Random Comic
piety

piety



└ Tags:

Discussion (61)¬

  1. r00db00y says:

    Yep, taking offence puts people on the defensive. I can see it all over this site :-D

  2. spaghettimonster says:

    Can Mo actually see the road? :)

  3. Mythbuster says:

    Bwa ha ha!! One of the best yet!

  4. Dan says:

    These just keep getting better.

  5. Mel says:

    @spaghettimonster: your racist innuendo towards Mo’s full ability to see the road hints at your deep rooted hatred towards Islam and it’s power to steer cars solely by faith.

  6. Tea says:

    I’ve had no idea J&M lived in England. Or is it Japan?

  7. jONES. says:

    pubs? pithy barmaids? subtle dry humor?

    Where did you think they lived, Detroit?

  8. Tea says:

    I guess I just assumed they lived in Slovenia, like everybody else.

  9. Chris says:

    I thought they lived in the US and used a religious excuse to drive a foreign car.

  10. Vince says:

    Also, you should make it clear that if you use violence after being offended, doesn’t matter against who, it will be wholly the fault of the guy that offended you.

  11. Poor Mo – he’s forgetting that it’s the barmaid he’s dealing with. If he tries that ‘I’m offended’ trick with her she’ll only ask even more difficult questions.

  12. Tea says:

    Chris,

    Did you also think they had a religious excuse for saying “offence” instead of “offense” in the US?

  13. Hobbes says:

    I think I’m in love with Barmaid. Anybody got her phone number?

  14. Hamidreza says:

    Respecting my religion and my ideas is my entitlement. And if you do not respect my ideas, I will “earn” your respect, by the threat of this sword.

    And so goes the Islamic credo, supported and respected by the democracy-hating postmodern and postcolonial lefto-fascists.

  15. Achim says:

    Why they don’t use seat belts?

  16. Greg M says:

    Absolute classic, one of the best.

  17. JohnnieCanuck says:

    When Jesus is your co-pilot, you don’t need seat belts or even insurance. In fact, if a crash seems imminent, raise your hands to the Heavens and pray loudly, “Jesus Take The Wheel”.

    Your mileage may vary.

  18. JohnnieCanuck says:

    I don’t know, Hobbes. Are you sure you want a girlfriend who can see right through any pretenses you might have, or any lies or excuses you might make?

    Not that I wouldn’t mind a chance to meet her, myself. Having her in your life would be… interesting.

  19. tie says:

    Awesome, one of the best… I’m so fed up with the religious attitude of a mafia cappo.

    “I’m terribly offended, I won’t do anything personally, but the other 1.6 billion followers might, just might burn your embassy or decapitate you with a fruit knife, I don’t personally approve, but you where asking for it”

    disgusting,

    If this was an animated cartoon the car radio should be playing “Jesus take the wheeeeeeeel” :)

  20. Hobbes says:

    JohnnieCanuck, it would be . . . err . . . heaven, to have a mate so philosophically and humanistically inclined (not that I don’t love my wife as she is). This is the very reason I love J&Mo, and the comments it inspires. I learn from both. I suspect most, if not all respondents on this page, feel the same. I thrill at reading another good argument of which I hadn’t thought–the latest being the fallible/infallibility argument presented so eloquently in 01/01/10. This is a real keeper.

    Hamidreza, “lefto-fascists?” So, we have lefto-fascists and Islamo-fascists. Since communism (extreme left) and fascism (extreme right) are at opposite ends of the political spectrum, I’d love to read the definition of the term “lefto-fascism.” As I understand it, Mussolini defined fascism is an economic system where business and government merge–something approaching the current system we now have in the U.S. (add to that, preemptive war, and what do we have?)

    I suppose the argument could be made that fundamentalist Islam, when in control of a nation, could be roughly construed to be fascist, since religion and government are the same. Thus, business (the economical infrastructure that supports the theocracy), being an integral part of that merger, makes the whole system a form of fascism. Am I wrong here? Whattayathing?

  21. Hobbes says:

    Oops, “Mussolini defined fascism is . . .” should have been “Mussolini defined fascism as . . .”

  22. Hobbes says:

    Also 01/01/10 should have been 2008/01/10. So much for proofreading my own stuff after posting.

  23. Tea says:

    Hobbes,

    For a long time, I was convinced that the Barmaid was Ophelia Benson. That’s why I was so surprised when I realized the guys lived in England.

  24. Hobbes says:

    Tea, thanks!

    Again I learn. I really don’t understand how I could have missed leaning of Ophelia Benson before now. Your reply takes me down yet another educational road. I looked her up on the Web and discovered why you would think she is the barmaid (indeed, why she might even be the author of J&Mo). Fantastic! I will have to read her book, Why Truth Matters. Thinks again.

  25. Tea says:

    I’m glad I’ve helped :)

    The book is terrific, and so is OB’s blog, http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/notes.php .

  26. Don says:

    I believe Ophelia has an option on the movie role.

  27. JayBee says:

    @ spaghettimonster: Mo is a visionary! with superhuman power! he sees everything! Did you forget he has truth/perfection/knowledge/ on his side (also you can take it literally since well the son of himself is there)?

  28. Tea says:

    what happened to offensive comments?

  29. Ricard says:

    Another masterpiece.

  30. Hamidreza says:

    Tea, good question. This place is run with an iron fist.

    I even had some complementary comment about Ophelia Benson which was deleted, as punishment for voicing my opinion about Hobbes. Sounds like collective punishment to me.

    And I bet a pack of 6 wheat beer, which we can drink at the MoJesus bar, that this complaint will meet the same fate.

    Hey MoJesus, don’t take yourself so seriously.

    Cheers

  31. Hobbes says:

    Maybe I missed it, but I haven’t seen any deletions. Hamidreza’s comment about “lefto-fascists” is still there as is my response. Tea’s comment about first thinking that barmaid was Ophelia Benson, is still there. Was there another post I missed?

  32. Tea says:

    deleting offensive comments under a cartoon making fun of people yelling “offense!”

    … interesting :)

  33. Hamidreza says:

    Hobbes, yes, MoJesus deleted an “offensive” post, where I called you brainless. But of course I was just venting some steam, and I was NOT trying to personally attack you – surely you are a swell person. But I admit it could have been construed otherwise. In any case, if I have saved the comment, I will repost it.

    Tea – great ironic observation. I guess MoJesus’ defense is that it was a personal ad hominem attack, which does not fall under the rubric of free speech. No doubt MoJesus has grounds to believe so. But a bit less of iron fist and more of tolerance can sometimes do wonders. I don’t think Hobbes would have minded. He may even have learnt something due to the shock therapy. Sort of like “Just War” – who knows?

  34. Hamidreza says:

    MoJesus also deleted my comment on Ophelia Benson, which truely baffles me. This one was complementary and not offensive.

    I guess some Mo thin-skinned culture must have rubbed off.

    I don’t know why humans take themselves so seriously. We are just a speck of dust in the greater scheme of things (if there is one). The universe is not about us – never was. Grow up and move on.

  35. You all do me too much honour. [simpers fetchingly]

  36. Oh but p.s. – I’m absolutely not the author of Jesus and Mo! I wish. No, credit where credit is due – the author is someone else entirely.

    And the name is Author, not MoJesus. It says so right on here somewhere.

  37. author says:

    Hamidreza you are welcome to post here, as is everyone. But it hasn’t always been so. Comments were disabled for months in 2006 when people were using them to abuse and threaten each other. This was completely against the spirit and purpose of this site (What’s the purpose, you say? Why, to spread joy, of course!). Believe me, it wasn’t pretty.

    So it was with some trepidation that I reactivated them – and since then I have taken a hands-on approach to ensuring they never descend to that level again. Nipping abuse in the bud has proved successful so far. Now the comments section is usually funnier than the comic.

    Your reply to Hobbes was interesting enough – you didn’t have to be rude. As for your comment to OB, I deleted that by mistake. Sorry.

  38. Hamidreza says:

    My favorite Mo joke:

    Prophet Mohammed (Peace be Upon this Child Molester) was asked why do you think you are God’s Prophet?

    He replied – because it says right there in the book. But what makes you think the book is correct? Because it is the literal word of God. But what makes it the literal word of God? Because it was revealed to me by God and I wrote it. But how do you know that God would speak to you? Because I am his Prophet … duh!

  39. Kristian says:

    I’m hearing echoes of the debate about freedom of speech current among my own tribe, the Danes. Apparently freedom of speech to the right-wing-o-fascists means the obligation to mock outsiders.
    Others, like the pragmatico-fascists of the centre/left (although not exclusively of the centre/left, to the credit of a few people) and not least our author-o-fascist, take a different approach, and judge the value of a given contribution against its offensive content.

    So… Thank you, author, for taking the time to moderate the forum, thus stalling the regress into the hell of perpetual flames. While still having the time to seek out divine inspiration for the adventures of the prophet & the son of man :-D

  40. Mel says:

    Dear author!
    please delete all comments in the fray that discuss your identity! This is not only to protect you but also the people mentioned.
    We all know that the islamofascist mob takes everybody it can get, questions asked in paradise.
    So if names are tossed around here (usually by irresponsible slackers, chuckling about your courageous cracking of tabus, commenting themselfs under pseudonyms, using sock puppet accounts) it is already dangerous, considering the current threat in Europe to be singled out publicly by the political correct mainstream as “intolerant” or “racist”, just to be subsequently marked as prey to be slaughtered by the deranged followers of some crazy illiterate huckster from the dark ages.
    If you are famous you will have a quite difficult life than, bodyguards watching you when you go to toilet… but if you are not, nobody might ever hear your screams…
    Thanks for your courage and creativity! May peace be upon YOU!

  41. Hamidreza says:

    Kristian: “Apparently freedom of speech to the right-wing-o-fascists means the obligation to mock outsiders.”

    It is well known when reason cannot penetrate the thick skull of the religious believer and the dogmatist, then mockery can do wonders. Mockery is quite a meaningful high-bandwidth method of communication – and unlike language, is quite universal.

    There is no responsibility to respect the ideas of the silly, the primitive, the idiot, or for that matter the ideas of me and you – despite what the postmodern lefto-fascists demand that ideas be respected.

  42. Hamidreza says:

    Kristian: “… take a different approach, and judge the value of a given contribution against its offensive content.”

    The irony has tragically escaped you. This episode of the cartoons is precisely about how the lefto-fascists and the Islamo-fascists try to censor and stifle debate by crying “I am offended”. And then you come and demand the same thing? At least you could have figured the cartoon in the first place, and save us the misery to have to respond.

    Again, respect for ideas, such as the gutter religion of Islam, and the gutter culture of Muslim religiosity (e.g. razor cutting the forehead of 4 year olds), is not an entitlement. I will mock their religion and their culture to my hearts content and there is nothing you can fortunately do.

    In fact I am a Muslim apostate, and that to your chagrin.

    I will only respect the individual rights of a person, and I will defend that.

    Otherwise, I am under no obligation to respect his beliefs or ideas, right or wrong, gutter or exhalted.

  43. Hobbes says:

    Hamidreza: you’re obviously using a view of fascism I wasn’t using. Since you preferred to use an ad hominem attack (yes, calling someone “brainless” is an ad hominem attack), I didn’t get the benefit of your response. Personally, I prefer to use civil debate, since personal attacks tend to entrench the opposition rather than enlighten.

    Referring to the definition of lefto-fascism, I can only guess, but you seem to be championing only the authoritarian aspect, where I was referring to the economic aspect. If we see fascism only as that which is authoritarian, then, yes, any form of authoritarianism can be thought of as fascist. I believe that to be a bogus view.

    However, if we look at the original definition of facism, then we see that the ideology was originally based on a hatred of anything “liberal,” such as labor unions, human rights, workers rights, etc. Thus, a fascist government will work for the benefit of the corporate world—some call it a “corporatocracy”—at the expense of the worker. Authoritarian, yes, but a corporatocracy as well. This is currently the state of affairs in the U.S., and this is why I believe we are very close to being a fascist state—if not there already, given that the executive branch pays no attention to the Constitution or the congress.

    So, under the foregoing definition, I don’t see how a liberal ideology can be considered fascist, unless, of course, we take the view that all authoritarians are fascists, which seems to be a fallacious argument.

    I would appreciate a civil response eliminating your definition so I can understand where I’m missing your meaning. This is your chance to educate, rather than denigrate.

  44. Hobbes: I was with Barmaid for ten years. She actually WAS a barmaid or, more properly, a bartender. She is just like Barmaid, and more than interesting–possibly the most interesting person I’ve ever known.

    Tea: for an American use of “offence” see Robert Frost’s “Mending Wall,”
    where the curious variation is made into a marvelous pun.

    –Poor Richard

  45. jONES. says:

    Way too much indepth debate for this cartoon… maybe we need a chat forum where these sorts of conversations can be carried out exclusive of the cartoon…

    Politics & Religion: two topics which should be discussed in moderation except in jest… Yet we’ve got over 15,000 on it already on this page…

    Come on people, lighten up.

  46. jONES. says:

    make that over 15,000 characters…

  47. Don says:

    This does rather underline Author’s point about how threads can become over-heated.

    Can we try to keep it pithy and urbane?

  48. Hobbes says:

    Poor Richard: I hope you recorded her aphorisms of wisdom in your almanac.

  49. Poor Richard says:

    Don: Yes, for Goddess’ sake. let us keep our nihilism cheerful.

    Hobbes, I’ll try to dig them out of my ancient fading memory. Here is one:
    “Ah, Sex, Bourbon, the NY Times crossword, more sex — thus we compose a perfect Sunday morning.” [That there “compose” is a printing pun.]

    Better than church.

  50. Kristian says:

    Hamidreza, as you’ve taken the time to respond, I’ll do so as well, briefly, out of respect for the time you’ve taken and to explain. And remember this is only the soapbox of the internet; there is no reason to get upset.

    My point is that mockery just for the sake of mockery, without having a sensible message is futile, and will only inflame the debate. Drawing a picture of Muhammad with a 17th century bomb in his turban, with a bit of Ottoman calligraphy thrown in, is not elegant, and will only increase the divide. Drawing something like the above cartoon in the ensuing debate is on the contrary witty and elegant (imho). I judge the value of the first contribution as a fair bit less than the above one. And if the decision was mine to make, I would have published this one, and not the first one.

    Thinking all ideas equally worthy of respect is indeed silly. And even though I’m unsure of who or what you refer to as “lefto-fascist”, I think if you ask them, they may agree, or they at least they should agree to that.

    But of course you’re right. People should not go out of the way to please people who are unbending in their anti-social or anti-democratic beliefs. However, very few believers belong in that category, and there’s no need to increase their numbers through thoughtless, sweeping provocations.

    Also, quite frankly, I’m a bit tired of people that use the word “islamo-fascist”, as if it were some kind of political observance. It’s not, and the word makes no sense. But please read the above stuff also.

  51. Chris says:

    Chris,

    Did you also think they had a religious excuse for saying “offence” instead of “offense” in the US?

    Indeed I did! Is there anything that cannot be excused by religion? ;)

    Now if you’ll excuse me, the color of my tires is a bit odd; I may have to replace the aluminum in my carburetor.

  52. Hobbes says:

    Thanks, Poor Richard, I’ll add that to my collection of famous quotes.

    And, thanks to author for maintaining a high level of civility on this board.

  53. JoJo says:

    HOBBES: On the matter of defining fascism, I am confident I have the last word. In my high school (UK) politics class we asked our very liberal leaning teacher for a proper definition of fascism. We argued that the word is bandied about far too much and it was difficult to pin down an academically accurate definition of the type you could use in an essay without looking silly. “That’s easy,” he said leaning back in his chair with a grin. “A fascist is someone who kicks your teeth in when you call him a fascist.”
    I hope this is an end to the matter.

    :-)

  54. Hamidreza says:

    Don – … keep it pithy and urbane”

    You mean at the expense of content and substance? You mean in favor of petty letters and linguistic games to the detriment of meaning?

    You gotta be kidding, ey?

  55. Hamidreza says:

    As explained once, and which has since been deleted, the ultra-left and the ultra-right meet in substance (but not in style) at the limit point of fascism.

    Fascism is a scientific political movement, and it should not be discounted and taken so lightly. Fascism is far more than the reductionist “kick your teeth in” thing. The US kicked Saddam’s teeth in, but it did that in defense of liberalism.

    How is it that the neo-Nazi skinheads of Germany vote for the German Left party that is so ostensibly supposed to be diametrically opposed to the neo-fascists, according to some leftists? Or the Respect party break bread with the ultra-right wing members of Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist Sharia demanding racist and supremacist organizations?

    For example, the support of Ahmadinejad and Khamenei by the western left. Or Michael Moore and Juan Cole calling Al-Qaeda death-squad fascists as “freedom fighters” and supporting them? And there are many more empirical observations as well, which I will not bore.

    And then we have religious fascism or Islamo-fascism, which is being denied by the postmodern and postcolonial left, due to their newfound romance with Islamic intolerance. State socialist economy and placing the group identity (national identity or religious identity) ahead of liberties, is the definition for fascism. Tell me what is about the Islamic Republic of Iran that does not meet this definition? And yes, the jackboots of the Islamic Basijis are very effective in killing all dissent in Iran. But of course the western self-hating anti-enlightenment postmodern selective bleeding heart leftists and lefto-fascists have their eyes, ears, and mouth shut.

    If Lancet is correct and 600,000 innocent Iraqis have been murdered by the Islamic death squads of Mahdis and Wahhabis, and all of this while the western leftists were cheering them on, and demanding more power to them, then the left has a lot of ‘plaining to do. Shame on the anti-human rights and pro-identity rights post-colonial lefto-fascist.

  56. Hobbes says:

    JO JO: “A fascist is someone who kicks your teeth in when you call him a fascist.”

    That was very inadequit. I’m not sure I would want to take a course under someone who blows off a serious question. Obviously, there is a lot of confusion concerning the definition. I’m beginning to think it’s a lot like “religion.” Some even call secular humanism a religion. However, if any school of social thought can be called religion, then the word is so watered down that it no longer has meaning. But, that’s another area of argument, for now, best left alone.

    Hamidreza: Thanks for your response.

    “The US kicked Saddam’s teeth in, but it did that in defense of liberalism.”

    Not so. The U.S. attacked Iran as a means of establishing a military force there in order to secure the region for the continued westward flow of oil. This was the second oil war, and the one that was sought after by the Neo-cons since the early 90s. “liberalism” had nothing to do with it. In fact, most liberals in the US were doing whatever they could to stop the invasion.

    “neo-Nazi skinheads of Germany vote for the German Left party”

    Although I don’t keep up with German politics, a quick check on the Web seems to show most voted for the NPD in the elections of 2004 in Saxony. That some might have voted for a liberal party could be true, but since you haven’t provided evidence (statistics from a reliable site), I cannot add more without more research.

    The Respect party talking with the Muslim Brotherhood and like organizations? That’s exactly what I would expect from a true liberal organization. A liberal believes in talking and trying to come to common ground with opposing organizations, and attack only when attacked.

    As an uninformed teen, I once attended a KKK rally and even shared some of their views. Now I am a member of a liberal organization (Americans United for the Separation of Church and State). Although I no longer share the opinions of the KKK, I would welcome civil debate with them. Would talking to them make me a radical right winger?

    “support of Ahmadinejad and Khamenei by the western left.”

    The “left” in the U.S. gives Ahmadinejad tacid support because there is at present nothing else holding back the Islamist extreemests from taking over a nation with nukes. That’s pragmatic. It is the Right in the U.S. that gives him weapons and free reign. You seem to be getting the distorted information usually put out by our neo-fascist (right wing) government.

    I do wish you would give reference to your “quotes.” We don’t know in what context Al-Qaeda members were called “freedom fighters.” And, in actually, that’s what they are to the fundamentalists Muslims. Bush was wrong (as usual) when he said they attacked us because they “hate our freedoms.” They attacked us (and gave us warning), because we had military bases on their “holy soil,” and for blind support of Israel at the expense of the palistanians.

    Lastly, “600,000 innocent Iraqis have been murdered by the Islamic death squads of Mahdis and Wahhabis, and all of this while the western leftists were cheering them on.”

    You must be getting your information from some radical right source. You need to listen to the left, perhaps Air America Radio, and understand what the American left is really saying, in context. One thing you will find out is that the left understands that we killed far more Iraqis than the ongoing civil war caused by our destabilizaton of the country.

    The figure you gave, “600,000” caused by Muslim radicals is misleading. See: http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/images/10/11/human.cost.of.war.pdf. You seriously need to open up to more reliable sources for your information.

  57. JoJo says:

    Actually, it was a bit more subtle than perhaps you realise.. but hey..

  58. Regal says:

    It’s funny cause it’s true…. haha

  59. Berto says:

    I just found your site, and I can’t stop laughing!
    Keep up the great work!

  60. Naboo says:

    Ohoh! Anybody thinking Scientology here???

    “We’ll sue you and your boss’s ass!!!”

  61. fenchurch says:

    @Hamidreza – How have you determined that your comments were a) purposefully deleted and b) that the agent responsible for such was [sic] JesusMo?

    The armchair accusation sounds an awful lot like my time womanning a tech support desk where callers with computer/internet problems would unfailing say “the problems’ at your end” or “it’s your server”, having neither the access nor the diagnostic abilities to determine such.

Comment¬

NOTE: This comments section is provided as a safe place for readers of J&M to talk, to exchange jokes and ideas, to engage in profound philosophical discussion, and to ridicule the sincerely held beliefs of millions. As such, comments of a racist, sexist or homophobic nature will not be tolerated.

If you are posting for the first time, or you change your username and/or email, your comment will be held in moderation until approval. When your first comment is approved, subsequent comments will be published automatically.