Random Comic
salah

salah

zawahiri and his rug button
This rug butter has been butting the rug so hard that he has developed a “rug butting button” on his forehead.



└ Tags: ,

Discussion (35)¬

  1. Daniel says:

    Perhaps he would prefer ‘butt ruggers’? No, I suspect not.

  2. revulo says:

    Even I feel bad for laughing at that one.
    If only a little.

  3. Mel says:

    Daniel is right, but excitation by prostrate or prostate both involves bending over.

  4. Poor Richard says:

    Wow, there is a wealth of potential here, and on Monday, too. Author must be in one of those super-creative modes. Do Christians who kneel get knee buttons? I once watched a married woman I knew to be having an affair with a colleague rush into her church (Episcopalian) to kneel and pray fervently, a very worried look on her face. Also, I know that Baptist teenagers won’t make love standing up because it might look like they are dancing–perhaps rug butting would . . . uh, scratch that.

    Let’s lock all the world’s clerics in one big room and see who is the last one standing. And, no, I haven’t the slightest idea what I mean by this sentence.

  5. Murfmensch says:

    I’ve enjoyed this comic and have recommended to others. I’ve read every entry and I feel like this is the first one that has crossed a line.

    Why this one and not a few others? I’d have to figure that one.

    We don’t need another word like “towelhead” in our lexicon.

    Challenging the ideas behind belief is a component of respecting belief. One reason many people are tolerating religious intolerance is that they don’t want to be a part of the utter contempt leveled at many communities.

  6. mjm202036 says:

    Murfmensch, it is in the human nature to offend others to get reactions. Author is just making a great attempt to offend Muslims (and Christians with the last two words in the final panel).

    As for Christians having knee-buttons, I remember reading once that Peter, of Jesus’ original 12 apostles, had knees like a camel because he was praying so much. I’m surprised some of the Muslim clerics prayed that much, I’m sure their knees and foreheads would all have the same appearence of being swollen from so much pressure on them on the ground.

    Author: Very good. Had my co-workers wondering if I’d gone crazy as I actually laughed out loud. I hope they never block your page from me.

  7. Craig says:

    I think I agree with Murfmensch on this one, especially with the addition of the guy in the photo. I don’t know if I can articulate exactly why, but I looked at some BNP cartoons recently, and I feel this one might, even with the last panel, I’d hate for people to think this was that kind of strip (Birmingham City Council actually already bans this website on their computers (assholes)).

  8. Poor Richard says:

    Like a tick, satire sticks to whatever smells right. Sure, this IS nasty. So was Jonathan Swift when he depicted all of us as Yahoos. It is a matter of seeing clearly, folks. Stand back sometime and watch an American funeral. “Christeeans wake up in the arms of Jeeesus.” Several friends of mine at that one had to go out in a neaby field and try not to throw up.

    Hasn’t Jesus already wondered what I’ve always wondered — which way is east when facing the shrine? Oh, I guess if the world is flat, it matters; but since the world is round, one can’t miss, can one?

    Someone dear to me is bipolar; she REALLY REALLY has seen the devil. In any
    other age, and possibly again soon, she would have burned at the stake. What a comfort to know something about the source of that hallucination, and to have some way to combat it.

    I was never free until I became an Atheist and thus took responsibility for whatever good I might leave behind me.

    The world will not be saved until religion is seen for what it is. Author is helping. Stand back friend; this one is probably a nuke.

  9. Dan says:

    Most Days:

    “Heheh, I’m reading a comic that mocks people who believe stupid, dangerous things because they’re not open-minded enough to realise how ridiculous they’re being. I find that funny.”

    Today:

    “I’m reading a comic that mocks people who believe stupid, dangerous things because they’re not open-minded enough to realise how ridiculous they’re being. For example, bashing their head on a carpet. I find that OUTRAGEOUS and the author should be ashamed of himself!”

  10. JoJo says:

    Dan.. Spot on. Author – what is the URL of the page that made you laugh??

  11. mjm202036 says:

    I can’t help but hope that Dan is being sarcastic and not truly agreeing with Murfmensch’s assesment of today’s comic being wrong. If we start drawing a line in the sand where we can not cross, then others will come along and say that line is too far out and push it back so that we have less room for jokes.

  12. Mel says:

    I think the “uneasieness” that Murfmensch feels is due to the fact that apart from this website there is almost no satire concerned with islam, out of the obvious reasons: islamist violence.

    What is wrong with a “rug butters”? Is it racist?- No, if you chose to do something like religion you should expect something like that from others.
    Does it misconstrue facts? No. – It is a completely legitimate reason to have a laugh on a stupid medival submission ritual.

    We simply are not used to see things like this, completely normal in satire about other religions. Naturally the “political correct” as well as islamist conditioning that we endure now via mass-media let us immediatly suspect a sinister motive behind a cartoon like this.
    That’s how far they have us.

    PS: thanks for the pic of Ayman al-Zawahiri, he should not be only target for laughter for his ignorance, but rug-butt in prison for the rest of his life, hated and despised by all mankind.

  13. r00db00y says:

    I myself do not find this strip offensive. I never do. Hypocritical, maybe (dogma is dogma whether it originates in a church or a lab) but not offensive to me.
    The only thing this particular strip is guilty of is making up another (as Crass would say) “silly little label to keep us all apart”.
    Mind you; I think Mel hit the nail on the head for the tone this strip could potentially set when she says “hated and despised by all mankind”.
    That just sounds like the start of extremism and has no place in a community of logical individuals.
    Or are we now saying it’s OK for us to hate and despise people (and advise the rest of mankind to do the same) because of their faith, but not OK for the nazis, the vatican or al qaeda?

  14. Mel says:

    I think it is very logical to hate and despise people, for their hateful actions and for their membership in clubs that advocate and carry out this kind of extremism. It is certainly quite logical to hate people like Zawahiri: This guy incites people to murder by manipulating their stupid beliefs and religious zeal. What is more despicable than that? Isn’t it the most logical thing in the world to hate fascist mass murderers?
    Why is that extremism?
    Only completely brainwashed Christians think that you should love people unconditionally.
    The “community of logical individuals” you speak about illogically confuses hate for peoples religious identity with hate for peoples actions. I don’t hate Islam, I just find it stupid and ridiculus (and should be allowed to say so).
    I hate Islamists (as well as Nazis, etc.) because they are cold blooded murderers.

  15. Tumsup says:

    Mel calls it a ‘stupid submission ritual’ I think the word you’re looking for is ‘Davening’ It’s a kind of self hypnosis used to attain a different state of consciousness. Think of the rockin’ religious at the wailing wall or a fakir going ‘OOm, OOm’
    The secular form you’ll see at any rave.

  16. Jerry w says:

    Sorry, I thought you said “rug butterers”.

    Never mind, I’ll call off the Jihad.

    Rug butter indeed.

    http://boskolives.wordpress.com/

  17. Daniel says:

    Good thing I didn’t say “rut buggers” then.

    Or “bug rutters”.

    I would never say either of those.

  18. mjm202036 says:

    But you just did, Daniel. That is one thing I love about this page is that there are actual discussions instead of hate spewing comments posted here. Intellectual debates without the extreme anger and name calling (no pun intended due to the comic). I really need to send Neal Boortz a “thank you” for linking to these comics a few weeks ago.

  19. JohnnieCanuck says:

    Given that the zabiba is typically seen on some Egyptian men and rarely on women or in other Islamic countries, it is clear that the mark is self-inflicted for the purposes of pious display. In other words, “Mine is bigger than yours, so I’m more pious than you”.

    It’s that deliberate damage for bragging purposes that make it a fair target of ridicule, to me.

  20. Peter L says:

    I love the site and have recommended to others. With so many recommendations I wonder what the total readership of this cartoon is?

  21. Tie says:

    very funny,

    on my vacation to Egypt the guide mention that they called the guys with the mark on the forehead good prayers, as in they pray good…

    I thought that praying 5 times a day is mandatory… if everyone does it but only a few get the mark, it must be that they either bang to hard, or fall asleep down there…

    anyway, you know a society has lost the plot when people who talk to imaginary friends the most, are the ones in highest consideration

  22. Trevor says:

    Muslims don’t have a monopoly on head buttons –
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wesley_Willis

    Schizophrenics and some muslims have a LOT in common… talking to imaginary friends, head buttons, violence and hate for “the man”.

    WELL, I say rock on head button, dude! You too, author.

  23. Poor Richard says:

    Here again, let’s not forget how funny we all can be when it comes to such symbologies: a lighted cross on the radiator of a Mack truck (aimed right you, sinner). Triple crosses made of telephone poles planted all over the USA. An ENORMOUS stainless steel cross in southern Illinois–maybe 12 stoires high or more. The tonsure, circumcision, clitoral mutilation (aaaugh),
    baptism (my minister did his best to drown me–can’t blame him there), all sorts of tinkle bells and candles and starry pentagrams and stuff. Don’t get me any more started. Ridicule is more a matter of vision than of hatred. Religion can be a great comfort to folks, and I can certainly understand the force of ritual. If we just didn’t take it so seriously. As THEY say, stealing from Poor Rick, Christianity was a nice religion until it confused itself with reality.

    I have taken more than my share of time and space. However, even though he had to invent an appropriate form of a word to make it mean “study of coprolites,” Needy Dick says:

    “THEOLOGY RECAPITULATES COPROLITOLOGY”

    Some day, some where, some one is going to explain to me the difference between religion and superstition. Now, don’t tell me it will be the Devil, just before I take the plunge… wheeeeee!

  24. Jerry w says:

    If Mo had said “Jesus F’n Christ” in reaction, my day would’ve been perfect.

    Even without that, all things considered it wasn’t too bad.

    Just looking for some icing on the cake.

    http://boskolives.wordpress.com/

  25. Don says:

    This cartoon is not offensive – to those who grock the context and the author’s position.
    The mark is mere religiose swagger.

    Murfmensch has a point that the catchy term could be twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools. However, if satirist start to self-censor to take knaves and fools into account, whence satire?

    Not every muslim is a rug-butter, just as not every christian is a holy-joe, a soapy-sam or a bible-punching sky-pilot. But those who are, are what they are and the term is apposite to them.

  26. + says:

    You have defiled the image of God with your blasphemous scribbles!
    Mohammed (praise be to allah) does not, I repeat does NOT have a monobrow!

  27. Murfmensch says:

    We cannot say that it is wrong to “draw a line in the sand”. It is wrong for the state to draw such a line based on the content of an idea.

    (Shame on B’ham City Council!)

    We all should ask ourselves how we ought to show respect. This includes challenging an idea, a practice, or a whole religion.

    I’m annoyed by those who slide from considering religion incorrect or inconsistent over to considering it stupid or insane. Don latest comment shows that he recognizes and thinks the comic doesn’t slide that way.

    I was only uneasy about this one. All told, I’m glad this comic is on-line.

  28. samir says:

    the muslim in me should be offended…or perhaps the former catholic that i was in the past before reverting to Islam should be offended…but, somehow all i can do is smile.

  29. God forgive me but I howled at that one! Butting the rug! Brilliant!! Casual disrespect is intellectual slapstick

  30. gorgardard says:

    I don’t find this strip particularly offensive, I just honestly don’t think it’s that funny. Yes, “rug butter” is basically the same thing as calling someone a “Holy Roller” or “Bible Thumper” or even something like a “Heterosexist” or “Fem Nazi”. They are terms referring not to a genetic or cultural slur(towel head, sand n*****r, etc…), but a religious/political/sociological choice. It’s no difference than athiests being called “God-Haters” or whatever(though if that offends you and you’re an atheist, perhaps you should consider that when you use the term “rug butter”.

    My issue with terms like that are… I’m going to give an example: I call my friends on using the words “gay” and “faggot” derogitorally, because my girlfriend’s brother, and some of my good friends are gay/bi sexual. It’s not that they’re particularly offended when a friend says it reflexively because it’s been built into their vocabulary – but as one of my friends said “When I’m in a bar and I hear someone say ‘gay’ or ‘faggot’, i instantly find myself worrying that it’s not just a [fake etymology(ie ‘gay’ meaning stupid or lame and ‘faggot’ meaning ‘wierdo’ or whatever)] but that that person might be truly homophobic to the point of violence, especially if they’re big and male. So I find myself avoiding that person and trying to avoid appearing ‘gay’ in order to avoid violence.” That’s my issue with terms like that, not that you are necissarily offending, but you are alienating someone who might be able to share with you something, a good idea, or a friendship, despite their religion or sexuality. Short of that, you are making someone uncomfortable, and not in a way that particularly inspires them to think about their beliefs, just in a way that makes them perhaps act differently and take you as one of those boneheads smurfmensch is talking about.

  31. DCoke says:

    This is not dogma. The theist should do as the theist pleases. But consider that the atheist has a point of view, a strength, that the theist does not. Thus, viewing the religious from an atheist perspective, it is completely just and logical that the atheist should consider the theist stupid, or insane.

  32. Daz says:

    Re the very first comment, by Daniel: Did no one else think ‘Butt Ruggers In The 25th Century’?

    Maybe I need professional help…

  33. fenchurch says:

    What is so great about quantity over quality when it comes to prayin’?

    Pious scabs are nothing new– I am reminded of self-imposed stigmata of some nuns trying to out-holier-than-thou.

  34. Cephas Atheos says:

    Thank the prophet no-one said “gut buggers”, because that would be, well, a slippery slope…

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.