So which picture is more offensive.
Discuss issues that have a social and cultural impact, including but not limited to issues such as racism, teenage pregnancies, the social impact of religion, and the state of the education system.
| Announcements | Posted on | |
|---|---|---|
-
- Reputation:
- Adored and Respected Member
- Posts: 412
Re: So which picture is more offensive.What do you think the differences would be?(Original post by prog2djent)
Lets say I posted each picture on its own, 10 people viewed, I personally think that I would get an different number of like and dislikes from the same 10 people.
That's all. -
- Reputation:
- TSR Demigod
- Location: *Mount Olympus*
- Posts: 7,081
Re: So which picture is more offensive.The only difference is the religion perspective of what happened (as far as I can notice.)
So of course if those 10 people consisted of Christians and Muslims then there would be conflicting beliefs.
Duh. -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Location: Leeds
Re: So which picture is more offensive.Are they not exactly the same, with only the religion being changed?
Since both religions generally reject evolution wouldn't that deem the pictures as equally offensive?
Depending on the perspective of the viewer obviously you'll get different amounts of rep...Last edited by Uzzy?; 17-06-2012 at 23:14. -
- Reputation:
- Benevolent Member
- Location: Cambridge
- Posts: 833
Re: So which picture is more offensive.The second one, but only because the image has nothing to do with Islam. I imagine there are plenty of Muslims who reject evolution. Both are definitely offensive though, since neither Islam nor Christianity require a rejection of science.
-
- Reputation:
- TSR Demigod
- Location: your mum | Posts: 109,543
Re: So which picture is more offensive.neither are offensive other than the fact you can be xtian/muslim and believe in evolution
also the pic is nothing to do with islam it's from a xtian holy place and muslims can't draw god anyway so if it were muslim it would be offensive to them unless they didn't care.Last edited by Bellissima; 17-06-2012 at 23:25. -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Location: Canada | Posts: ∞
Re: So which picture is more offensive.Why is the second one blasphemous to muslims? It represents that God created humans. Is that not what muslims believe?(Original post by noisy06)
The second one is the just incorrect and blasphemous to Muslims. -
- Reputation:
- Banned
- Warning points: 1000
Re: So which picture is more offensive.No, it's about your inability to understand that in Islam, drawing or attempting to draw God is blasphemous. So the caption "this is what Muslims think happened", is full of BS. Why don't you try to use another picture to make your point, because that was crap.(Original post by prog2djent)
For those that are confused, this isn't about differences or semantics over their idea of human creation, this is about double standards. -
- Reputation:
- Banned
- Warning points: 1000
Re: So which picture is more offensive.Because there is nothing more blasphemous than drawing something and making that drawn object the portrayal of God. In fact, the drawing is giving the impression that God is human-like, that idea in itself is blasphemous, let alone the actual drawing, which is beyond the pale.(Original post by .eXe)
Why is the second one blasphemous to muslims? It represents that God created humans. Is that not what muslims believe? -
- Reputation:
- Banned
- Location: Gloucester
- Posts: 1,220
Re: So which picture is more offensive.But if cattle and horses or lions had hands, or were able to draw with their hands and do the work that men can do, horses would draw the forms of the gods like horses, and cattle like cattle, and they would make their bodies such as they each had themselves.
-
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Location: Canada | Posts: ∞
Re: So which picture is more offensive.Hmm okay, but since no one knows what God looks like, what is so blasphemous about a representation of God?(Original post by noisy06)
Because there is nothing more blasphemous than drawing something and making that drawn object the portrayal of God. In fact, the drawing is giving the impression that God is human-like, that idea in itself is blasphemous, let alone the actual drawing, which is beyond the pale.
I know that Islam is against idol worship so I thought perhaps that might be the issue. However, we aren't worshipping the picture. It's just a representation.
Show me why it incites so much anger in you and other muslims.
Here is the thing which really annoys me about your argument.
In the above quoted post you said: "the drawing is giving the impression that God is human-like"
And that was your reason why it shouldn't be drawn.
Fine.
What about Mohammad. He WAS human.
Why is drawing him forbidden?
Double standards much? Or is Mohammad God? -
- Reputation:
- Exalted and Worshipped Member
- Location: Scotland
- Posts: 1,250
Re: So which picture is more offensive.What about the Muslims that accept common decent?(Original post by prog2djent)
Lets say I posted each picture on its own, 10 people viewed, I personally think that I would get an different number of like and dislikes from the same 10 people.
That's all.
