Clarifying the South Park Response and Calling on Others to Join in the Defense of the Prophet Muhammad – RevolutionMuslim.com
by Jay
- 6,716 views
Accessibility
Upload Details
Uploaded via SlideShare as Microsoft Word
Usage Rights
© All Rights Reserved
Statistics
- Likes
- 0
- Downloads
- 31
- Comments
- 9
- Embed Views
- Views on SlideShare
- 3,818
- Total Views
- 6,716
So, let me show you how I can use freedom of speech:
Fuck Muhammad. 1 year ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:South_park_muhammad.jpg 3 years ago
The Prophet Muhammad valued the truth, and he would expect his followers to as well.
You can't just make things up. You can't be consistent with your faith and at the same time try to save your own face because you made a mistake and did something before all the fact were in. Might as well say they showed the Prophet Muhammad gambling in a casino with Jesus. That didn't happen on South Park. But neither was the Prophet Muhammad shown in a bear costume. It was Santa Claus. This can't be ignored!
The South Park episode was actually only half of an episode, as it continued to the next week (hence, 'to be continued' at the end of episode 200). 3 years ago
We should all strive for this every day, Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Unfortunately your threats to kill the creators of South Park speak much louder these words. You have again portrayed Islam as the Religion of Perpetual Outrage, and reinforced the stereotype of Muslims as intolerant, murderous savages who deal with every insult, (real or imagined) with violence.
Threats and intimidation will never change people's opinions, but they will justify their hatred of Muslims.
Peace be upon you. 3 years ago
I'm sorry, but perhaps the clarification could be clarified. The explanation that Revolution Muslim give, in a nutshell, is that they were just informing Trey and Matt (the South Park creators) of the consequences of airing the episode. And yet, in the 4th paragraph, Revolution Muslim say:
'Within the episode the makers of South Park made it very clear that they knew how the Muslims would feel and potentially respond to their show.'
So, as far as the explanation goes, it's a chumps game. Beyond the fact that these people seem to be have a pretty good grasp of the English language above (so it would seems absurd to me that that they don't know how subtext and insinuation work), they've contradicted their own explanation in the opening paragraphs. And I'd also expect more regret for their phrasing of the warning if they really were misunderstood. So I'll deal no more with these clearlfy false explanations.
As for the more inflammatory remarks, there's far too much to say, but I'll just point out some of the more obvious offfenders.
Revolution Muslim say:
'The cancer we are referring to is that of American imperialism and its coincident culture of pagan hedonistic barbarism...'
This is just unbelievable to hear from Revolution Muslim. The claim is that America is imperialistic and imposing its culture on the world, and that this is unjust. This from the same group of people who, if they don't endorse, at least fail to condemn those Muslim's who would murder in an effort to force the world to live to extremist Muslim values. Are we to take from the pages above that there's nothing wrong with imperialism and imposing one's culture per se, it's just wrong if Americans do it? Barbaric murder over a few jokes is fine if Muslim's are weilding the weapon? Revolution Muslim: do you really think that you have explicated your postion well, here?
And in regards to your comments on free speech, what you have to understand is that if there is to be a limit on free speech, there seems to be a question as to who would set that limit. If you would set it, as you wish to, then we couldn't have a laugh at what you describe as 'obscene' jokes (Muhammad in a bear costume, etc). But if others were to set the limits, they would ban any talk of religion (as perhaps in the USSR), or simply ban any mention of Muhammad or Islamic beliefs, effectively suppressing your religion (many Americans, incited by extremist Muslims such as yourselves, indeed call for such a limitation). The point of allowing free speech is so that we don't have to decide who gets to set the limits, in it's not OUR tyrant who wins that one. You can argue for limitations on free speech all you want, but until you have a good argument that you guys should tell us how we live, and not the other way around, you'd better watch out that you don't convince some people to suppress you.
I'd just like to add that speculation about South Park being part of a conserted effor to dehumanise and oppress your religion is flagrantly ignorant; South Park makes fun of everything, every religion ('conquered' or not 'conquered'), every type of belief and so forth far, FAR more than they've ever touched Muhammad. So to infer from the fact that South Park made a joke about A that they are part of a concerted effort to oppress A would indicate that there is a concerted attempt to oppress everything, including Christopher Reeves and aliens. So your position is just ludicrous.
Now I don't want to go on, because the more I go on the less likely you will be to read what I've said, but please take into consideration the fact it's people's lives you are playing with here and your comments really are very ill-considered, and your justification for your 'threats' is just ludicrous. You need to have these discussions with non-Muslims, people who don't agree with you, first, before you makes statements of such import. People who already hold the same beliefs as you aren't the best to bounce grave ideas off. More, don't just open up debate to the internet: seek out smart people who disagree with you, because -- no offense to everyone out there -- anyone can post on the internet, and it's a lucky day when you don't get dense responses. Like today! 3 years ago
When you consider as I, (an infidel that has asked the question of a Muslim), understand one facet of Islam, each pious Muslim is responsible for his own soul. Under that concept, each pious Muslim is required to read the Qur'an and live his or her life according to the ideas and principles and directives contained therein, as he or she interprets those concepts. As such, upon their earthly death, Muslims cannot claim that someone else led them astray. Allah will judge them based on their loyalty to his word. If my understanding is correct, that would imply that there are 1.3 billion people out there interpreting the Qur'anic verses. I do understand that Islamic culture provides guidance in the form of Imams, Mullahs, etc. for their followers. Though, there seems to be a certain amount of disagreement within those circles as to what Allah really meant.
Most respectfully, it would appear as extremely unlikely that the violence within the Islamic world can ever subside. As I write this, my guess is there are 1.3 billion Muslims with diverse opinions on whether sacreligious expressions should be punished with death or not.
The old testament specifically spells out divinely approved massacre as an appropriate form of punishment for transgressions against God. I understand that all Christians and Jews, as well as Muslims, are people of the book. Under fundamentalist Islam, would it not be appropriate for them to start killing people in what they consider adherence to the will of God, as they interpret that will?
This is not ment to be a 'Stump the Ayatollah' exercise but a respectful observation of one small facet of an incredibly complex situation.
My opinion is the average Muslim is identical to the average Hindu, Christian, Jew, etc, We all want the same earthly benefits - health, education, safety, financial security and eventual spiritual redemption. I am hard pressed to see where religious extremism or fundamentalism contributes to those goals. On the other hand, it is quite clear what benefit can be derived by politicians that are in a position to manipulate the message.
Would it not be better to resist the call for blood and seek leaders that are truly pious and respect what life Allah has created?
Regarding South Park and its creators; If an ass is braying out in a field, why should we feel compelled to go out into that field and bray back at--- or kill him? 3 years ago