Insulting the prophet

[lunakilo]

When somone decides to insult the prophet Muhammed it seems to often result in some people using this as an excuse to run around yelling and screaming, setting fire to things, braking into embassies and killing people (preferably americans it seems), and generally behaving very violently.

I don't get that.

Obviously the vast majority of muslims never do such things, but still there are enough people around who do, if there weren't it wouldn't happen.
So why is that?
Is it a cultural thing or a political thing or what?

Can anyone decrease my ignorance on this topic?

 

[nazz]

First off, one should understand that is was an extremely small number of Muslims who even protested about the offensive film. Less than one-tenth of one percent worldwide. Most of those protests were peaceful in nature. Where violence did break out it was usually against property. But there were some clashes with police and at least one suicide bombing.

Just to get a little perspective.

Second, it is offensive to Muslims to even depict the Prophet Muhammad in a positive manner. And if you have seen the film you would know this was an extremely negative portrayal. If a similar portrayal of Jesus were made you can be sure there would be similar Christian protests (and in fact that has happened in the past).

Third, all indications are that the attack on the embassy in Libya was a pre-planned terrorist act that was not connected to outrage over the film.

 

[Surya Deva]

I understand why the Muslims would protest at such an insulting portrayal of their holy Prophet. I mean what do you expect them to do, sit still and just tolerate it, giving other such authors the opportunity to insult their prophet? The fact that they make a very vocal and violent protest gives sends a very strong message to any prospective authors that insults against their holy prophets will not be tolerated.

However, I do not agree that the violent protests are just representative of a minority of Muslims, it is actually an institutionalized doctrine within the religion itself that waging a holy war, which may include violence against those who attack Islam is justified.

 

[nazz]

I understand why the Muslims would protest at such an insulting portrayal of their holy Prophet. I mean what do you expect them to do, sit still and just tolerate it, giving other such authors the opportunity to insult their prophet? The fact that they make a very vocal and violent protest gives sends a very strong message to any prospective authors that insults against their holy prophets will not be tolerated.

However, I do not agree that the violent protests are just representative of a minority of Muslims, it is actually an institutionalized doctrine within the religion itself that waging a holy war, which may include violence against those who attack Islam is justified.

Yes, but there are very strict rules that govern waging a military jihad. Terrorist acts violate most of them.

 

[jazzymom]

I understand why the Muslims would protest at such an insulting portrayal of their holy Prophet. I mean what do you expect them to do, sit still and just tolerate it, giving other such authors the opportunity to insult their prophet? The fact that they make a very vocal and violent protest gives sends a very strong message to any prospective authors that insults against their holy prophets will not be tolerated.

However, I do not agree that the violent protests are just representative of a minority of Muslims, it is actually an institutionalized doctrine within the religion itself that waging a holy war, which may include violence against those who attack Islam is justified.

I expect protests to be peaceful and not cause death and destruction.

 

[Surya Deva]

I personally would expect peaceful protests as well. However, sometimes peaceful protests are not loud enough, and this is why some protesters go violent to make their message loud and clear.

How many authors do you think would dare insult the Prophet of the Muslims after this incident?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

..., it is actually an institutionalized doctrine within the religion itself that waging a holy war, ...

No, it is actually an institutionalized doctrine infused into the religion by extreme institutions such as the Taliban.

To suggest that my Muslim friends are, either, deceiving me or (lapsing into a 'No True Scotsman Fallacy') that they are not 'real' Muslims is insulting, islamophobic rubbish.

 

[Reptillian]

Just more examples of human behavior....we're all just great apes after all...

From a Big Think article by Scott McLeod:

There's an apocryphal story about monkeys - based loosely on a real experiment - that goes something like this:

Stage 1. Monkeys 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 live in a cage. A researcher hangs a banana down from the top and places a ladder underneath the banana. However, every time a monkey tries to climb the ladder to get to the banana, the researcher sprays the monkey with freezing cold water, causing him to retreat. The researcher ALSO sprays the other four monkeys. Pretty soon, all of the monkeys learn that none of them should go anywhere near the banana because they will all be sprayed with ice water. If an individual stubbornly tries to get the banana anyway, the other monkeys will vigorously intervene (i.e., beat him up). The monkeys not only have been conditioned into a state of learned helplessness but now actively engage in behaviors that reinforce that state.
Stage 2. Take Monkey 1 out and introduce a new monkey, Monkey A, instead. Monkey A, of course, never has been sprayed with cold water and just sees a tasty banana within reasonable reach. Every time he moves toward the banana, however, the other four monkeys start beating him up. Monkey A has no idea why this happens, but pretty soon he too internalizes the idea that no one should try and get the banana.
Stage 3. Take Monkey 2 out and introduce a new monkey, Monkey B, instead. Monkey B experiences the same thing that Monkey A did: move toward the banana and the other four monkeys start beating you up. Monkey A joins in the enforcement even though he doesn't know about and never experienced the original reason that led to the behavior.
Stage 4. Keep taking the original monkeys out until you have all new monkeys, Monkeys A through E, in the cage. By this time, the original reason for staying away from the banana has long been relegated to the dustbin of history and none of the current monkeys have experienced an icy spraying. Yet, all of the new monkeys vigorously enforce the prohibition against trying to get the banana because, hey, that's how we do things around here.

The violent protesters are spraying cold water trying to convince non-believers that the banana is off limits.

 

[jazzymom]

I personally would expect peaceful protests as well. However, sometimes peaceful protests are not loud enough, and this is why some protesters go violent to make their message loud and clear.

How many authors do you think would dare insult the Prophet of the Muslims after this incident?

I think the opposite happens... The more violent they are the more people will exercise their right to free speech.

 

[Surya Deva]

No, it is actually an institutionalized doctrine infused into the religion by extreme institutions such as the Taliban.

To suggest that my Muslim friends are, either, deceiving me or (lapsing into a 'No True Scotsman Fallacy') that they are not 'real' Muslims is insulting, islamophobic rubbish.

I am just telling you what their scripture the Quran itself says themselves say: where there are hundreds of verses clearly supporting violence against those who attack Islam. The Tablian and other Wahabhi Islamic fundamentalists are literalists.

Now what constitutes an attack on Islam is subjective. Some would regard a hateful portrayal of their holy prophet that too by Jewish American author to be an attack on Islam and thus violence could be justified by scriptural support.

 

[Father Heathen]

I personally would expect peaceful protests as well. However, sometimes peaceful protests are not loud enough, and this is why some protesters go violent to make their message loud and clear.

How many authors do you think would dare insult the Prophet of the Muslims after this incident?

Those with integrity would not be intimidated into forfeiting their rights and freedoms.

 

[Surya Deva]

Those with integrity would not be intimidated into forfeiting their rights and freedoms.

Their right for what? To insult the Prophet of 1.5 billion people in the world?
I mean come on, put your hand in the hornets nest and what do you think is likely to happen?

 

[Father Heathen]

I understand why the Muslims would protest at such an insulting portrayal of their holy Prophet. I mean what do you expect them to do, sit still and just tolerate it, giving other such authors the opportunity to insult their prophet? The fact that they make a very vocal and violent protest gives sends a very strong message to any prospective authors that insults against their holy prophets will not be tolerated.

We expect them to behave as civilized adults by simply ignoring the depictions. When Buddha, Jesus, Joseph Smith, or Bahaullah are insulted you don't see Buddhists, Christians, Mormons or Baha'is behaving like savages. Since you find it easy to defend such behavior, perhaps you could explain this discrepancy?

 

[Father Heathen]

Their right for what? To insult the Prophet of 1.5 billion people in the world?
I mean come on, put your hand in the hornets nest and what do you think is likely to happen?

Yes, their right to express their opinion, regardless if others find it insulting. No one is obligated to pay respect and reverence to things they feel are unworthy of it.

 

[Surya Deva]

We expect them to behave as civilized adults by simply ignoring the depictions. When Buddha, Jesus, Joseph Smith, or Bahaullah are insulted you don't see Buddhists, Christians, Mormons or Baha'is behaving like savages. Since you find it easy to defend such behavior, perhaps you could explain this discrepancy?

You have a very particular and exclusive definition of a "civilized adult". So civilized adults just ignore insults and abuse against their religious founders? If you allow such insults and abuse to be made openly and freely, then you just set a precedent where you allow people to easily abuse and insult you. That is hardly a civilized and adult thing to do.

Like I said I would personally make a peaceful protest. I am not defending indiscriminate killing at all, but I am trying to understand the mentality that has perpetrated them and labeling them as "behaving like savages" does not really help in my opinion.

 

[Father Heathen]

You have a very particular and exclusive definition of a "civilized adult". So civilized adults just ignore insults and abuse against their religious founders? If you allow such insults and abuse to be made openly and freely, then you just set a precedent where you allow people to easily abuse and insult you. That is hardly a civilized and adult thing to do.

Like I said I would personally make a peaceful protest. I am not defending indiscriminate killing at all, but I am trying to understand the mentality that has perpetrated them and labeling them as "behaving like savages" does not really help in my opinion.

Ready your molotovs, because "Krishna is a smurf". Has that statement whipped you up into a frothing rage? Have you taken to the streets? No? Then reflect upon that for a moment.

 

[nazz]

We expect them to behave as civilized adults by simply ignoring the depictions. When Buddha, Jesus, Joseph Smith, or Bahaullah are insulted you don't see Buddhists, Christians, Mormons or Baha'is behaving like savages. Since you find it easy to defend such behavior, perhaps you could explain this discrepancy?

Fundamentalist Christians firebombed a theater in Paris that was showing the Last Temptation of Christ. Google it.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I am just telling you what their scripture the Quran itself says ...

You are just promoting your prejudices. It's tiresome. If significant numbers of Muslims reject violence in response to repugnant ridicule and anti-Muslim bigotry, either they are lousy Muslims or you are wrong in insisting that such violence reaction is Muslim doctrine.

 

[Surya Deva]

Ready your molotovs, because "Krishna is a smurf". Has that statement whipped you up into a frothing rage? Have you taken to the streets? No? Then reflect upon that for a moment.

No, and the reason is because I am not a Vaishnava who worship Krishna as God. I am a Hindu Atheist. However, had you insulted Krishna to a Vaishnava they may have been agitated by your remark, but as you don't really have much influence they would just ignore your opinion. However, had you published your opinions in public, you are more than likely to irritate many Vaishnava and other Hindus and you can expect some action to be taken against you.

It is unlikely to expect a violent protest from Hindus(Although Hindu nationalists can be violent if push comes to shove) because Hinduism does not really have an institutionalized doctrine of violence against those who attack Hindu opinions. In fact on the contrary we have a culture of peaceful debate and will resolve most issues through debate.

Any author that knowingly provokes 1.5 billion people in the world who are known to be historically militant against those who attack their religion, should not complain when they face the consequences. The incident regarding the insulting of the Prophet should make Western media more responsible in dealing with sensitive issues like religion. The wrong way to go about this is to be self-righteous about it.

 

[Surya Deva]

You are just promoting your prejudices. It's tiresome. If significant numbers of Muslims reject violence in response to repugnant ridicule and anti-Muslim bigotry, either they are lousy Muslims or you are wrong in insisting that such violence reaction is Muslim doctrine.

Whatever, I have personally read the Quran and read those verses. I am just being honest, don't shoot the messenger now.