Is it blasphemous to lampoon a prophet?

[Redemptionsong]

The only fight that sets us free, is to fight the demons inside us: desire, anger, greed, delusion, pride and jealousy
And live a life according to virtues like: truth, righteousness, peace, love, and nonviolence

I agree, but the reality is not the breeze it appears. Non-violence is, in reality, an acceptance of self-sacrifice.

I was recently reading an account of Richard Wurmbrand's torture under the communists in Romania. Some of his Christian friends were 'turned' by unimaginable physical and psychological torture. They were then made to torture their own brothers, with promises of release.

It seems that our house must be built on solid rock for it to stand through the storms of life. In much of western society, where we are used to comfortable living, I wonder how well we will stand up to the reality of testing times.

 

[Wandering Monk]

Why is it when someone mock or being insensitive towards the Jews, we call it anti-Semitism, when someone mock or make fun of people of color, we call it racism, when someone mock the women, we call it sexism, and yet when someone mock or being insensitive towards the Muslims, we call it freedom of expression !!!!

No one deserves to have their head sawed off for being offensive.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Nobody, absolutely nobody has the right to terrorise and murder any body.

Now, do you want to stuff nasty stuff out there on the media about any religions at all?

Do you? Look at what has happened in recent weeks... Why? There are nutters following all kinds of politicals, religions, and so forth... why deliberately upset millions of decent Muslims, and spark off terrorist nutters?
Where I live this stuff is not lawful.

I also live in the UK. Do you not remember the Salman Rushdie affair? Did the publication of his novel 'The Satanic Verses' amount to the language of hate? Did he deserve to have a fatwa passed against him? A fatwa passed in Iran had immediate ramifications on the streets of London and elsewhere.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Matthew 12:31.'Wherefore, I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.'

This seems to indicate that God deals with his own enemies. He doesn't need men to take revenge on His behalf.

Maybe this is a message that Muslim imams should be preaching in the mosques?

It would be a start. I think frustration is brought into it, though, when God doesn't actually EVER do anything about blasphemers. They're there, all around the religious person, saying "bad" things all the time about their God/deity... and NOTHING happens. So then the religious person stops, thinks a moment, and decides that if THEY go about the business of teaching the blasphemers a lesson, then they are likely the "tool" that God is using to mete out His own punishment! "Yeah! Yeah, that's it!! I'll just be God's right hand in this, and punish the infidels!" And WHO can prove them wrong? Who can literally prove to them that God wasn't the one giving them these ideas and that they aren't doing "God's work" by attacking what they (and possibly THEY ALONE) consider "blasphemers?" There is no one. It is a completely unfalsifiable claim. This is dangerous stuff we're talking about here. Crazy people. People without an ounce of rationality left once they have crossed that line. They can do anything, and will do anything - and people may die.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Your example does not prove that your first quote is correct

My example proves that your first quote was not correct

I'm not claiming to prove, only to persuade! You can accept, or reject, the words of Jesus. That's the freedom of choice you enjoy.

 

[stvdv]

I agree, but the reality is not the breeze it appears. Non-violence is, in reality, an acceptance of self-sacrifice.

I was recently reading an account of Richard Wurmbrand's torture under the communists in Romania. Some of his Christian friends were 'turned' by unimaginable physical and psychological torture. They were then made to torture their own brothers, with promises of release.

It seems that our house must be built on solid rock for it to stand through the storms of life. In much of western society, where we are used to comfortable living, I wonder how well we will stand up to the reality of testing times.

Of course "non-violence" implies that no violence is done to you too. But I can understand that Saints move up into the Himalayas

 

[stvdv]

I'm not claiming to prove, only to persuade! You can accept, or reject, the words of Jesus. That's the freedom of choice you enjoy.

I understand above quote, and agree, but this had nothing to do with your below quote

And I replied to your below specific quote which is just not true; that is all I was saying. Brainwashing is mean and can happen even unnoticed

brainwashing can only occur where a person is not given the freedom to compare and contrast with other viewpoints.

 

[oldbadger]

It isn't a question of "why." Freedom of expression laws never ask "why would you want to do that?" Instead they say, "you can do that but not that other thing". And no one who isn't part of the group that makes/enforces the laws can do anything about it. If we now question behavior because we are afraid of triggering terrorists (akin to victim shaming -- why wear that and encourage people to rape you), then the terrorists have won, as we live our lives terrorized.

Your analogy won't win this one, I'm afraid.
Any action which causes deep upset amongst a minority group is harassment. It's just nasty.
If you think that it is France's deep duty to allow publications which upset minorities then I cannot support you on that.
It wouldn't be allowed where I live. I respect our equality laws more than France chanting about its freedoms.

 

[oldbadger]

I also live in the UK. Do you not remember the Salman Rushdie affair? Did the publication of his novel 'The Satanic Verses' amount to the language of hate? Did he deserve to have a fatwa passed against him? A fatwa passed in Iran had immediate ramifications on the streets of London and elsewhere.

Now..... since you obviously do remember Satanic Verses, can you remember exactly why a fatwa was passed? What exactly was written?
And do you remember the date of the publication?
Btw our Equality Act was passed in 2010.

 

[Redemptionsong]

It would be a start. I think frustration is brought into it, though, when God doesn't actually EVER do anything about blasphemers. They're there, all around the religious person, saying "bad" things all the time about their God/deity... and NOTHING happens. So then the religious person stops, thinks a moment, and decides that if THEY go about the business of teaching the blasphemers a lesson, then they are likely the "tool" that God is using to mete out His own punishment! "Yeah! Yeah, that's it!! I'll just be God's right hand in this, and punish the infidels!" And WHO can prove them wrong? Who can literally prove to them that God wasn't the one giving them these ideas and that they aren't doing "God's work" by attacking what they (and possibly THEY ALONE) consider "blasphemers?" There is no one. It is a completely unfalsifiable claim. This is dangerous stuff we're talking about here. Crazy people. People without an ounce of rationality left once they have crossed that line. They can do anything, and will do anything - and people may die.

I guess it's human nature to want immediate justice or revenge, but God has set a day when he will judge, and it hasn't come yet. But it is promised!

The one God I believe in is described by John as the Spirit of LOVE. No one can claim that a God of mercy and love wants another person dead.

Meanwhile, the state cannot act under grace, only under law. This is because they have to act for everyone, objectively. So whilst I can forgive, I must expect the state to administer justice.

There was an interesting case in Britain, not too many years ago. A vicar was burgled, and his daughter raped. The vicar, and his daughter, forgave the perpetrators of the crime. However, the court gave a very lenient sentence, and the vicar made it known that he believed the sentence was too lenient. Were these two standards at odds? I don't think so.

 

[rosends]

Any action which causes deep upset amongst a minority group is harassment. It's just nasty.

No, any action which causes deep upset causes deep upset. My students don't like when I assign homework. That causes them deep upset. It isn't harassment any more than when the school cafeteria serves meat and a vegetarian looks at it.

If you think that it is France's deep duty to allow publications which upset minorities then I cannot support you on that.

I have no opinion about what France's duty is. I can only speak to what France's current law is and who has the right to enforce that law in a way that the government condones. The moment we try to justify beheading in France, we are blaming the victim. Many minorities feel marginalized. How many resort to violence to deal with that feeling? Should they all be allowed to?

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

There was an interesting case in Britain, not too many years ago. A vicar was burgled, and his daughter raped. The vicar, and his daughter, forgave the perpetrators of the crime. However, the court gave a very lenient sentence, and the vicar made it known that he believed the sentence was too lenient. Were these two standards at odds? I don't think so.

I suppose the next step would be, however, to ask what the vicar would say/do if he learned of God's punishment of this man, and didn't agree with it, and found it too lenient. What would he do then?

 

[Stevicus]

Now..... since you obviously do remember Satanic Verses, can you remember exactly why a fatwa was passed? What exactly was written?
And do you remember the date of the publication?
Btw our Equality Act was passed in 2010.

The Satanic Verses controversy - Wikipedia

The Satanic Verses controversy, also known as the Rushdie Affair, was the heated reaction of Muslims to the publication of Salman Rushdie's novel The Satanic Verses, which was first published in the United Kingdom in 1988 and inspired in part by the life of Muhammad. Many Muslims accused Rushdie of blasphemy or unbelief and in 1989 the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini of Iran issued a fatwa ordering Muslims to kill Rushdie. Numerous killings, attempted killings, and bombings resulted in response to the novel.[1]

The Iranian government backed the fatwa against Rushdie until 1998, when the succeeding government of Iranian President Mohammad Khatami said it no longer supported the killing of Rushdie.[2] However, the fatwa remains in place.[3]

The issue was said to have divided "Muslims from Westerners along the fault line of culture,"[4][5] and to have pitted a core Western value of freedom of expression—that no one "should be killed, or face a serious threat of being killed, for what they say or write"[6]—against the view of many Muslims that no one should be free to "insult and malign Muslims" by disparaging the "honour of the Prophet".[7] English writer Hanif Kureishi called the fatwa "one of the most significant events in postwar literary history".[8]

 

[Muffled]

If you happen to live in a secular society, such as France, you may believe that secularism provides a framework for democracy where:
1. There is a separation of state and religion
2. There is freedom to practice one's faith (theist, agnostic or atheist), without harming others, and to change faith if one so wishes.
3. There is equal treatment of faiths and ideologies by the state, so long as a citizen acts within the law.

Does the lampooning and portrayal of Muhammad amount to blasphemy, and is this harmful to Islam/Muslims?

I believe blasphemy can only be agains God but that would include Jesus also but not Muhammad.

I believe there can be a lack of respect and some of that really untoward.

 

[Muffled]

I think the lampooning of religious icons or anything we tend to put on a pedestal for that matter is good for the soul.

I believe some are less than helpful. The joke about religious people on the golf course and the wrong one getting hit by lightning because God misssed is one of those. God always gets the person He is aiming for.

 

[Muffled]

There are many Muslim souls that clearly disagree!

I believe there are many Muslims wrong about many things.

 

[oldbadger]

No, any action which causes deep upset causes deep upset. My students don't like when I assign homework. That causes them deep upset. It isn't harassment any more than when the school cafeteria serves meat and a vegetarian looks at it.

Such poor analogies!
Here's a slightly better one!
Nasty kids laughing and heckling a loner, it goes on and on, and one day the loner turns and punches one of the kids. Shock Horror! Johnny is so violent! He dreadful, hurting innocent kiddies !
Try that one

I have no opinion about what France's duty is. I can only speak to what France's current law is and who has the right to enforce that law in a way that the government condones.

I can only speak to that as well, it's trashy.

The
momenty to justify beheading in France, we are blaming the victim. Many minorities feel marginalized. How many resort to violence to deal with that feeling? Should they all be allowed to?

Don't pretend I'm doing that.
I'm simply saying that France's idea of equality and anti harassment law is junk.

 

[oldbadger]

The Satanic Verses controversy - Wikipedia

Ha ha! Well done!
I was waiting for that..... It was annulled.
So let's face it, Shia Islam can think again.
I had forgotten that was 30+ years ago.
I don't much like France's rather Nationalist mindsets to be honest. It can stick it's prejudices ..... really.

 

[Father Heathen]

We debated all this a few weeks back.
Look what's happened since then.

By the way, which group has been persecuted lately?
I do believe that this whole business has been a wind up, to get a reaction, to 'justify' a very strong persecution.... of innocent Muslims.

If you agree with laughing at and poking fun at people until a very few nutcases among them go wrong, then I can't help you.

Freedom should always supercede cowardice and butthurt.

 

[Father Heathen]

@oldbadger Let's say that a lot of Mormon missionaries show up in the U.K. and as you might know Tea is forbidden by their beliefs. So if they were to start demanding that British citizens stop drinking it because they find it offensive, would you give up tea or defy their demands?