aisha
December 12th, 2018
Even St Paul would have trouble spinning that one.
Jesus & Mo is licensed under a Creative Commons License:
Feel free to copy for noncommercial purposes, under the same license.
Please provide a link back to jesusandmo.net
Hosted by the amazing NearlyFreeSpeech.NET
Protected by the mighty CloudFlare
-
What they're saying...
Jesus & Mo (the characters) are absurd, blinkered, and oddly very sweet. J&M (the cartoon) is brilliant: sharp, delicious, irresistible.
Salman Rushdie
Jesus and Mo cartoons are wonderfully funny and true.
Richard Dawkins
Jesus and Mo make the world a better place, bless their little hearts.
Ophelia Benson
In a world defined by outrage and offence and liberal spinelessness, Jesus and Mo is a treasure, whose value we should never fail to recognize. Read them. Laugh. And think.
Kenan Malik
...a philosophical confrère.
Jerry Coyne
The brilliant, celebrated, freaking hilarious atheist comic strip ...
Greta Christina
...rays of sanity in a befuddled world.
Keri Hulme
The liveliest depictions of Muhammad currently available...
Malise Ruthven
J & Mo is the funniest and most consistently thought-provoking cartoon strip on the Net. In a saner world, it would run in a major newspaper.
Nelson Jones, Heresy Corner
Consistently amusing, frequently thought-provoking and often heart-warming.
New Humanist
Jesus & Mo is one of the most wonderful things on the internet..
JT Eberhard
Wittily captures much of the absurdity of religious apologetics.
Mano Singham
...wonderfully brilliant and witty.
Miranda Celeste Hale
Too good for words.
Maryam Namazie
The Eric and Ernie of monotheism.
Tom Holland
The most impious double act since Sodom and Gomorrah.
Andrew Copson, Chief Executive, BHA
I love jesusandmo.net cartoons - witty and sharp!
Katha Pollitt
Often hilarious, frequently wry, these cartoons do what all the best cartoons do: they tell the truth through humour.
Terry Sanderson, NSS President
...a wonderfully acid British cartoonist...
Nick Cohen
I love the scrappy mockery of Jesus and Mo. Freedom of speech includes the freedom to mock any person, any thing, any activity, and any belief -- and J&M stands up for this unflinchingly
Richard Stallman
...empowering, important and deeply progressive, not to mention hilarious...
Council of Ex-Muslims
Jesus & Mo is my go to example of how to do tasteful, beautiful religious satire.
Eiynah, Polite Conversations
...humor is humor and this cartoonist doesn't have it. Karl Giberson
- Akimbo Comics
- Ape, not Monkey
- Creationist Zoo Keeper
- Dinosaur Comics
- E-merl
- Flea Snobbery
- J&M – in Portuguese
- J&M – in Russian
- Medium Large
- Pictorial Theology
- SMBC
- The Atheist Pig
- Bad Science
- Butterflies & Wheels
- CEMB
- EXMNA
- RichardDawkins.Net
- The Freethinker
- The Rationalizer
- Why Evolution is True
Comix
Other places
Latest book…
The J&M Top Ten
Random oldie…
January 12, 2009Weekly email...
Get an email every time J&M updates. (No spam)-
- NICE T-SHIRT (Thank you for not provoking my uncontrollable lust). Currently unavailable.
1 I can’t find her name in the Quran
2 I can’t find “sex at 9” in the Quran
3 I think facts are important
4 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2012/sep/17/muhammad-aisha-truth
raymondm – Points 1, 2 and 3 are irrelevant, but 4 is an excellent example of the phenomenon which is the subject of this – and last week’s – strip. Aisha’s story is [drum roll] “an affirmation of female autonomy”. Perfect!
Raymond – are you suggesting that the koran is the only source of information? Jesus does begin by discussing issues he has with the koran however he doesn’t say that the marriage and consummation are part of the koran he says it’s an embarrassing aspect of mo’s life
I think Qur’an commentators have different opinions on the whole Aisha marriage thing. Married at 6 or 7, perhaps, but while it’s customary in certain societies for a “marriage” to take place, these are often essentially what we now call an engagement or commitment (and this continues to present day). Consummation is probably the key point: it’s often dated to her being 9 or 10, but some apologists give the benefit of the doubt by placing it at puberty. Presumably, the point of her age was to highlight that she was Muhammad’s only virgin wife, for whatever political use that may have been.
why bicker over silly fairytale stories…. did old mother Hubbard actually have cupboards? did the old women actually live in the shoe? and what about Jack Sprats wife? I think once we get sucked into quarreling about “facts” in myths, we have missed the point and have lost the first round to them… facts do matter, so show me a talking snake or a winged unicorn that fly’s to the moon and we’ll start from there… til then keep your myths out of our schools, court rooms and government.
it’s fascinating that the defense of pederasty hinges on “it was a different time”. well, if your world view revolves around the conjecture of an _unchanging, objective_ standard of morality, IT FOLLOWS that you must regard the same conduct as equally acceptable currently.
M27Holts, I left a comment for you on the previous thread.
My experience of religious believers is that they aren’t embarrassed about anything in their ancient texts or stories. It all just rolls over them. I gave up on arguing religion with my mother when she justified god’s murder of innocent children in Sodom with “Well, what chance would those children have had living in that situation.” That’s when I realized that shaking the faith of an elderly woman was not worth doing, though I did give her shit about opposing same sex marriage.
What’s scariest to me is that, because Mohamed is this “perfect man,” the concept appears to have been spread across the Islamic world that sex with underage girls is perfectly okay. I’ve seen videos of mullahs arguing for betrothal of children as young as ONE YEAR. At what age they feel sex is permissible, that I haven’t seen elucidated, though I’m sure it’s been discussed.
Meanwhile, here I am, thinking that if anyone so much as laid a hand on my daughter at such an age, they might not get the hand back. This kind of acculturation scares the crap outta me.
Mohammed could always adapt the excuse made by Charles Laughton as Henry VIII, for having sex with Anne of Cleves: “The things I do for islam!”
“It was different time and morals cant be applied today”.
Phew! Here was me thinking that the violent jihadism, looking down on kafir unbelievers (especially Jews) as subhuman and treating women’s testimony as 1/4 of a mans was something Islamic states did today. Thank gawd for correcting me. I would want to be one of those irrational “Islamophobes” who think that a set of beliefs that openly calls for my subjugation or death was something to worry about. Praise be to the Guardian! Turns out it was all the fault of the west that the east is the way it was.
Helena: I think there may be a missing “not” in there.
SoG: You know, I think prefer an honest Islamist (who honestly thinks that non-muslims are scum and that western women are all whores) than the hand-wringing lying accomodationists who twist language and try to make the victims feel guilty for being hated. I prefer my enemies in front of me with their true colours flying.
Although the evil referenced in panel four is most peoples main deal breaker on islam, I have always found the events in panel three to be far worse. The various slaughtering attributed to Mo shows him to be a cross between oliie cromwell and genghis khan.
If the koran wasn’t a “religious” book it would be on the nasty shelf with mein kampf, the turner diaries and tintin in the congo. Oops I’m being islamophobic, which I think means “fear of islam” and it’s true islam terrifies me.
Ah well, speaking of fear, I’m getting ready to watch mrs disMays latest speech on brexit from Brussels.
A suggestion:
To most people and their ways of thinking, what happened around the year 600 is far less important than what happens today.
So the fact that Muhammad may have had sex with a child in 600 CE is far less compelling in support of child marriage than modern misbehavior by religious folks is, as a condemnation of religion.
People aren’t convinced by logic, but rather by emotion. I find the best way to approach these topics with believers is to evoke shame – actually use the word. Whether it’s Muslims and terrorism, or Catholics and their priests’ molestations of children, or similar with the Haredi ultra-Orthodox. Just ignore whatever they have to say and commiserate with them on how much shame they must feel, how these acts have brought shame upon their religion from the whole world. It didn’t hurt to say how the whole world knows all about it and is disgusted. Emotionally laden words work well. Logic doesn’t.
But with American Southern Baptist belief in young earth creation, nothing works.
Faith. People place a lot of value for people believing complete bollocks despite a mountain load of conflicting evidence. The more compelling the evidence the more kudos is gained by holding onto your religious belief. Helena, I dont really know Mr Adams, but I like Dilbert. Its almost as funny as this strip sometimes….
So the Guardian has now blamed crusaders for blemishing the prophet of peace. Hmm…sounds like holocaust denial to me.. .
M27 I like Dilbert too. That’s why watching it’s author lose his grip on sanity is so alternately fascinating and horrifying.
It’s a reminder that being smart is no defence against insanity.
G K. Chesteron once put it “a madman isn’t someone whose lost his reason, he’s lost everything except his reason”. Watching Scott Adams calmly and reasonably talk himself into climate change denial, evolution denial, holocaust denial and Trump worship (I swear by all thats sacred I’m not making any of this up–go and look for yourself) is an amazing experience.
It would be easier if it was Alex Jones style ranting and raving (or possibly comedy? Who the hell knows or cares).
Adams hasn’t lost his reason, he’s lost his judgment–something that is a condition of the useful exercise of reason, of assessing and balancing evidence, of realizing where one doesnt have enough experience to be able to hold an opinion, etc. And he now genuinely believes that Trump is some sort of magical wizard bending reality to his will (although, for unspecified reasons, the rest of us are immune to his magical powers). He’s not frothing at the mouth- he’s what Pratchett once described as “frothing at the brain”. Far far more scary.
If I found myself (say) regularly soiling myself publicly and being hauled into custody having picked fights with burly thugs I (hope?) I might get some sort of internal “It didn’t use to be this way” alarm.
But what if, instead of shitting my pants, I regualrly shit my brain in public. And I’m smart enough to keep using big words. How would I ever know that I’m now a waste of DNA? Scary.
Ahh. I didnt realise that he was a Trumpster. Having said that you get geology graduates believing the earth is only 10000 years old and you get people with biology doctorates who insist that ID is right and evolution wrong. How many people have a high IQ and believe in all sorts of bat-shittery as and when it suits them?
M27Holts: Re: “geology graduates” and “biology doctorates”: What colleges/universities awarded them their degrees?
They compartmentalise their faith and the science degrees they swatted for. So they passed the exams but think that their faith is still correct. One of my friends has a doctorate in Geology and has lectured on plate tectonics for the past 30 years. He told me last xmas that he has mentored dozens of students who regurgitate the facts to pass the exams but still believe in tbe literal interpretation of the bible and think that the science is made up by satan. I kid you not. You dont get marked down if you dont believe in the answers you have regurgitated.
Those students were mainly from the usa he just confirmed on facebook.
M27Holts: “… students were mainly from the USA …” Why does that not surprise me!
Actually, I was speculating that the degrees in question might have been from hard-core Christian Colleges, in the USA Deep South or elsewhere, offering courses in bible-based creationist biology or deluvian geology, similar to “Answers in Genesis” teachings.
I think that he said that their brainwashing as a child is so complete that the living earth with its vulcanism and plate friction and theories of gravitational and gyroscopic actions etc gives them hooks to hang hades upon….Religion would cease to be if it was illegal to brainwash kids with it…
My wise grandma said “People looking for hell. Always find it eventually.”
Re Geology graduates and similar.
There is the fascinating story of Kurt Wise, PhD in paleontology. He studied under Stephen Jay Gould (strong proponent of evolution, but for political reasons thinks it stopped at the human neck, but thats a side issue here).
Wise is very smart, has read all the material, has contributed material to actual scientific textbooks and remains one of the most prominent young earth creationists. This is what he says:
“Although there are scientific reasons for accepting a young earth, I am a young age creationist because that is my understanding of the Scripture. As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate”
Rarely do we get this level of honesty. Most of the time humans hide behind weasel words such as “I am just asking questions”, “I am obediently following the truth wherever it leads”, “This is not settled science” and similar.]
None of that nonsense for Kurt Wise! “I believe this because I want to. It comforts me.”
I had a similar exchange with Peter Hitchens online a few years back (about drug policy) where, at one point, he said “I couldnt bear to live in a universe where wicked people were not punished”.
Well, thanks for the honesty Peter. There we have it. Motivated reasoning laid bare. Its one reason why philosophers try to keep facts and values distinct in their reasoning.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Wise
Another victim of childhood indoctrination. Imagine if fookwits couldnt reproduce it’s easy if you try!
Funny though: you never hear about people who drive a car saying they don’t believe in internal combustion engines, that the car moves through faith.
Biologists believe in evolution because it’s useful as a framework for thought, to help design good experiments; plus evidence. If it was useless, but ID was useful, they might use, hence believe, in that.
It turns out that the framework of religion is useful for something: mental comfort. As Helena indicated, two posts back. Well, flying planes into buildings isn’t that comfortable for other people. Teaching myths when there is massive evidence to the contrary, for someone’s comfort, is simply immoral.
And WHAT ARE the scientific reasons for accepting that the earth is only 10000 years old?
The fact that he could read the bible without laughing out loud tells you everything you would need to know. My mate has just commented that once you realise the graduate has a bible in their satchel you will struggle to convince them that its as much use in the classroom as a copy of Tess Oth D’urbovilles…..
Presumably kurt Wise (turn off the irony meter now) believes in Noahs Ark. He needs to have his qualifications recinded for being a dangerous lunatic..or for just being an egregious liar….
The scientific reasons for believing in a young earth are (brace yourself now) looking at all the So and So begat Such and Such (In the OT) and counting backwards. Bishop Usher came up withthte 6000 years figure from this.
Helena, also, the Jewish year, supposedly counting from creation, is currently 5779. Every such estimate involves error bounding, so I’d say the date is perfectly accurate… ±14 billion. 😉
M27Holts, the problems of fitting all the species into the Ark and preventing them from eating each other, can all be resolved by assuming that ol’ Jehovah whipped up a miracle.
Nothing wrong with any of that … except, of course, that it’s ridiculous bullshit.
I’m very disappointed. I thought there may be some provable chemistry that can cast sufficient doubt upon the molecular dating techniques that currently date the planet earth at 4.5 billion years old. The words bible and scientific will never be compatible. Honestly, the urge to choke the fooker with shredded bible pages would be almost too much of temptation. How Dawkins didn’t snot him is testament to his genteel upbringing…
Laripu: Nice one!
The standard answer in the Jewish Orthodox tradition is “what is a year to G-d?” (They didn’t like writing his name, and love answering questions with a question). They were ok with saying that 6k years to god was 4 billion years to us. But then, Jewish scholars have had years to hone this sort of sophistry (bs) and (dare I say?) they are a bit cannier than christian fundamentalists (who have a more in-your-face, do as we say or we burn you style of bs).
Maybe its because Jews havent traditionally had a whole lot of political power ? (E.g. they’d dearly love to burn me but cant get the council to remit the zoning violations that my smouldering corpse would create).