That offend the Prophet of mercy


Now have some revolting kakk from the International Union for Islamic Scholars.

(That’s not “scholars” as normally understood, of course. It means not people who have read and understood many books, but people who have read and memorized one book.)

IUMS calls for the Islamic nation to continue in the legal peaceful demonstrating to defend the great messenger, and calls for the West to protect Muslim communities from attacks.

Defend him from what? He’s dead. It’s too late to defend him because he has no life to defend any more.

IUMS had received with deep sorr[ow], the insistence of some of the re-deployment of graphics or movies that offend the Prophet of mercy, the Great Prophet Muhammad – peace be upon him

But they don’t offend him, because they can’t offend him, because he’s not alive to be offended. People who are no longer alive can no more be offended than they can be surprised or delighted or giddy or afraid. You have to be alive to have feelings and thoughts. This is basic. Living people can be hurt; dead people can’t. Dead people can sustain damage to their posthumous reputations, but that’s all.

ignoring the feelings of a great nation that came into the world with values and ethics and knowledge and civilization that lit up the whole world, and spread goodness between the people , and is still trying to recover, under the conspiracy of the conspirators on it, to continue to provide universal mission based on freedom, compassion, justice, and the reconstruction of the earth

No. That universal mission is not based on freedom. Not even a little bit; not in any sense. Submission is not freedom, it’s the opposite of freedom.

It’s not great on compassion or justice either, at least not going by its current record in countries where Islam is entangled with government.

and about the continued abuse of the systematic Holy Prophet, IUMS affirms the following:

  • The Union confirms that the Islamic religion forbids not only the contempt of the Prophet Muhammad – peace be upon him, but denied contempt of all religions and the prophets and holy sites.

No. The Islamic religion can “forbid” what it likes, but it doesn’t get to impose its rules on people who have never signed up to obey them.

•The Union calls on Islamic countries to submit a global law draft criminalizing defamation of religions and the prophets and the holy sites of all, through a global conference to discuss clauses in complete freedom.

Such a law, of course, would be, again, the very opposite of freedom. It’s not freedom that these “scholars” want. It’s global authority they want, and they can’t have it.

• The Union calls on Western countries to provide full protection to the Muslims living in their country, whether they are citizens or residents or visitors, especially after a series of systematic attacks, they have suffered from after the events of the French newspaper “Charlie Hebdo” and till now.

Certainly. All people should be protected.

And guess who is the president of this fine outfit.

Mr. Dr. Yusuf Al-Qaradawi
IUMS President
Nope nope nope.

Comments

  1. Blanche Quizno says

    a great nation that came into the world with values and ethics and knowledge and civilization that lit up the whole world, and spread goodness between the people

    Well, the Islamic Golden Age certainly illuminated the whole world with science and learning, but once the Ottoman Empire turned Islam into what we now know it as, all that came to a screeching halt and has never revived. “Goodness between the people”? Again, the flourishing of science and learning within the Islamic Renaissance, where the hadith principle that “the ink of the scholar’s pen is more precious than the blood of the martyr” was, indeed, apparently a governing principle, speaks to “spreading goodness between the people” (their brilliance touched off the Renaissance in the West, after all), but ever since Islam became what we now recognize as Islam, that’s been dead and gone. Some “scholars”, the ones who’ve read more than one book, point to religious traditionalists as the responsible parties in choking the brilliance out of the Muslim world:

    So, how did Islamdom really lose her virtue?

    Simply, she forgot the importance of reason. It wasn’t because of moral decadence nor because of the infidels. No, it was because of one main cause, and that was the abandonment of reason. Our philosophical thinkers faded to the background as religious literalists rose to the fore. The freedom of thought, expression, experimentation, and questioning fell under the rule of obdurate Traditionalists, who quashed the use of reason. It is because of this that Islam’s virtue has disappeared.

    As for the Traditionalists of today, they love to brag about Islamdom’s Golden Age of achievements. They love to gloat about her past glory and relative harmonious openness. They love to point out her former flourishing and her sciences and innovations. But those achievements were the work of persevering Rationalism – the very intellectual foundation that Traditionalists still attack today. If Islamdom is to ever rise again to its former stature, it must look to its past, to its real heroes, and turn once more to the reason and empiricism that made it great. http://www.freearabs.com/index.php/ideas/102-stories/624-jb-span-islam-jb-span-the-historic-battle-for-reason

    If only…

  2. Crimson Clupeidae says

    Fuck the prophet.

    Since he’s merciful and all, I’ll just assume he’ll forgive me. :)

  3. Pierce R. Butler says

    Blanche Quizno @ # 1: … once the Ottoman Empire turned Islam into what we now know it as, all that came to a screeching halt …

    The histories I’ve read mostly point to the Mongol invasion of Mesopotamia and sacking of Baghdad (circa 1258) as the tipping point for general decline of civilization in the Middle East. Others state that the problems began earlier as the success of Caliphate imperialism led to a dominance by militarism and high-level corruption – a phenomenon now readily observable in a superpower near you…

  4. says

    That’s not “scholars” as normally understood, of course. It means not people who have read and understood many books, but people who have read and memorized one book.

    Now, now. I’m sure they’ve brushed up on the Hadith, as well.

  5. johnthedrunkard says

    Irshad Manji blames Ghazali for ‘closing’ the gates of Ijtihad (enquiry) around 1,000 CE.

    Most of the ‘golden age’ was the product of NON-muslims who were swept up under the control of the vast Islamic Empire. Even then, muslims did not bother to study Greek, Hebrew, Latin, or Sanskrit…or any other language. They relied on enslaved scholars of those cultures to spoon-feed them knowledge.

    So yes, the Arab world DID serve as a bridge between Asia and Europe, and some important books were preserved under their occupation. But the fantasy of the Islamic Golden Age is a fantasy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *