Muhammed on South Park

[neves]

The South Park Studios website disclaimer:

©2010 South Park Digital Studios LLC. All Rights Reserved.
SOUTH PARK ©2010 Comedy Partners. All Rights Reserved. Comedy Central, South Park and all related titles, logos and characters are trademarks of Comedy Partners.





In other words, Matt and Trey didn't take down the episode. Comedy Central did.

you say freedom fries... I say french fries...

 

[Commoner]

something wrong with that kind of "thinking"? i believe you are being nice cos it is not thinking at all. that's not how we live or experience religion. we do ask questions. we have to. majority would assume faith is blind. i think not. while you still have your intellect, following something else blindly is not even humane. intellect is a tool for us and it has to be used. there are somethings beyond my intellect, for sure. there i would hold on to my faith. but what we are talking about is not really beyond human mind

.

Can you give me an example of something one would need faith (or more specifically, scripture) for?

 

[*Anne*]

Arsalan Iftikhar's opinion on the South Park incident


"To generate some press coverage and needless dispute, two extremist buffoons at a radical website called "Revolution Muslim" directed a thinly veiled threat against the show's creators for depicting Mohammed in the recent episode. Much of the American mainstream media ended up giving a national platform to these unknown knuckleheads, which only helped to tarnish the reputation of Muslims in America further.

Sadly, it seems to be far sexier for the media to report the message of two extremists rather than the tempered and tolerant message of the majority of millions of American Muslims.

This is also important because actual Islamophobia -- and other forms of bigotry and racism -- badly needs to be combated by our society. That fight certainly does not revolve around a bunch of Comedy Central cartoon characters named Eric Cartman or Mr. Hanky."


And...

"As an American Muslim civil rights lawyer and proud First Amendment freak, I can honestly say that I love both my Prophet Mohammed and "South Park." In any free democratic society, the concept of free speech can only be combated with more free speech, not censorship. If the creators of "South Park" choose to depict the Prophet Mohammed, that is their First Amendment right, and they should be able to do so freely without any threats of physical violence and retribution.

I also believe that Comedy Central probably went too far when it censored the following episode -- 201 -- especially since the show had run a depiction of the Prophet Mohammed in season five."

 

[Sunstone]

I dont believe they all believe the same things, and I am only concerned with the ones that do.

Good to know.

 

[Sunstone]

some Muslims believe they are at war with "the West".

And some Westerners believe they are at war with Islam. There is a name for such Westerners. "Idiots".

 

[Darkness]

Qur'an is a holy book. human ego is the idol

.

The Qur'an is a work of man. It is one man's interpretation of God, which is riddled with inconsistancies, as expected from a falable work. I do not know why the faithful need to believe in an inerrant work from God. Maybe it is a desire to grasp the absolute that gives comfort. Perhaps it is the same line of thought that Russians have which leads them to choose strong leader who brings stability. A world where there are absolutes is a lot easier than one in which you must create your own purpose.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

Revolution Muslim has one of the most poorly constructed website layouts I've ever experienced.

 

[Kerr]

i am unsure if Nazis are good example here. if it really is, then who's in the place of Nazis? Iraqis or American? besides, entire Europe did fight against them because they suffered from them. seems Ira did not offer suffering to Western enough

.

Not the entire Europe. My own country even made a deal with them to remain... neutral. Of course, the "neutral" part involved allowing their troops to move through our country . There where also others who took the side of the Nazis. It was later that people started to turn against Hitler. At last that is what I learned, don´t know how true it really is, so if someone can correct me if I am wrong I would be grateful. Anyway, can´t say I don´t understand them, when faced with an enemy you don´t believe you can beat it is easy to try and take their side to survive, I just wish more people would have stood up to them instead.

Today... I would personally not compare them. The Nazis where a lot worse then any of the parts involved in the current conflict. But they are a proof of one thing. It does not matter what religion you are of, there will always be someone somewhere that will come up with a reason to kill you. Even if you are of the same religion. It is one of the darker aspects of humanity I guess, an aspect I for one cannot say I am a fan of.

 

[jmvizanko]

And some Westerners believe they are at war with Islam. There is a name for such Westerners. "Idiots".

What exactly do you mean by war with Islam? Do you mean mindless patriotic "towel head" hating jarheads who want all Muslims killed? No argument here that they are idiots, and are just as much a problem as the terrorist extremists. (The irony and hypocrisy of which they cannot see is only proof of how stupid they are.)

However, I am at war with Islam in the sense that I am opposed, and find worth fighting with dialogue and debate, any ideology that has a harmful effect on scietific progress, education, and flat out acceptance, as well as tries to oppress the freedom of people who do not share its beliefs. Does that make me an "idiot?" Once again, not all Muslims, and Christians for that matter, fall under the category of believers that cause these problems because of their faith, but that doesn't stop the religions themselves from containing aspects that necessarily lead to these problems.

 

[Caladan]

Arsalan Iftikhar's opinion on the South Park incident


"To generate some press coverage and needless dispute, two extremist buffoons at a radical website called "Revolution Muslim" directed a thinly veiled threat against the show's creators for depicting Mohammed in the recent episode. Much of the American mainstream media ended up giving a national platform to these unknown knuckleheads, which only helped to tarnish the reputation of Muslims in America further.

I dont really feel comfortable about Iftikhar's way to downplay the significance of threats on freedom of expression in the west. we need to remember that when Dutch film maker, Theo van Gogh was murdered, it was also by a buffoon who was unknown to anyone at the time. the fact that the people from 'Revolution Muslim' made tha linkage to van Gogh and posted the address of South Park creators is enough to warrant an attention. personally I find it a serious issue when Europeans or Americans cannot resume to do what Europeans and Americans have always done, satire, political criticism, and social criticism in general.

 

[*Anne*]

However, I am at war with Islam in the sense that I am opposed, and find worth fighting with dialogue and debate, any ideology that has a harmful effect on scietific progress, education, and flat out acceptance, as well as tries to oppress the freedom of people who do not share its beliefs.

Perhaps "at war with Islam" isn't an accurate phrase then. Maybe "at war with violent extremists" would be better. That seems to narrow things down.

 

[jmvizanko]

Perhaps "at war with Islam" isn't an accurate phrase then.

If by war you go with the "an active struggle between competing entities" definition, then I'd say its still accurate. I obviously am not in the "we should nuke them all" crowd is what I am trying to drive home. My conflict is with their ideology, not them as people.

 

[Commoner]

If by war you go with the "an active struggle between competing entities" definition, ...

Yeah, because people always jump to "active struggle between competing entities" when someone mentions war.

 

[jmvizanko]

Well I think I obviously understood what was implied originally by "war with Islam," so I guess I'm just being difficult...

 

[*Anne*]

I dont really feel comfortable about Iftikhar's way to downplay the significance of threats on freedom of expression in the west. we need to remember that when Dutch film maker, Theo van Gogh was murdered, it was also by a buffoon who was unknown to anyone at the time. the fact that the people from 'Revolution Muslim' made tha linkage to van Gogh and posted the address of South Park creators is enough to warrant an attention.

I agree that the incident was worth protest. I think we should be careful how we protest though.

*thinks*

For example, going after RM.com specifically in some way might be good. Pushing Comedy Central to not give in anymore would be ideal.

"Draw Muhammad Day" likely won't help things. As much as I appreciate this kind of rebellion, the action doesn't seem to target RM.com specifically nor put pressure on Comedy Central. It will, however, make light of offending Muslims in general.

(You just know some of those drawings are going to be horrible.)

I don't know...I'm thinking out loud here. I can understand Iftikhar's concern about how this affects all Muslims and our perception of them.

 

[monta]

Frankly I think the whole thing is dumb as a box of frogs, if someone asks you not to mention pluots to them because they find it upsetting and you keep going on about pluots you are a jerk, on the other hand if everytime you meet someone you say to them, now remember don't mention pluots, you are a dumb ***.

Afaik the reasons you are not allowed portray Mohammed is that it will encourage veneration or that in general it is sinful to portray humans, I could be wrong, but why there is such a hullaballoo about it when it is non Muslims doing the sinning, is beyond me, however it obviously is upsetting to people so why do it?

There are people who want to turn it into a ******* contest and I for one would like them to **** of and **** on each others shoes and leave the rest of us out of it.

BTW I have seen documentaries portraying Mohammed that were far more likely to lead to his veneration and I have never heard of a protest about them.

 

[Caladan]

I agree that the incident was worth protest. I think we should be careful how we protest though.

*thinks*

For example, going after RM.com specifically in some way might be good. Pushing Comedy Central to not give in anymore would be ideal.

"Draw Muhammad Day" likely won't help things. As much as I appreciate this kind of rebellion, the action doesn't seem to target RM.com specifically nor put pressure on Comedy Central. It will, however, make light of offending Muslims in general.

(You just know some of those drawings are going to be horrible.)

I don't know...I'm thinking out loud here. I can understand Iftikhar's concern about how this affects all Muslims and our perception of them.

I understand what you're saying Anne. my main concern is that the platform for social and political criticism and analysys in developed nations is targeted. its going to the basics as far as im concerned. just like I feel criticism of political and religious elements in my nation should always be active, I do not want to see the criticism methods in other nations being countered with unsophisticated violence, and the very idea that religious and social themes are beyond human criticism is troubling. the themes which are on the criticism lens are criticised for the simple reason that they are questionable! the fact that the criticism is met with violence only empowers the cartoons, the films, the articles, the activists and proves the points they are making. I'm not at ease with the fact that Europeans, or Americans need to accommodate the oversensitivity of certain communities. there are many relevant issues being debated in the west which are involved with religion, issues such as GLBT rights. the fact that critics need to go back to square one and are now threatened for touching sacred cows needs to be resolved, in the west, critics have worked hard to be able to analyze social, religious and political issues, it should not be easily downplayed by violence from groups who do not wish to meet the standards of criticism in the developed world, and the methods to tackle political issues.

 

[Caladan]

Afaik the reasons you are not allowed portray Mohammed is that it will encourage veneration or that in general it is sinful to portray humans, I could be wrong, but why there is such a hullaballoo about it when it is non Muslims doing the sinning, is beyond me, however it obviously is upsetting to people so why do it?

I think this isnt the issue. the artists, film directors, activists and politicians are not busy with inane ridicule. many of these people criticize Christian issues, and political issues in their own nation by routine, the elements who are criticized simply deal with the fact that its a normative and regular phenomenon in our nations. we criticize social issues which are on the debate table and are part of domestic and foreign affairs. its a reality, we cant set the clock back.

 

[monta]

I think this isnt the issue. the artists, film directors, activists and politicians are not busy with inane ridicule. many of these people criticize Christian issues, and political issues in their own nation by routine, the elements who are criticized simply deal with the fact that its a normative and regular phenomenon in our nations. we criticize social issues which are on the debate table and are part of domestic and foreign affairs. its a reality, we cant set the clock back.

We can't set the clock back, but the clock seems to be stuck. We need to move on and stop this ridiculous school yard tit for tat bickering about who has the biggest dad.

Basically, Islam got trolled, and we all know the only way to deal with trolls is to ignore them, however we also know that it is easier said then done.

 

[.lava]

Can you give me an example of something one would need faith (or more specifically, scripture) for?

i am sorry. i don't understand what you're asking me. any example from verses that we should follow word by word?

.