The cartoons of Prophet Muhammed (pbuh)?

Question

I don't mean offend people by this question. Please understand it is simply an inquisitive query.
Why was there such a massive Muslim outcry, and sometimes very threatening? I remember seeing on the news people holding banners threatening to "kill all those who insult Islam" or "the phrophet".
Why were these people like this?
Is there any need, when many Muslims were calmy using their right to protest and getting their point across?
Can someone explain why people felt that?

Please don't offend anyone in your answers.

Answer 1

I agree with not trying to offend anyone but I disagree with any use of violence to get your way of force others to obey your beliefs. We need to strongly maintain our freedom of speech and expression. One only needs to look at any Nation controlled by Islam to see they seek to impose Islamic law on everyone. So this is just a first step. The rest will follow. We will defend our freedoms or lose them. And our own government may be the worst one. Making you wear seat belts, helmets, and now passing laws about what you can eat in restaurants.

Answer 2

I think that if the cartoonist (who very much was trying to be inflammatory) had simply made a cartoon that had Muhammad walking to a mosque or something like that, it would've offended some people (images of Muhammad are forebidden in Islam), but it wouldn't have been a big deal. What the cartoons did was call Muhammad a terrorist, and depict him wearing explosives. On just a general humanity theme, this is intentionally hurtful, came at a time where muslims internally and externally were in a lot of strife, and was wildly distasteful.

South Park did a show years ago that depicted Muhammad as one of the "SuperFriends" alongside Buddha, Jesus, Moses, and others. I didn't hear anyone complain about this. To me that is the difference. One was done with comedy as the intent, the other was done to intentionally be hurtful, try to creat a bad situation, and was just flat-out classless.

Answer 3

I believe it is less about religion than is portrayed. It is about power and influence. After certain terrible global events the Muslim community worldwide finds the Western world in fear. Yes, it was the actions of a few that caused this, but countries have seen their governments give a significant amount of attention to Muslim needs because of this. There is a saying that 'if you give an inch, they'll take a yard'. I believe it is like that in this case, and when the Muslims kick off at anything and everything, it is not about being offended it is about getting more and more influence and more and more of their wants.
Thus governments, national and local, wanting an easy life and fearing the worst, feel the need to show an over the top amount of leniency. That is what the demonstrations were about.

Answer 4

There was an otcry because some people felt insulted and offended.
It is a fair comment to query why some should threaten murder in response.
Surely the call to kill is even more offensive than any cartoon.
As a non-Muslim, I thought that they were insensitive to say the least....but one of the side effects of freedom of expression is that views which others may feel to be offensive or insensitive will be stated.
There must be very few statements that could not offend SOMEBODY.
I would have thought,however, that God is quite big enough to look after Himself.

Answer 5

I quote:

Islamic tradition explicitly prohibits images of God, Muhammad and all the major prophets of the Christian and Jewish traditions.

More widely, Islamic tradition has discouraged the figurative depiction of living creatures, especially human beings. Islamic art has therefore tended to be abstract or decorative.

Why is the insult so deeply felt by some Muslims?

Of course, there is the prohibition on images of Muhammad.

But one cartoon, showing the Prophet wearing a turban shaped as a bomb with a burning fuse, extends the caricature of Muslims as terrorists to Muhammad.

In this image, Muslims see a depiction of Islam, its prophet and Muslims in general as terrorists.

This will certainly play into a widespread perception among Muslims across the world that many in the West harbour a hostility towards - or fear of - Islam and Muslims.

End of quote.

God knows best.

Peace and Love.

Answer 6

Are there any true images of the Prophet - does anybody know what he looked like; let's be clear, there are plenty of images of Jesus Christ and not too many have seen Him recently!

What is quite true is that it is not right to abuse another religion, regardless of one's own belief. threats to kill as a retaliation for a perceived insult fly in the face of decency and are contrary to the will of God whatever you choose to call the deity you may worship.

It could be that those who started the outcry need to look at themselves and question the leadership they either have or do not have on the earth at this time. The greater the local focus within a religion the harder it becomes to speak with a unified voice.

Answer 7

ok when i heard about the cartoon i felt angry but i was shocked by the muslim response. i think the reason they reacted so much was because people dont understand that our religion is not something to be critiqued or mocked, its our beliefs, its how we live and why we live. the respect we hold in our heart for Prophet Muhammad (Pbuh) cannot be compared. its not allowed in islam to make any image to represent the prophets and then to make a image that makes him look that way to the world was very disrespecting. i guess christians aren't as offended regarding any insults toward jesus...there was a video on youtube of Jesus to which many christians were guiltily laughing others were saying it was just fun. few got angry. if there had been a similar video of Muhammad (Pbuh) none of the muslims would be laughing. i know that for sure. i know the muslims went way overboard but it wasn't everyone. i guess they feel they are betraying their Prophet (Pbuh) by keeping quiet but going crazy will in no way solve anything which they fail to understand. my cousin in pakistan told me about the uproar there but it was basically led by the poorer uneducated class which says something. asking them to calmly sit and protest is not that easy of a task

Answer 8

I was amused by the ironic plack which read 'BEHEAD THOSE WHO SAY ISLAM IS A VIOLENT RELIGION'.

Don't offend anyone? Hm. Freedom of speech is about not always hearing what we want. Please consider that. I don't live in a theocracy and I say what I please.

**I'd like to add that Dawkins gives a good description of the unfolding events in the 1st chapter of 'the god delusion' - the most offensive cartoons werent by the danish cartoonists at all but they were put in with them as a deliberate attempt to incite mayhem. Why were they all asking the Danish government to apologise? for what? having a free press and freedom of speech?**

Answer 9

First of all, I was furious at the reaction to the cartoons - people should not lose their lives over something so trivial.

In fairness, however, I believe that the Muslims involved felt that the cartoon was a sort of "straw that broke the camel's back" and that the cartoon encapsulated decades of Western bigotry and oppression.

I'm not saying I believe that, or that I agree with it, I just think that was probably their point of view.

Answer 10

The point really was that there ARE limits to freedom of speech. As much as you disliked seeing those phrases - warning of death and destruction to those who opposed the Prophet (Btw, that was only one protest, most protests were mudane and boring, but that one fitted with the stereotype and so was broadcast around the world) - those who protested were more offended by what they saw as an attack on their very being, their faith, thier deen, their core inner self, that which offers guidance and fulfillment. Their most beloved, Muhammad himself, was being mocked and derided as a common Terrorist. So, If those cartoonists were free to humiliate their deen, their faith, their being under the guise of Freedom of speech, they would use that same freedom to terrify.