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 | |
|---|---|---|
| TSR launches Learn Together! - Our new subscription to help improve your learning | 16-05-2013 | |
-
- Reputation:
- Banned
- Warning points: 1000
Re: So which picture is more offensive.Well first and foremost, the single most important reason why we don't draw any Prophets or God Himself is because God Himself said so. End of story. However, there are secondary/tertiary reasons, such as the fact that:(Original post by .eXe)
Hmm okay, but since no one knows what God looks like, what is so blasphemous about a representation of God?
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?
-We don't know how God looks like, which is why we can't draw him. Speculating about the Unseen is something that is off-limits in Islam.
-It can easily lead to idol worship. In fact even to this day there are people that claim to be Muslims, and yet worship pictures that they call God. There are people that worship Muhammad as well, without a drawing. Imagine what would happen with a drawing. -
- Reputation:
- Peer Of The TSR Realm
- Posts: 1,788
Re: So which picture is more offensive.hahaha...(Original post by kiss_me_now9)
The second one is just incorrect though isn't it?
Islam doesn't saying anything about adam and eve. -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Location: Canada | Posts: ∞
Re: So which picture is more offensive.Do you draw pictures? Of animals? people? trees? flowers?(Original post by noisy06)
~
Do you paint? Sketch?
Or is all that forbidden as well?
Also, that argument about "it can lead to idol worship" makes me chuckle.
Why are you preventing something on that basis that it "can" lead to something? As an analogy: it's as if your God decided...hey eating sugar can lead to diabetes. Let's just ban sugar.
Surely you can see how unnecessarily pre-emptive that is. Fine, if you want to follow your God's commandment as a muslim, go ahead.
But why do you prevent non-muslims from doing it?Last edited by .eXe; 17-06-2012 at 23:49. -
- Reputation:
- Banned
- Warning points: 1000
Re: So which picture is more offensive.This isn't sugar we're talking about though with all due respect. This is about eternal punishment or not. Even if one person is misguided because of a drawing, then that is pretty high stakes. And anyhow, the primary reason remains the same, it is forbidden because God said it is forbidden.(Original post by .eXe)
Do you draw pictures? Of animals? people? trees? flowers?
Do you paint? Sketch?
Or is all that forbidden as well?
Also, that argument about "it can lead to idol worship"
Why are you preventing something on that basis that it "can" lead to something? As an analogy: it's as if your God decided...hey eating sugar can lead to diabetes. Let's just ban sugar.
Come on that's absolutely ridiculous. -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Location: Canada | Posts: ∞
Re: So which picture is more offensive.Sorry I edited the initial post. I'll post the edit here.(Original post by noisy06)
This isn't sugar we're talking about though with all due respect. This is about eternal punishment or not. Even if one person is misguided because of a drawing, then that is pretty high stakes. And anyhow, the primary reason remains the same, it is forbidden because God said it is forbidden.
If you want to follow that law about not drawing God, go ahead.
But why do you force non-muslims from drawing him? We don't believe in Allah. We don't ascribe to his rules.
Why must be be forbidden from drawing whoever we want? -
- Reputation:
- Banned
- Warning points: 1000
Re: So which picture is more offensive.We don't have the legal privileges to ban Non-Muslims from doing it. We can however put societal pressure on individuals not to do it publicly, we have every right to do that. Just like racism is not tolerable due to societal pressure, or making fun of the holocaust is not acceptable publicly, so should drawing things that blasphemes against us.(Original post by .eXe)
But why do you prevent non-muslims from doing it? -
- Reputation:
- Banned
- Location: Behind the Sun
Re: So which picture is more offensive.Is that right.(Original post by Uzzy?)
Since both religions generally reject evolution wouldn't that deem the pictures as equally offensive? -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Location: Canada | Posts: ∞
Re: So which picture is more offensive.Well here's the thing...you can put societal pressure by rallying or marching in protest, etc.(Original post by noisy06)
We don't have the legal privileges to ban Non-Muslims from doing it. We can however put societal pressure on individuals not to do it publicly, we have every right to do that. Just like racism is not tolerable due to societal pressure, or making fun of the holocaust is not acceptable publicly, so should drawing things that blasphemes against us.
But you cannot do 2 things.
1) Deny us our freedom to do as we wish.
2) Kill us
It seems you people do not understand those two concepts.
Sure, protest against us for drawing your God/Prophet, but who gave you the right to take our life for it? -
- Reputation:
- Banned
- Warning points: 1000
Re: So which picture is more offensive.I said we have the right to societal pressure, like protesting, lobbying, divesting etc. Your number 1 doesn't make sense. As Muslims, we're not even allowed to kill such people. You have no idea what you're talking about, I assume you just want to take a few people with stupid boards that say "kill those who draw our Prophet" or something like that? If you think that's what Islam teaches, then may God help you and those people who wish to kill all together.(Original post by .eXe)
Well here's the thing...you can put societal pressure by rallying or marching in protest, etc.
But you cannot do 2 things.
1) Deny us our freedom to do as we wish.
2) Kill us
It seems you people do not understand those two concepts.
Sure, protest against us for drawing your God/Prophet, but who gave you the right to take our life for it? -
- Reputation:
- Benevolent Member
- Location: Glasgow
- Posts: 758
Re: So which picture is more offensive.How is either offensive?
They are completely true (apart from the picture for Islam not being representative of their beliefs) the pictures are merely suggesting that evolution is scientific fact and that each religion seems to argue that it isn't.
The point the pictures are trying to make is a valid one. -
- Reputation:
- Peer Of The TSR Realm
- Posts: 1,468
Re: So which picture is more offensive.The first one's also incorrect... there's a fundamental difference between christianity and creationism. Most modern-day Christians agree that evolution is valid.(Original post by kiss_me_now9)
The second one is just incorrect though isn't it?
Personally, as a Christian, I find the first one offensive because of the stupid misconception that a belief in God automatically means rejection of science, and a belief in a 6-day creation. It does nothing but hinder (and trivialise) the age-old debate about whether or not there is a god.
This is also a massive flaw in Richard Dawkins' argument, incidentally. Moreover, the majority of atheists argue the same thing. What their arguments boil down to, pretty much, is that evolution happened, and that there wasn't a 6-day creation. This, and presumptuous arguments that lead them to the black-and-white conclusion that there isn't a god (but I digress). But, in terms of the scientific evolution / creation argument, the creationists out there should certainly pay attention to what scientists says regarding that (except for Andy McIntosh...) but the majority of christians are well aware of the scientific facts already. It's the 21st century, people, not the middle ages. Even Christians aren't moronic enough to take the Old Testament literally.
/rant.Last edited by mc1000; 18-06-2012 at 00:24. -
- Reputation:
- Full Member
Re: So which picture is more offensive.The people who are trying to 'kill' you aren't following the religion right, seeing as killing is forbidden.(Original post by .eXe)
Well here's the thing...you can put societal pressure by rallying or marching in protest, etc.
But you cannot do 2 things.
1) Deny us our freedom to do as we wish.
2) Kill us
It seems you people do not understand those two concepts.
Sure, protest against us for drawing your God/Prophet, but who gave you the right to take our life for it?
the thing that confuses me is that I'd you're not Muslim, not Christian, then why bother yourself by 'depicting' something uou don't believe in i.e God? Or Prophet Muhammed PBUH? Why? To get a reaction? When it is common knowledge that it will offend a large group of people? -
- Reputation:
- Thread Starter
- Banned
- Location: Huddersfield
- Posts: 3,209
Re: So which picture is more offensive.Certainly more so than Christians.(Original post by xBillyBrownx)
Omg you're so right the Muslims would be more offended cause all Muslims are super sensitive and crazy. Well done.
Pretty much anything painting Islam in negative light is met with physical violence, oppression and silencing by the muslim world/islamic nations.
Care for me to reel of tens of examples? -
- Reputation:
- Peer Of The TSR Realm
- Posts: 1,788
Re: So which picture is more offensive.that's not jesus though.,(Original post by Harolinho)
Why's jesus in a picture that's meant to depict islamic creation?
Get a picture of Mohammad there and then it's more offensive. -
- Reputation:
- TSR Legend
- Location: Barnsley, South Yorkshire
- Posts: 14,432
Re: So which picture is more offensive.That's not Jesus(Original post by Harolinho)
Why's jesus in a picture that's meant to depict islamic creation?
Get a picture of Mohammad there and then it's more offensive.
That's the extremely famous "Creation of Adam" painting on the Sistine chapel ceiling by Michelangelo.
Course, you're right, it has nothing to do with Islam, but really I can't believe you thought it was Jesus.
What on earth do they teach you younguns these days? -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Location: Canada | Posts: ∞
Re: So which picture is more offensive.The "why" doesn't matter though...part of having freedom is to not have to justify it.(Original post by LittleLily)
The people who are trying to 'kill' you aren't following the religion right, seeing as killing is forbidden.
the thing that confuses me is that I'd you're not Muslim, not Christian, then why bother yourself by 'depicting' something uou don't believe in i.e God? Or Prophet Muhammed PBUH? Why? To get a reaction? When it is common knowledge that it will offend a large group of people?
If I have to justify everything I do, then it's not really freedom because I am essentially seeking permission every time.
Also, no one has provided yet a reasonable answer to "Why are non-muslims forbidden from drawing allah/Mo?"
Surely, allah's rules are meant for muslims...not all of mankind?
I mean I am a Christian and I am not supposed to lie. But do you see me out there stopping ever single person in the world from lying?
Why do you guys try to stop every single person from doing something that YOU aren't supposed to do.
