June 18th, 2010
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
Okay wtf… that website has quotes from G. B. Shaw praising Islam! Apparently from a book called ‘The Genuine Islam’! Am I going blind? Has everyone gone bat-shit crazy?
If I recall my bible correctly, jesus wasn’t all that into equal rights either…
I knew it. We have to thank the Catholics for science, and now the Islamics for feminism. I think I can claim to have seen it coming.
I like the implication that Islam gave women the right to vote over 1000 years ago.
I “love” when fundie Christians self-righteously whine about how oppressive burqas are all while they bitch about how women lead “good Christian MEN to SIN~! with lustful thoughts!” simply by existing.
Fundies with planks in their eyes pointing out the splinters in their so-called enemies.
Much like going to an AA meeting in Scotland….
azurefrog, it wasn’t so much Jesus that wasn’t into equal rights as his followers, particularly Paul. He hated everybody and everything (especially women) except himself. Personally, I think that most “Christian” churches should actually be called “Paulist”. The inventor of the time machine would do the world a favor by going back to the first century CE and killing Saul of Tarsus in his cradle.
Indeed. If Jesus saw the modern churches, he’d be wondering why they were eating pork and not being circumcised. At least Islam is true to its founder.
@Nunuv: “Pauline” – that is an actual adjective, with the exact meaning you want, and it sounds better than “Paulist.”
Regrettably in many instances they are “last rites”.
Re: IHRC and the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights. May I suggest that for a pitch perfect analysis one need only read Chapter five of ‘Does God Hate Women?’ by Benson and Stangroom?
@ Nunuv: Actually, I think Paul alias Saul hated himself the most, which was why he could’t love anyone else. From his writings and hang-ups, he sounds like a homophobic closet-homosexual, who had to chastise the whole world for what he felt was his own shortcomings. (Except when he was feeling soppy and had to wax vaguely and poetically about “twue lowe”…)
beleiving in women’s rights is rather conditional to what you beleive those rights to be – the gal on the poster says it all
it makes sense, I always thought that just because Freud had a mommy complex didn’t mean that everyone else did
“and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them”
being framed as a complete intent.
I can’t understand how both could physically be accomplished at the one time. Perhaps the writer of that segment had a problem with snoring and the couple had a big row over it.
The IbM propaganda identifies with the values most cherished by the Left, at whom it is squarely aimed. As Author points out here, it is all bull-frog. Beware the Lefty-Muzi alliance, it is a front for Sharia.
‘I’ before ‘E’ except after ‘C’, in other words “believing” and “believe” rather than the way it came out in your post.
BTW you hit the nail on the head with that post, regardless of spelling. 🙂
@Godless not gormless
Read the Daily Fail, much?
I never read the Daily Mail or any other papers for that matter. They are a waste of trees. But I guess this is you saying that I am being taken in by scaremongering about the idea of islam taking over. Is that what you’re getting at?
@Godless not gormless
Your rant is every bit as terrifying as anything the religious folks come up with. Exchanging one make-believe world of religion with another one based on xenophobic paranoia is not an improvement.
Muslim woman have rights, as long as they live in non muslim countries…
Peace and love, GnotG, peace and love!
@Godless not gormless
It sounds like you are. Remember the first amendment? Letting people freely call for the destruction of the USA is one of the founding principles of the USA.
Btw, never could understand why the shape of one’s genitalia should determine the extent to which one is afforded respect; or the shape of the map one happens to have been born onto? ‘This country’? Get over it!
still smoking the good stuff i see. can i have some too?
It’s truely amazing! The moderate muslims praise warlord Mohammed, the drowner of children. What a splendid link. Its added to my favorites !
Apologies to all for the painfully obvious, clichéd response here, but sometimes painfully clichéd comments merit equivalent responses.
@ GodlessnotGenius —
By the “logic” you use, Catholics and Protestants should all be sent packing; in absolute numbers, there are far more people “slaughtering people all over the globe” who do so because they’re “inspired by Jesus,” than there are Muhmmad-inspired mass-murderers. Not to mention “destroy[ing] every other country they’ve ever invaded” (that one clearly goes without saying).
And the Hindus — especially the Hindus! (You do know it was the Tamil Tigers, who are majority Hindu, who invented the concept of suicide bombing, yes?)
So: Are you willing to say to these groups what you say so blithely about Muslims? To their faces?
“Your rant is every bit as terrifying as anything the religious folks come up with”
Really. You think? I think that’s a more than a bit silly.
Muslims don’t understand peace and love. Just war, oppression and hate. As for your stupid comment about “this country”, this country happens to be where I live and it’s where many of us value free speech and freedom of choice. If muslims get their way all that will change. It’s already changing and silly people like you don’t help. You seem to think that muslims who settle here will be impressed by how we live more freely rather than be incensed that we do – which is exactly what happens. They then rant on about why we should be made to live like them and our mad politicians give them what they want. They are gradually taking over and it’s only a matter of time unless we do something about it soon. And I say, send them all to live somewhere that gives a shit about their evil death cult. All of them. I have every right to defend my country.
“this country happens to be where I live and it’s where many of us value free speech and freedom of choice. ” and yet you would apparently deny those to muslims? *braincramp*
Way weird. Atheist Gng gets crucified by his own kind for opposing a religion, fhs. I wonder if Christianity was identified with Africa & Asia (where it is growing fastest) would critics of the gospel be accused of xenophobia? FTR, I stand with Gng in defense of the West.
I think the problem sensible moderate Muslims have is that the Koran is supposed to be the word of God dictated (not read) to Muhammad and is exactly as it’s supposed to be. It’s a single work and as I understand the state of scholarship on the Koran is nowhere near that of the Bible. Unlike Christians, they can’t blame Paul and other Church fathers for the bad things in their holy book.
On the other hand, traditionalist muslims also think Muhammad’s responsible for geology, embryology, microbiology and immunology (remember that thing about dipping flies into your drink?). Also, Muhammad wasn’t a merchant and never travelled before getting the revelation, Islam spread peacefully, and
Say what you like, at least the Iranians lead the world in transgender rights. Granted, they do it because they believe it’s caused by souls accidentally getting stuck in the wrong body instead of neurological development….
Please, look at this incredible news about vatican…they are really umbeliveble! I´m brazilian and I think they lost a good chance to be quiet! They forgive priest who molests children, but not a ateist.
@Godless not gormless
That’s one of those comments where the term ‘islamophobia’ actually is appropriate.
I know it is often used to whine after a legitimate critique of the awful system of islam, but islamophobia does exist.
It is like antiamericanism, which is often not easily distinguishable from legitimate criticism of the foreign politics of the most powerful and most militant nation in the world. Or antisemitism from legitimate criticism of serious human rights violations in Gaza.
Your comments however bare the scaremongering rhetorics that completely ignore that the majority of muslims here in the west are just some guys who want to go on with their lives and happen to believe some evil medieval bullshit. But – and that is the crux – they don’t act the part or even think they should. Sounds strange? Well, people are…
Excellent. I submitted an enquiry to the ‘Inspired by Muhammad’ website after seeing this poster, gently reminding them that Muhammad had sex with a child bride and therefore surely there are many better sources of ‘inspiration’ to promote. Unfortunately, owing to an overwhelming positive response to their campaign, they cannot promise a reply to every individual enquiry.
Hadn’t picked up on the omission of the word ‘equal’ though, which is tacitly assumed- very clever!
That’s the whole point of the muslim – similar to the christian – view on the status of women. Let me describe it in their terms:
A woman is of equal value to a man, but inherently different and thus has to fulfill a different role in life. She has to take care of the house and to raise the children. If she does this she can also have a job (now that’s one that’s just BOUND to work out wonderful). The money she earns belongs only to herself and she doesn’t have to share it with her family. If she does so it is regarded as charity (and by implication an embarrassment for her husband).
The mans first duty is to take care of his family. If he can’t earn enough money to support the family, he failed his responsibility. He makes the important decisions regarding the family and lovingly leads his wife and children in all affairs.
The label usually is ‘equal rights is not identical rights’. The rest of that strange “inspired by” article is just saying that 800 years ago the muslim world was more civilized than Europe. We all know that. BIG deal.
@foundationist: which is why both are crap. Individual rights cannot, by definition, be limited by the individual’s gender. If they are gender-limited, then they are (religiously-imposed) restrictions, not rights.
Muslims don’t understand peace and love.
Really? Lacking the concept, huh? I guess they are not truly human, then.
What’s phase two?
Godless not Gormless has been blacklisted for being abusive and dull.
Praise be unto Author, (bowing, genuflecting, groveling, etc.)
thanks, but lazy and dyslexic is a terrible combo for spelling
pretty sure that Japanese kamakzi pilots preceded mere suicide bombers
I read somewhere that in the postwar period, the first religious suicide bombers were Lebanese christians. Then again, the communist Viet Cong were known to use it as one of their party tricks too. It seems to be a hallmark of any kind of sufficiently warped ideological zealotry.
I don’t buy this idea that Islam is ‘just’ another religion and that muslims in the west ‘just want to get on with their lives.
Many years ago, when Irish terrorism was at its height I lived in digs, in London. My landlady was Irish, but had spent most of her life in London where she had worked, married and raised two daughters. She was the kindest lady you could wish to meet but under no circumstances could you get her to say the slightest thing against the terror bombers operating in London, “I’m sure they have their reasons”, she would say. She had a friend, of similar background, who ran a pub and kept some rooms for rent. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if some of her ‘guests’ had blood on their hands.
Yes your ‘western’ muslims might want a ‘quiet life’ but who will they fund, give passive support to, or vote for? Islam will ‘quietly’ become the norm, and once that happens, like communism, it will be too late, you won’t be able to vote it out.
As to the London campaign, I just love the way that they tell us that Mo conquered Mecca ‘with humility’, so that will be alright then!
@Broggly. Your comment about Iran and trans gender rights was provocative enough to get me checking it out with Iranian mates.
Turns out you are right, apparently.
Of course the full story, which you may or may not know, is that the people that transition typically turn into social outcasts and, in many cases, only do it to avoid a death penalty for homosexuality. This allows Amadinajad to retain the fiction of no homosexuals in Iran. Fascinating.
I know that, we all know that. Just wanted to outline how they see it. And how they see it is bullshit.
Well, as I said, there is such a thing as legitimate critique of the inherently antidemocratic and inhuman system that islam is (no doubt about it), and such a thing as islamophobia. Deciding which is which is often a tricky business, at least for me. Even the muslim fundamentalist terrorists have a few good arguments about the exploitation of the third world by the west. Is anyone who agrees with them on that topic a fundamentalist? Or someone who points out that the number of civilians killed by western soldiers in the war on terror is many many times larger than the number of civilians killed in muslim extremist attacks? What about someone who finds the western media biased? Or someone who thinks that religion and state should not be totally separated because he thinks god is the foundation of our morals?
As boring and old-fashioned as it sounds, I think the world is too complex for easy divisions into good and evil groups, and there are slippery slopes galore. Navigating them is the trick.
foundationist: … I think the world is too complex for easy divisions into good and evil groups…
Yeah, well, that’s what you think. The Supreme Court of the United States, however, has just decided that such divisions are just dandy, and even the most innocuous contact with a group the federal government has declared “terrorists” can get you 15 years on ice.
The case was argued on behalf of the Obama regime by one Elena Kagan, apparently soon to wear the dreaded Black Robe herself. So who are you to argue with such majestic intellects?
from the article:
“The US Supreme Court on Monday upheld the constitutionality of a federal law that makes it illegal to teach members of a foreign terrorist group how to use peaceful means to pursue political goals.”
Good thing they didn’t outlaw teaching members of a foreign terrorist group how to use violent means to pursue political goals. The CIA would have been in deep shit otherwise 🙂
@Author, I did think it was a bit sneaky to upgrade the lady’s headscarf to a (?)niqab, when in the actual poster you can see her face; then again, you did link to a site with the original clearly visible. I still thought it was unnecessary. I wonder why you made the change.
@sweetpityfulmercy – I’m surprised nobody’s poked at this ‘drowner of children’ assertion. Anything to back up this assertion, or is it just reactionary bullshit?
It’s kind of funny how MaryD says in the same post that Islam is isn’t just another religion, but then brings up a different group that had a similar set of issues in the same post.
From what I hear, while Mohammad certainly did have some nasty bits in his story (the whole child marriage thing), there are also some things that the fundamentalists like to forget about such as how he worked for a woman who was his mentor at being a merchant.
I’m not saying the history of Islam is a particularly good thing to be inspired by, just pointing out something that amuses me. People who want to “get back to the time of” things ignore amazing amounts of what they supposedly revere.
@Broggly – a pity that Iran is embracing transgender rights for the wrong reasons, and still continues to execute gays. But, half a loaf is better than none!
Ah, human behavior is everywhere there are humans. I’m finding the comments have shifted from comic 1 to this particular issue. As people grow familiar wih each other and cozy with their presence here, the divisions start & it’s no longer one happy family under the atheist banner. I’ve not read all the comments on all the comic posts, but enough to get a feeling that he divisiveness set in around this point. What do you think? (anyone) I’m often distressed at witnessing how much difference there really can be among people that all believe (supposedly) in the same thing, even when the topics are (seemingly to me) less convoluted and more rational. So… Just observing… I’m still in awe at most of the comments here.
Sorry for iPhone typos 🙁
You know, Dysamoria, it is actually possible for people to have differing opinions and to discuss them without divisions appearing. I think the mistake you’re making is in assuming that there is a ‘What the Atheist does and doesn’t think’ instruction book somewhere, but the rather more prosaic truth is that atheists on the whole have only one thing in common – disbelief in gods. Think about it, if there weren’t differing views among the contributors to the discussions here, there’s be little more in the discussions than “Nice one Author (again)” “I agree” “So do I” “Me too” “Like” “lol lol lol” and so on, and wheres the fun in that?