Now even the word “Mohammed” is too offensive. I thought I was done talking about the childish responses from Muslims at the University of Wisconsin – Madison over the chalk drawings of stick figures labeled “Mohammed.” And I’d already written about the absurdity of Muslims objecting to drawings of anything that just have the name “Mohammed” attached to them to illustrate how silly this whole idea of rejecting any images of Mohammed.
As I reported the other day, first, they went a great degree out of their way and wasted a hell of a lot of time writing “Ali” after Mohammed’s name…because that’s apparently all that’s required to turn blasphemy into harmless stick figures. This led the local atheist group responsible for the original drawings. took a cue from the South Park creators and started drawing just the stick figure and the word “Censored” next to it. They also drew some with the following text: “Muham…is this okay?”
Apparently, it wasn’t.
The even write the name of Islam’s favorite child rapist, or you know, even half the name of their favorite child rapist is going too far. So what did they do? They rubbed away the word “Mohammed” near several of the stick figures.
You’ve illustrated better than anyone else could that there’s a direct correlation between Islam and certifiable insanity.
Okay, there’s a chance this wasn’t actually done by the local Muslim Student Association. But given that we know they already were willing to waste hours going around campus adding “Ali” to the name Mohammed, is it really that far of a stretch to assume they were responsible?
As for criticisms that this whole venture had no legitimate merit and was purely about offending people, Chris Calvey, president of the Atheists, Humanists, & Agnostics group at the University of Wisconsin – Madison, had this to say:
A common sentiment I’ve heard the past few days went a little something like this: “I’m totally in favor of free speech and all, but what you’re doing is needlessly offensive. Just because you can draw Muhammad doesn’t mean that you should.”
And my response was simple — we shall see if I can.
As it turns out, no, you cannot draw depictions of Muhammad in Madison. At least, not without having them immediately changed to pictures of Muhammad Ali, and not without having them censored the next day. Let’s imagine an alternate universe. Let’s say the drawings were never tampered with, but instead were met with nothing more than shrugged shoulders and public admonishment for our childish behavior. In this scenario the egg would be on our faces. Instead, suffice it to say that our point has been proven. The right to criticize religion and perform blasphemous acts needs to be defended more than ever.
Spectacularly well said, Chris. These Muslims missed the whole point. And in the process, they made our point for us. It’s not about drawing stick figures to piss people off. It’s about how mere stick figures have the unwarranted power to make possibly otherwise rational people behave in ways unacceptable in any civilized society.
This is how buildings are toppled, not by airplanes but by ideas. Ideas that overpower people’s rational minds and allow them to justify unspeakable carnage in the name of righteousness combined with a belief that their all-powerful tribal god is so impotent it needs them to defend its honor.
Despite their “faith” in their teachings and the absolute power of their god to control the universe, these Muslims feel threatened by chalk drawings of stick figures. A strong belief system should value criticism because it tests one’s faith, which leads to stronger faith when that belief is verifiable as the truth. Only false prophets teaching a weak faith fear the questioning of that faith, because they know they might be wrong. If they’ve got “The Truth” on your side, why are they so afraid of stick figures?