21621 Views
46 Comments

muhammad cartoonist attacked

Published May 11th, 2010 by Bobby Henderson

Here’s a video of Swedish artist Lars Vilks being attacked during a presentation on free speech today at Sweden’s Uppsala University.

 

Lars was the guy who drew the cartoon of Muhammad as a dog that made a bunch of Muslims go apeshit.

This latest attack bugs me a lot.  Here’s the disclaimer: I’ve received tons of hatemail and many threats and had more than a couple disturbing run-ins with religious nuts, and few if any of those nuts were Muslim.  By and large all the Muslims I know are awesome and not at all nutty.  I find Christian nuts the creepiest of all the religious nuts.  But I am way more scared of nutty Muslims than nutty Christians.

Lars has become a symbol for the right to criticize religion.  That’s a right we can’t lose.  I don’t believe this is about religion or values, I think it’s about dogma.  There is nothing inherently evil or wrong with what nutty Christians or Muslims believe – what’s wrong is that it’s no longer a set of beliefs, it’s a set of Truths that can’t be questioned, and that’s a dangerous thing.  Lars is completely right that it’s important to be able to criticize religion.

Lets see if we can come up with something to help Lars.

Also, the FSM does not mind if you draw him as something unclean.. like a stripper.



46 Responses to “muhammad cartoonist attacked”

  1. d says:

    @21: Yeah, I agree, it’s a stereotype. But a justifiable stereotype I believe. Yes, pretty much all the cultures went through the phase where they’ve been bloody and nutty and all. No arguments there. It’s where Islam is now. Sure there are exceptions but… Stoning people? Bombing stuff? “Kill the non believer” attitude? Death sentence for homosexuality in the freakin’ legal system of countries?
    I understand they are a different culture. It’s just that the way I view it, the less there is of it here, the better.

  2. Danimal says:

    I hope this post hits in time but check out the facebook page Everybody Draw Mohammad

  3. PastaFaZoo says:

    The violent reaction, again and again, by Radical Islam, is something that must be exposed and dealt with harshly. As Muslims immigrate, they have a tendency to bring their hate and religious ideology with them. Just ask the Europeans.

    I am a firm believer in religious freedom (even though I find the whole idea of religion detestable) but also a believer in the rule of law. If you intend to move to a country that has personal and religious freedom, then you must agree to the rules and culture that govern the land.

    Faith should never, in any way, supersede law and order. I fail to understand how the religious feel that they have the right to violent, even murderous retribution for being ‘offended’. Not being offended is not a human right. If the religious have the right to build churches, temples, mosques and synagogs wherever they like, then they must accept that they are likely building in a place where freedom of speech is guaranteed, along with their freedom of religion.

    If Islam is ever to be considered anything other than the hate fuelled, violent ravings of a lunatic fringe, it may want to consider reasoned debate over violent outbursts.

  4. Danimal says:

    Mr. Cooper
    All abrahamic religions teach that it’s their way or the highway and that any punishment inflicted on non-believers is righteous. (And I don’t want someone to put up quotes of how any one of the three religions says to be peaceful to everyone. For every quote you find I can find a quote from the respective religious text telling the followers to punish non-believers)
    Thankfully progress is slowly happening where individuals are realizing that this attitude of forcing others to think like you through violence is wrong. Your friends that you cite are examples of this progress. Unfortunately your friends represent a small population of these religious groups. The fact (not stereotype) is that the extremists are either the largest, or if not the largest, then the most vocal parts of their religion. That extremism is why so many people have such low opinions of religion.

    As for all the thumbs down on your first comment I think some clarification is needed. Do you mean that muslims in general are in the right to be offended when someone creates a work of art specifically depicting their prophet in a way that they find disrespectful, or do you mean that the individuals in the video are in the right for shouting down and physically attacking the artist? I assumed you meant the former and agree with you but I think a lot of people took it to mean you meant the latter.

    I also want to ask another question. If your friends are accepting the teachings of there respective religions but are rejecting the extreme aspects, at what point do they still get to call themselves a member of that religion. Do you have to believe 100% of the bible, contradictions and all, to call yourself a christian? Do you just have to have a simple majority and believe 51% of the teachings of the bible? If you agree with only some of the teachings of the bible and these teachings you have cherry picked also happen to all exist in the qur’an does that make you a christian and a muslim? I have friends who call themselves christians but don’t believe that jesus actually came back from the dead and walked the earth after he was hung on the cross? Does that mean my friends are wrong? My fiancee is a christian and she believes that same sex couples should be able to wed. My uncle is also a christian and claims my fiancee isn’t a christian because she doesn’t reject same sex marriage. I think he is wrong but who gets to decide these things? If the individual gets to decide then that’s fine but then you can’t use the “no true scotsman” argument because everyone who defines themselves is a member of a religion is a de facto member.

    The point of my long rant here is that I don’t think you can say, “I’m a christian”, “I’m a muslim” or, “I’m a member of [X] religion” because of all the baggage attached to it. You either cherry pick your beliefs and forgo universal acceptance or you take everything including the extremists and murders. I’ll take neither option thank you.

    RAmen
    Danimal

  5. theFewtheProudtheMarinara says:

    The one thing we can’t tolerate is intolerance.

    That Muhammad must have been one ugly guy to have all depictions of him banned.

  6. Nisse says:

    Here is the complete video with English subtitles:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2IHnWY-i6Y&feature=player_embedded
    Note the huge difference in behaivor between Swedish people and Muslims.

    two days later two young muslims tried to burn down Vilks house. The fire didn’t work so well, but one of the muslims burned himself and is now in hospital with skin burns. Cops waiting outside the door. The other muslims is his brother and he will stay behind bar for many years.

  7. Charlie says:

    I disagree with Danimal (post 28) about the relationship between extremists and non extremists. I would say that most of the people in a religion are not extremists, however the extremists are much more vocal, easily provoked (in comparison to their non-extremist counterparts), and tend to take power or overpower the governments/laws in their area. Some examples are in Pakistan, and the extremists have the laws written to effectively prevent someone from speaking ill of any religious leader (who are often extremists themselves), or a little closer to the free world, when the Kansas School Board tried to have ID taught in public schools. I do agree that if you associate yourself with a religion, you should realize that there are probably extremists within your religion, and they are as much a part of your religion as you are. I would say that the extremists were a big reason I left the religion I used to belong to (its a popular polytheistic religion that thinks they are monotheistic, and does not have a deity named Shiva). I personally think that the artist had every right to draw whatever he wanted to, insulting or not, and all those insulted have the right to say that they were insulted and explain why, but not to show physical aggression towards the insulter. I think insults are an acceptable form of showing disagreement, however when it goes beyond words (or pictures/video) and becomes aggression then we have a problem. Mocking religion is something that we should have a right to do, without receiving any form of revenge over insults thrown back at you. My vote is to send the guy a T-shirt and letters of support. The people decided decided to enact their ‘divine retribution’ on Lars’ ass are wrong and should leave their hate back in whatever 3rd world country they came from and learn how to act in a modern society where disagreements are settled with words and not fists.

  8. csaar says:

    Well, this being Lars Vilks, they knew what would be on his dish so to speak. Yet, the came to the show anyway.

Leave a Reply