatena]

Joseph's argument is the exact one used historically to persecute gays and any other group 'the majority' doesn't agree with. 'They asked for it. They knew they'd offend, and they did it anyway.' Or, in the case of rape 'with a skirt that short, the bitch deserved it.'

 

Well, freedom of expression without death threats is an ideal I think should be promoted regardless of the consequences. Lampooning a group who believes they have the right to kill because someone drew a picture of their bobbleheaded idol is something a citizen who truly believes in a free society should support.

 

A free society means eating it when someone else does something that is perfectly within their right to do and you choose to be offended. Offended by gays? OK, don't fuck one. Offended by hippies? Fine, get a job, insurance, and haircut. Offended by people who aren't extremist, tyrannical muslims? Tough shit. This is America. Get used to it, motherfucker.

Edited April 28, 2010 by tvashtarkatena

[billcoe]

It's always interesting when effectiveness and ignorance are confused, though admittedly the latter sometimes does have the appearance of the former. It's also rather amusing with otherwise educated folks can't distinguish between them due to "principle". Such lack of subtlety usually makes for fine orthodoxies and fundamentalists, but then of course you become no different then what you rail against.

A lack of subtly makes you no different than what your rail against? What kind of absolute, meaningless bullshit are you trying to foist on us this time?

 

A lack of subtly gets the message out successfully. Artists have done a remarkable and very effective job (um...we're talking about it on an obscure climbing forum, duh) of exposing the religious tyranny of a minority of Muslims for what it is. It's a job politicians are often too hamstringed to do, but it needs to be done, nonetheless. Your conflation of the two sides (they're both fundamentalists, right?) is a tired, tired, rhetorical trick, and one that is much overused by the far Right. Fortunately, there probably isn't a poster here who's dumb enough to buy it. There's a slight difference between a cartoonist willing to remove the religious cloak from usurpation, corruption, and tyranny and the death-threat-issuing tyrants themselves.

GET

FUCKING

REAL,

and stop insulting our intelligence with this kind of crap. I know you hate losing an argument (you may not even believe such an eventuality is even possible), but your desperation here is, frankly, embarrassing. You can do better than that.

 

Finally, which 'delicate flowers' are you protecting, Joseph? Do you even know?

You go girl, he's probably a closet Bush voting right winger utilizing these tired regressive rhetorical tricks. Is it time to bring out the "he's a Nazi" argument, salute the flag and march off into the distance as a group still burning our torches?

[tvashtarkatena]

See what I mean? I have to tolerate morons with one loose fastener barely holding their works together, but do I go issuing death threats?

 

Hah!

[archenemy]

Fortunately, there probably isn't a poster here who's dumb enough to buy it.

Debatable.

[billcoe]

do I go issuing death threats?

Hah!

Hey, I already apologized for that Pat! This thread is warming up.....I'll be over here watching.

 

[JosephH]

No, you confuse effectiveness with ignorance although I will say there are always those that appreciate a good martyr and like to cheer them on from the sidelines. Got that website up yet?

[archenemy]

 

Well, freedom of expression without death threats is an ideal I think should be promoted regardless of the consequences. Lampooning a group who believes they have the right to kill because someone drew a picture of their bobbleheaded idol is something a citizen who truly believes in a free society should support.

 

A free society means eating it when someone else does something that is perfectly within their right to do and you choose to be offended. Offended by gays? OK, don't fuck one. Offended by hippies? Fine, get a job, insurance, and haircut. Offended by people who aren't extremist, tyrannical muslims? Tough shit. This is America. Get used to it, motherfucker.

100% on the mark.

[tvashtarkatena]

No, you confuse effectiveness with ignorance although I will say there are always those that appreciate a good martyr and like to cheer them on from the sidelines. Got that website up yet?

 

Ignorance? An intellectual blind spot prevents you from getting the cartoonist's point and you're calling us ignorant?

 

Hah!

 

As for the website, I'm

just

a

little

busy

with some other advocacy issues right now. Thanks for the suggestion, though. I'll give it all the consideration it deserves.

[tvashtarkatena]

Everybody has a right to be offended. Everybody has a right to voice that offense. But death threats? No. If you choose to be on the side of that shit, I'm sorry, but fuck you. That shit doesn't wash here, and it shouldn't wash anywhere else, either.