Actually Ninja, I think they made two really great points.

1. Their faith comes across as really weak by being threatened by a cartoon (which I've been saying for a long time).

2. The rule is that Muslims shouldn't draw Mohammad, just the same as Muslims shouldn't eat pork. They don't go around stopping others from eating pork, why stop others from violating other rules that only apply to Muslims?

But whatever, you seem so intent oh hating TYT I doubt this will make any difference to you.

You can always count on TYT to make an argument like a couple of retards. I find it ironic that these so called "ultra-liberals" are never able to actually look at a situation and analyze it like adults, they're just the left-wing version of their right-wing extremist equivalents (though that is definitely the preferable version).
At the very least be intelligent and honest enough to admit that the Muslims in question are honestly offended and rightly so, the whole point was to offend them. Am I saying they have any right to send death threats to anybody? or even go around campus erasing drawings? no. But when someone tries to make fun of someone else's beliefs you don't have to be a genius to expect someone will be offended. The fact they can't handle their being offended like adults is another problem and whether or not this whole draw Mohammad day is an admirable move or just some cheap shot at Muslims is again, unrelated. Bravo TYT, you are morons.

Draw Mohammad day lives! And how does a drawing infringe on your freedom of expression? You're welcome to make your own drawing, poem, speech,etc.From your comment I get the impression you only want people to say and express what you want to hear.>> ^Matthu:

Draw Muhammad day is dead. You're all a bunch of cowards.
h
ttp://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/04/creators-of-everybody-draw-muhammad-day-abandon-effort-after-it-becomes-controversial.html
Post some drawings of Muhammad on your facebook pages where actual muslims might see them if you want to draw attention to the infringements on our freedom of expression.

-------\@/---------------->
,_/--\@.
--------/ \-------------------->

----------------------->

In the spirit of peace and love between two religions here's Mohammad going down on Jesus as they fly through the sky.

   @@
\   |||     /
 \ (`.`) /
   ------
   (.)(.)
     ||
    /  \
   /    \
~       ~

The thing is... these people are simpletons. Plain and simple, they are dumb. That's what it all comes down to. They are completely UNABLE to fathom how if they have some particular faith in a particular creator or prophet that it SHOULD NOT MATTER what other people say about said creator or prophet. That they can get homicidally worked up over someone showing a picture of their precious Mohammad just speaks to their isane inability to be at peace with what they believe.

If the only way they can be at peace with what they believe is to kill all who apposes their view then it's a VERY, VERY weak personal belief.

I am happy for people to believe that there was a Jesus or an Allah (although I wish they'd actually look into it rather than take ONE fricken book's word on the matter)... but FUCK them sideways with a large, pointy and rusty pitchfork if they want to impose their view on me and other in a violent way... FUCK them repeatedly.

I was really just saying that someone always posts something along the lines of "Haha religion is poo" on all these videos. Admittedly I think that organised religion is, indeed, poo but because it matters to a lot of people I don't degrade it. Just like if my (imaginary) little sister cherished a rock I wouldn't harm it.

Re the last con: Yes, I would have said the same thing on a new age spiritualism video. I would have even said it on a scientology video because of the general term praying. But yeah, if you'd been saying "praying to Xenu" I probably wouldn't have called you on it because some religions are just bad news for everyone. Not all though - I think that's my basic defence.
>> ^chilaxe:

In reply to this comment by lampishthing:
I think that comment constitutes trolling on some level.>> ^chilaxe:
Is the prank that praying is make-believe?


I can honestly respect that sentiment. On the pro side, it could be right.

On the con side, the other above comments include an offensive racial stereotype, deliberate insensitivity to Muslims' ban on depictions of the prophet Mohammad, and the video itself might be highly offensive to some conservative Muslims.
I was religious when I was younger, and it did extract a cost on my life history, so I do make such comments based on my own experience, rather than as an outsider.
If this was a video of some new age spiritual ritual, I don't think my comment would be questioned, so I'm not sure what the difference is in the present circumstances.

That's my 2 cents on the pro and con, anyway

In reply to this comment by lampishthing:
I think that comment constitutes trolling on some level.>> ^chilaxe:

Is the prank that praying is make-believe?



I can honestly respect that sentiment. On the pro side, it could be right for a couple reasons.


On the con side, the other above comments include an offensive racial stereotype, deliberate insensitivity to Muslims' ban on depictions of the prophet Mohammad, and the video itself might be highly offensive to some conservative Muslims.

I was religious when I was younger, and it did extract a cost on my life history, so I do make such comments based on my own experience, rather than as an outsider.

If this was a video of some new age spiritual ritual, I don't think my comment would be questioned, so I'm not sure what the difference is in the present circumstances.


That's my 2 cents on the pro and con, anyway

>> ^xxovercastxx:
I get these results for "Mohammed is "
...a false prophet
...the antichrist
...a liar
...my hero lyrics
...his prophet
...the false prophet
...god
...satan
...a pig
...jesus deep dish
Thinking you're having a technical issue, BRM.
>> ^BicycleRepairMan:
>> ^entr0py:
Try typing in "Mohammed is" "Allah is" and see what comes up. If google wanted to censor the topic I doubt they'd do it in such a half-assed and ineffective way.

The same thing happens with variations on the name mohammad,mohammed,muhammad,muhammed (was/is...) nothing comes up.



MMMMmmmm..... now I'm starving for some Mohammed is Jesus Deep Dish Chicago style pizza.

good analysis...

here is a selection of statements he made and for which he is currently being prosecuted:

Fitna(film)
"The Islam wants to conquer, subjugate and destroy our civilization. In 1945 Nazism was conquered, in 1989 Communism, and now we most conquer the Islamic ideology"
The movie show images of a future Holland as a Islamic country. A postcard of The Netherlands which s only shows minarets, a violent decapitation and images of terrorist attacks.

Volkskrant, 08-08-2007
"The root of the problem is the fascistic Islam, the sick ideology of Allah en Mohammad demonstrated in the Islamatic Mein Kampf: The Qur'an. The texts of the Qur'an leave little to the imagination."
as sanderbos said, referring to Mein Kampf is a big no-go in Western Europe.

"Ban that book (the Qur'an). Just like Mein Kampf!”
It is still illegal to sell Mein Kampf in the Netherlands. You are allowed to own it and trade it but not to buy it however.

De Pers, 13-02-2007
"Enough is enough. Close the borders, no more Muslims for the Netherlands, export as many as possible. Take away the Dutch passport of Muslim criminals"

Volkskrant, 07-09-2006
"Close the borders for non-western immigrants'
“We have to stop the tsunami of Muslims. It is a matter that touches our heart.”

>> ^sanderbos:
Well rougy,
Dutch 'liberal' here, not a Wilders fan.
The court case is completely ridiculous, of course he should be able to say what he wants, especially since he is a politician and has to be able to express things even if they defy laws (since politicians define laws), and because he represents a large constituency of Dutch voters (8 percent in last election, could be up to 30% according to some polls).
However, this speech, man he or his (famous) lawyer seemed to have cobbled together all divine phrases of free speech and wrapped them together in a nice little presentation. Anybody can put together a speech like this ("wasn't it Voltaire who said 'as much as I despise your opinion, I will defend your ability to speak it'" is a staple of such speeches, and no it wasn't Voltaire).
You must understand that Wilders' other thoughts include a tax of say (pinky to mouth) a thousand dollars per hijab (islam head scarf) to fix the economic crisis.
The situation on free speech in the Netherlands is super unclear. Because we are such a liberal free country, nobody really bothered/ bothers to ensure those rights are also legally documented. So on some fronts the freedoms of speech are very limited if prosecution occurs (almost yearly people are put in prison over making pretty tame references to the queen, giving somebody the finger is technically an offense).
In this particular case, the Dutch DOJ first decided not to sue, then some hippy who can't deal with anybody not agreeing him (Rene Danen) forces the DOJ to reconsider, if you read the verdict of that case you can see it is all about Nazi Germany references, a big no-no in the Netherlands (Wilders compares the Quran to Mein Kampf, as in both books that cause people to do bad things).
Anyway, this is just part of the whole Wilders big clown extravanganza show that is going on for years now. He is just making outregeous claims and getting in trouble everywhere to drum up support (actually I am most impressed by the way he does these things, as he does really little press or other public things yet gets the press to talk about him constantly). I think it is unclear what will happen if he gets into power (which probably won't happen all too soon, in part because of him the Dutch political landscape is superfragmented now, any coalition created in the next four years will be crazy enough without him in it).

>> ^xxovercastxx:
I get these results for "Mohammed is "
...a false prophet
...the antichrist
...a liar
...my hero lyrics
...his prophet
...the false prophet
...god
...satan
...a pig
...jesus deep dish
Thinking you're having a technical issue, BRM.
>> ^BicycleRepairMan:
>> ^entr0py:
Try typing in "Mohammed is" "Allah is" and see what comes up. If google wanted to censor the topic I doubt they'd do it in such a half-assed and ineffective way.

The same thing happens with variations on the name mohammad,mohammed,muhammad,muhammed (was/is...) nothing comes up.



lol 'Jesus Deep Dish?' wtf does that mean?

I get these results for "Mohammed is "

...a false prophet
...the antichrist
...a liar
...my hero lyrics
...his prophet
...the false prophet
...god
...satan
...a pig
...jesus deep dish

Thinking you're having a technical issue, BRM.

>> ^BicycleRepairMan:
>> ^entr0py:
Try typing in "Mohammed is" "Allah is" and see what comes up. If google wanted to censor the topic I doubt they'd do it in such a half-assed and ineffective way.

The same thing happens with variations on the name mohammad,mohammed,muhammad,muhammed (was/is...) nothing comes up.

>> ^entr0py:
Try typing in "Mohammed is" "Allah is" and see what comes up. If google wanted to censor the topic I doubt they'd do it in such a half-assed and ineffective way.


The same thing happens with variations on the name mohammad,mohammed,muhammad,muhammed (was/is...) nothing comes up. (keep in mind that in addition to being the name of a certain prophet, this is the one of the worlds most common male names ) Jesus is/was by comparison gives several results. Sure , this could be a bug, but given how islam is related to so much controversy and impacts our news every day, it is absurd that it is conveniently missing like this, while much less popular and much less controversial non-news making religions are all included. I would think this one is deliberate on googles part

>> ^Jesus_Freak:
Anyone who was raised Catholic and can't answer "what was so special about Jesus" either wasn't listening or was horribly underserved in the teaching department.
What I did find refreshing from this clip (compared to the buh-zillion other atheism clips on the sift) was his willingness to live and let live in terms of other people's beliefs with minimal judgmentalism. I find "evangelical atheists" to be a bit ironic.


You find "evangelical atheist" ironic only because you are too much of an idiot to understand what evangelical really means. It means "to bring good news", hence the "Good News" ("gospel" in anglo-saxon, from "goodspell" NOT "godspell") of the coming of Jesus. Thus an "evangelical atheist" is the bringer of the good news of atheism. Pretty straightforward, eh?

What's really ironic, on the other hand, is exactly the content of the joke about the specialness of Jesus. We are all sons of God, says Jesus himself, yet the church would like us to believe Jesus was somehow special. Yes, Jesus says he is the the son of God but he also says we all are sons of God. Why is he special then? The answer: he's not and he never claimed to be. Only people who never really read (understood) the Bible, but only had it read (interpreted) to them instead can say that Jesus was special. Yes, that means the Trinity is bust and the reformists are "right" but all these theological debates are moot when you realize Jesus considered himself a simple, very much human, messenger and nothing more (much like the Mohammad of Islam). And of course, that we put so much energy on explaining fairy tales seems really ludicrous and somewhat sad when you realize there is no such thing as God.

Just a note, Mohammad was the only prophet in history to personally kill and wage wars in the name of his own religion! All other prophets can claim that their words were twisted and misused to wage wars, but Mohammad's followers can't.