What is a drawing of Muhammad?

[The Architect Of Fate]

Whatever offends them.

Umm no it's actually pretty specific. It's depictions made for the purpose of mockery or disrespect as there have been depictions supposedly of him 

Be careful not to take a photo of toast, that might not be Mary but M

I doubt that and Christian are the last group to whine about getting offended you guys will get pissy about stupidest shit that supposedly disrespects your religion

[Leonardo17]

Akhenaten was, more accurately, a henotheist.  His desire to replace the egyptian pantheon at the state level with his favored deity from that pantheon being at odds with their acceptance of other cultures deities even if akhenatens reforms held - which they didn't.  That atenism (or abrahamism for that matter) is seen as "monotheistic" today boils down to a present cultural need to assert as much, but not the reality of the historic circumstances.  Ultimately, it's the theistic gods themselves, and not any particular number of them, which cause the issue.  All of them share in those two fundamental attributes of theistic gods and so all instantiate the issues of conceiving of divinity in that particular way.  You could pick any one of them..and we have...and you will see all of the same problems, which we have.  All we do when we posit a single deity is add totalitarianism to the list of defects.

 Akhenaten lived in 1350 BC. So our knowledge is still limited. But we know enough about him to affirm that he was an extraordinary person in many ways. For instance all the pharaoh’s before him we portrayed a God-like, young with V-shaped bodies. He is being portrayed as weak, sickly and even fat. He and his family look almost like creatures in some representations.

 





For comparision: Mycerinus and his Queen (Dynasty 4):




 
He was also tyrannical and overtly insane. He used to do things like making foreign ambassadors wait for hours under the Egyptian sun so that they would be blessed by the rays of Aten, the only God.
 
Egyptian wanted to erase all that’s left of him (including his son tut-Ankh –Amun) as quickly as possible because nobody really liked his completely extreme ideology.
 
I only mentioned him because the idea is good. It parallels the Hindu tradition that I understand as one universal energy, with many different types of more “specific” energies, going as far as each village and/or clan having their own deities on a more micro level.
 
Hittites on the other hand were henotheists. They were known as the people with a thousand deities. They simply assimilated all the Gods whenever they conquered a foreign land. (and I don't know of any other civilization who did that, at least not at that scale)

[Istvan]

This matter really has to be seen in the context of the changing demographic face of the Old White West. The right wing in Europe has a vested interest in making immigrants feel as unwelcome as possible, so they propose laws like niqab bans and regulations that close down halal butcher shops. In addition, old secularization laws from the 60s (originally intended to limit the influence of the Catholic Church) get dusted off and used against Muslims.

And yeah, free speech has become a right wing dog whistle that makes baiting Muslims with racist Charlie Hebdo cartoons seem noble and blameless. Hey, draw caricatures of Mohammed all day long if you want, but just know who you're in cahoots with when you're doodling.

[Tonus]

And yeah, free speech has become a right wing dog whistle that makes baiting Muslims with racist Charlie Hebdo cartoons seem noble and blameless. Hey, draw caricatures of Mohammed all day long if you want, but just know who you're in cahoots with when you're doodling.

By all means, criticize those who create those caricatures and call them out, if you wish. They shouldn't be protected from criticism.

They also shouldn't be murdered for doing it.

[Istvan]

By all means, criticize those who create those caricatures and call them out, if you wish.

Okay. It's obvious the only reason they do it in the first place is to antagonize Muslims and make them feel as unwelcome as possible in Western society. Nice white folks are used to a social order where they get to display contempt for the Other and disrespect for their traditions with complete impunity.

And if any consequences for this immature behavior ensue, the nice white folks can use it to validate their contempt for these irrational, violent immigrants and further erase any distinction they still make (if any) between terrorists and immigrants. It's a win-win!

They also shouldn't be murdered for doing it.

Agreed.

[Tonus]

It's obvious the only reason they do it in the first place is to antagonize Muslims and make them feel as unwelcome as possible in Western society.

This is where that criticism comes in. Perfectly reasonable to react to them by expressing disapproval and disdain.

And if any consequences for this immature behavior ensue

If the consequences are criticism and disdain, I think everything's fine. They do something offensive and childish, they get called out.

If the consequences are assault and murder, doesn't that validate the fear and contempt felt for those irrational and violent immigrants? The reasonable response to an insulting cartoon might be harsh language and criticism. The irrational and violent response is physical assault and attempts to kill those who drew a cartoon.

[Leonardo17]

I think that the real issue here is this. The history of the Middle East is a history of clashing empire who are endlessly struggling for domination. I was still a prosperous region despite everything at least at least until the beginning of the Ottoman rule. But we have a lot of social memory on how this last one worked: There were endless palace conspiracies, people (especially the Turks) being oppressed for revolting even in the face of hunger and famine. In fact the only ones doing well where Jewish and Christian minorities who were allowed to develop small industries and trading companies (If you visit the Aegean parts of Turkey today you will be able how small Greek villages from the 19th century have developed such a level of wealth and cultural sophistication).

 

   So what about Muslims?

- They lived under very strict rules. Where called for military service whenever it was necessary. They payed very heavy taxes. They were ignorant (the empire didn’t invest in any type of public service for them). They were simply exploited to the bone by this (now) decadent and oppressive feudal order.

 

And in the other half of the Muslim world (mainly Ancient Iran / Persian Empire) things were not that different either.

 

   The problem of Europeans is that they think they are seeing “The East” when they see a woman with four children dressed like Zorro with her husband (looking completely Western) walking at least 5 paces in front of her. Many Europeans today understand that it’s not as simple as that. The proof is that the kids of that Zorro-like lady will usually (at least 3 in 4) embrace western-European values while keeping the true values of their society of origin in the Middle-east.

 

   To put more frankly: This isn’t East versus West. It’s about all those feudal values that are dying and are going to die no matter what we do and the pain that is being generated is simply caused by those who are not willing to let go of these millennia old / obsolete values.

 

   And Charlie Hebdo?

- It’s not a free magazine you know. I never had the cash to spend on that magazine. But I don’t mind if there are people who like it.

 

And there is no blasphemy. The issue in Islam is that the Prophet did not want us to idealize him like Christians idealized Jesus. He wanted to be remembered as an ordinary human. Not a God-like superior being. And that’s about it.

 

- Do I condemn drawings like Charlie Hebdo comics?

- Not really. They doing this for a laugh right?

 

On other acts like burning the Quran etc.:

 

- As a spiritual person what I see there is an act of fear (also hatred but mainly fear): I understand that Westerners I scared when they see a woman all dressed like Zorro. So it’s normal that some of them a reacting when they perceive things like their governments are doing too much for these “backward” people. – I am not saying I agree with that I am only saying this is how they perceive things –

 

   And that’s such an easy thing to do. I mean choosing a scapegoat and making them carry all your load of frustration and negative energy.

 

    On the Zorro part: You may check the History of the Turkish Republic and the extensive reforms of Mustafa Kemal on Wikipedia on that. It can be a really difficult and extensive task to deal with these Zorro-like people. It’s a long term game actually. You (we) need to be patient with them because it’s not an easy task for them either

[Istvan]

If the consequences are criticism and disdain, I think everything's fine. They do something offensive and childish, they get called out.

- Do I condemn drawings like Charlie Hebdo comics?

- Not really. They doing this for a laugh right?

Gee, you guys are so far up in your ivory towers that you don't think marginalization is as big an issue as it seems from the ground.

When you're telling immigrants and Muslims to get over it, that they just need to abide dehumanization and persecution, that they have a short list of approved reactions to their plight, and that any reactions you consider unacceptable will only increase the severity of their plight, then you've been swimming in privilege for so long you've grown gills.

[Angrboda]

Yeah, no, not buying it.

[The Grand Nudger]

When you're telling immigrants and Muslims to get over it, that they just need to abide dehumanization and persecution, that they have a short list of approved reactions to their plight, and that any reactions you consider unacceptable will only increase the severity of their plight, then you've been swimming in privilege for so long you've grown gills.

Unless we believe that murder should be included in the appropriate responses™ then it doesn't really matter what a person thinks about whether mockery is distasteful (or should be illegal) or what ivory towers anyone inhabits.  Presumably..even someone who believes that cartoons are a pressing social issue and should be censored (or that cartoonist ought to self censor) would still not believe that a failure to do so come with a death sentence. Or, at least, that's an additional belief that would stand on it's own and not flow explicitly from the other.

Me, personally..I'm absolutely fine with people shitting on old gods and new gods, and if they decide to get all murdery about it that's just another thing to mock them for. The only privilege worth considering here is the privilege the religious appear to believe that they and they alone possess. Business as usual in our god-addled world.