<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Muhammad Cartoons Won&#8217;t Be Included in a Book About the Muhammad Cartoons</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2009/08/13/the-muhammad-cartoons-wont-be-included-in-a-book-about-the-muhammad-cartoons/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2009/08/13/the-muhammad-cartoons-wont-be-included-in-a-book-about-the-muhammad-cartoons/</link>
	<description>by Hemant Mehta</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 May 2012 07:57:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Freemage</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2009/08/13/the-muhammad-cartoons-wont-be-included-in-a-book-about-the-muhammad-cartoons/#comment-738621</link>
		<dc:creator>Freemage</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 16:52:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=15026#comment-738621</guid>
		<description>Lost Left Coaster:  Could you be specific in your critique, namely on the charge of &quot;racism&quot;?  Some of the cartoons are a broadside swipe against the most violent strains of Islamic culture (such as the &quot;we&#039;ve run out of virgins&quot; one).  But I really don&#039;t see any racism inherent in any of the cartoons posted in the piece above.

And I wish I&#039;d had time this week to do the DMD image I wanted to, even if my &#039;art&#039; is craptacular.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lost Left Coaster:  Could you be specific in your critique, namely on the charge of &#8220;racism&#8221;?  Some of the cartoons are a broadside swipe against the most violent strains of Islamic culture (such as the &#8220;we&#8217;ve run out of virgins&#8221; one).  But I really don&#8217;t see any racism inherent in any of the cartoons posted in the piece above.</p>
<p>And I wish I&#8217;d had time this week to do the DMD image I wanted to, even if my &#8216;art&#8217; is craptacular.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JL</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2009/08/13/the-muhammad-cartoons-wont-be-included-in-a-book-about-the-muhammad-cartoons/#comment-345473</link>
		<dc:creator>JL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2009 19:16:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=15026#comment-345473</guid>
		<description>Not including the cartoons in a book about the cartoons is ridiculous.  And it is a crying shame that violence has intimidated the publisher into omitting the cartoons.

Now, a couple of the side issues in this thread:

&quot;The fact that PEOPLE WERE MURDERED in response to the cartoons more than justifies them as being thoughtful religious criticism.&quot;

Huh?  That people had a bad reaction to something, makes that something automatically good?  That makes no sense.

&quot;Atheists will say that Catholics are child molesters and that Evangelicals are knuckle-dragging, women-hating ignoramuses, but apparently saying (not without justification, either!) that Muslims the world over have violent tendencies is too much for some.&quot;

Well, I would say (as an atheist) that atheists shouldn&#039;t be slinging around bigoted overgeneralizations about &lt;em&gt;anyone&lt;/em&gt;.  In the US, it bugs me more when Muslims are the targets than when, say, evangelical Protestants are, because it&#039;s feeding a more pervasive societal stereotype, and because US Muslims don&#039;t have the same level of power to defend themselves.  But I would call out someone who started spouting anti-Christian bigotry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not including the cartoons in a book about the cartoons is ridiculous.  And it is a crying shame that violence has intimidated the publisher into omitting the cartoons.</p>
<p>Now, a couple of the side issues in this thread:</p>
<p>&#8220;The fact that PEOPLE WERE MURDERED in response to the cartoons more than justifies them as being thoughtful religious criticism.&#8221;</p>
<p>Huh?  That people had a bad reaction to something, makes that something automatically good?  That makes no sense.</p>
<p>&#8220;Atheists will say that Catholics are child molesters and that Evangelicals are knuckle-dragging, women-hating ignoramuses, but apparently saying (not without justification, either!) that Muslims the world over have violent tendencies is too much for some.&#8221;</p>
<p>Well, I would say (as an atheist) that atheists shouldn&#8217;t be slinging around bigoted overgeneralizations about <em>anyone</em>.  In the US, it bugs me more when Muslims are the targets than when, say, evangelical Protestants are, because it&#8217;s feeding a more pervasive societal stereotype, and because US Muslims don&#8217;t have the same level of power to defend themselves.  But I would call out someone who started spouting anti-Christian bigotry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ContainsCaffeine</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2009/08/13/the-muhammad-cartoons-wont-be-included-in-a-book-about-the-muhammad-cartoons/#comment-345223</link>
		<dc:creator>ContainsCaffeine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2009 03:41:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=15026#comment-345223</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s a shame that the images won&#039;t be included, but publishing them would likely put the writers life at stake.  I can understand the decision to keep them out.  I&#039;m not sure worrying about your life is being a &quot;wuss&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s a shame that the images won&#8217;t be included, but publishing them would likely put the writers life at stake.  I can understand the decision to keep them out.  I&#8217;m not sure worrying about your life is being a &#8220;wuss&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GullWatcher</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2009/08/13/the-muhammad-cartoons-wont-be-included-in-a-book-about-the-muhammad-cartoons/#comment-344262</link>
		<dc:creator>GullWatcher</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Aug 2009 10:04:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=15026#comment-344262</guid>
		<description>I can&#039;t read Danish, so something there may have escaped me, but I fail to see why so many people are using the knee-jerk term &#039;racist&#039;.  Since when is Islam a race?

To paint this as anything other than a freedom-of-speech issue is a distraction.  It doesn&#039;t matter if it&#039;s xenophobic, it doesn&#039;t matter if it&#039;s offensive, it doesn&#039;t matter if the cartoons are good or bad or funny or mean.  

What matters is that a group of people responded to political cartoons with violence, leaving over a hundred people dead, setting fire to buildings, and issuing death threats,all of which intimidated a university press to such an extent that they refused to publish the images in a book &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; the images. 

I find both of those things truly offensive, and yet, somehow, I manage not to riot or make death threats...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can&#8217;t read Danish, so something there may have escaped me, but I fail to see why so many people are using the knee-jerk term &#8216;racist&#8217;.  Since when is Islam a race?</p>
<p>To paint this as anything other than a freedom-of-speech issue is a distraction.  It doesn&#8217;t matter if it&#8217;s xenophobic, it doesn&#8217;t matter if it&#8217;s offensive, it doesn&#8217;t matter if the cartoons are good or bad or funny or mean.  </p>
<p>What matters is that a group of people responded to political cartoons with violence, leaving over a hundred people dead, setting fire to buildings, and issuing death threats,all of which intimidated a university press to such an extent that they refused to publish the images in a book <em>about</em> the images. </p>
<p>I find both of those things truly offensive, and yet, somehow, I manage not to riot or make death threats&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jim murray</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2009/08/13/the-muhammad-cartoons-wont-be-included-in-a-book-about-the-muhammad-cartoons/#comment-344197</link>
		<dc:creator>jim murray</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Aug 2009 04:10:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=15026#comment-344197</guid>
		<description>Jytte Klausen&#039;s book is so mild.  Wait for the radicals to discover a book published this week.  Noor Barack&#039;s &quot;How Fatima Started Islam: Mohammad&#039;s Daughter Tells It All&quot; is page after page of blasphemous defaming of Islam and about every tenet of the religion.  Mohammad is depicted as a stupid, drunken, child molesting pimp who owns Mohammad&#039;s Saloon &amp; Brothel.  Fatima his daughter secretly controls him and directs the religion for monetary gain and power.  Everything is lampooned, even the first words of the Qu&#039;ran which are very gross.

A photo of an old man who looks disgusting is on the back cover with the name Mohammad under it.  This book is begging for a fatwa.

Jim Murray</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jytte Klausen&#8217;s book is so mild.  Wait for the radicals to discover a book published this week.  Noor Barack&#8217;s &#8220;How Fatima Started Islam: Mohammad&#8217;s Daughter Tells It All&#8221; is page after page of blasphemous defaming of Islam and about every tenet of the religion.  Mohammad is depicted as a stupid, drunken, child molesting pimp who owns Mohammad&#8217;s Saloon &amp; Brothel.  Fatima his daughter secretly controls him and directs the religion for monetary gain and power.  Everything is lampooned, even the first words of the Qu&#8217;ran which are very gross.</p>
<p>A photo of an old man who looks disgusting is on the back cover with the name Mohammad under it.  This book is begging for a fatwa.</p>
<p>Jim Murray</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mag</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2009/08/13/the-muhammad-cartoons-wont-be-included-in-a-book-about-the-muhammad-cartoons/#comment-343946</link>
		<dc:creator>mag</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2009 19:34:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=15026#comment-343946</guid>
		<description>I think they are cute, sorry, that&#039;s my opinion and I&#039;m stick&#039;n to it!! !</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think they are cute, sorry, that&#8217;s my opinion and I&#8217;m stick&#8217;n to it!! !</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan W</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2009/08/13/the-muhammad-cartoons-wont-be-included-in-a-book-about-the-muhammad-cartoons/#comment-343636</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan W</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2009 04:44:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=15026#comment-343636</guid>
		<description>Wusses. To hell with muslims taking offense to the cartoons, put them in there! Considering the ridiculous uproar by muslims when those cartoons were first printed, they definitely should be in that book. Man, it never ceases to amaze me how people can get so upset over cartoons, even getting violent like so many muslims did over those.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wusses. To hell with muslims taking offense to the cartoons, put them in there! Considering the ridiculous uproar by muslims when those cartoons were first printed, they definitely should be in that book. Man, it never ceases to amaze me how people can get so upset over cartoons, even getting violent like so many muslims did over those.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Philbert</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2009/08/13/the-muhammad-cartoons-wont-be-included-in-a-book-about-the-muhammad-cartoons/#comment-343603</link>
		<dc:creator>Philbert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2009 02:03:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=15026#comment-343603</guid>
		<description>It is possible to hold the opinion that murder is definitely wrong and that the cartoons are somehow bad as well, but I think you have to be careful how you present such opinions because frankly, the cartoons are rather insignificant in comparison to the reaction to them. If it weren&#039;t for the riots and murders, it would be a different story. People peacefully argue in the strongest of terms all the time. But when blood is spilled it changes the dynamic.

I guess it&#039;s the same as when Christians respond to the murder of abortion providers. When George Tiller was murdered the reaction from some was largely about the evils of abortion and how Tiller was a bad person, with a begrudging &quot;of course murder is wrong&quot; thrown in. It made me seriously question people&#039;s priorities if not their true motives.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is possible to hold the opinion that murder is definitely wrong and that the cartoons are somehow bad as well, but I think you have to be careful how you present such opinions because frankly, the cartoons are rather insignificant in comparison to the reaction to them. If it weren&#8217;t for the riots and murders, it would be a different story. People peacefully argue in the strongest of terms all the time. But when blood is spilled it changes the dynamic.</p>
<p>I guess it&#8217;s the same as when Christians respond to the murder of abortion providers. When George Tiller was murdered the reaction from some was largely about the evils of abortion and how Tiller was a bad person, with a begrudging &#8220;of course murder is wrong&#8221; thrown in. It made me seriously question people&#8217;s priorities if not their true motives.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jay jay</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2009/08/13/the-muhammad-cartoons-wont-be-included-in-a-book-about-the-muhammad-cartoons/#comment-343575</link>
		<dc:creator>jay jay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2009 00:13:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=15026#comment-343575</guid>
		<description>Freedom of speech is and should be continued. The freedom of speech also should be meant for good ideas or speech. The objective should be the main discussion here. What is the intention of drawing Muhammad SAW cartoon. Just so that for hatred. What if somebody write something good about Hitler. Do you still say that it is still freedom of speech. What if a muslim say bad things about Jesus,do think that you will still stand it, or the vatican still be quiet. In the record, the Christian alyways make joke of their religion, about Jesus etc. I think that never in the history,muslim make joke of other religion gods. Remember, freedom of speech should be used for good only.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Freedom of speech is and should be continued. The freedom of speech also should be meant for good ideas or speech. The objective should be the main discussion here. What is the intention of drawing Muhammad SAW cartoon. Just so that for hatred. What if somebody write something good about Hitler. Do you still say that it is still freedom of speech. What if a muslim say bad things about Jesus,do think that you will still stand it, or the vatican still be quiet. In the record, the Christian alyways make joke of their religion, about Jesus etc. I think that never in the history,muslim make joke of other religion gods. Remember, freedom of speech should be used for good only.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ajlis</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2009/08/13/the-muhammad-cartoons-wont-be-included-in-a-book-about-the-muhammad-cartoons/#comment-343554</link>
		<dc:creator>ajlis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 23:41:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=15026#comment-343554</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;The whole point of publishing those cartoons originally (in a right wing Danish newspaper) was to give a big “f%#! you!” to Muslims living in Denmark and Europe. It didn’t appear to me to be any sort of thoughtful critique of religion.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

No, it was not. It was a talk both about free speech and how fundy muslims made other muslims look. If I remember correct, besides JyllandsPosten isn&#039;t &quot;right-winged&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>The whole point of publishing those cartoons originally (in a right wing Danish newspaper) was to give a big “f%#! you!” to Muslims living in Denmark and Europe. It didn’t appear to me to be any sort of thoughtful critique of religion.</p></blockquote>
<p>No, it was not. It was a talk both about free speech and how fundy muslims made other muslims look. If I remember correct, besides JyllandsPosten isn&#8217;t &#8220;right-winged&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic (User agent is rejected)
Page Caching using disk: enhanced (User agent is rejected)
Database Caching 1/4 queries in 0.005 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 379/383 objects using disk: basic
Content Delivery Network via Amazon Web Services: S3: wp.patheos.com.s3.amazonaws.com (user agent is rejected)

Served from: www.patheos.com @ 2012-05-28 03:02:31 -->
