Comments on: Will Muslims go the whole hog and destroy this painting? http://freethinker.co.uk/2008/10/16/will-muslims-go-the-whole-hog-and-destroy-this-painting/ The voice of atheism since 1881 Mon, 13 Feb 2012 01:51:59 +0000 hourly 1 By: Karinina http://freethinker.co.uk/2008/10/16/will-muslims-go-the-whole-hog-and-destroy-this-painting/comment-page-1/#comment-35077 Karinina Sat, 22 May 2010 01:40:30 +0000 http://www.freethinker.co.uk/?p=2140#comment-35077 When I see images like this it makes me think. That does not mean I approve or even understand it ... it just makes me think. Artists interpret and express their feelings, politics, rage, whatever it is they want to say through their art, be it music, painting, sculpturing ... what ever talent God has blessed them with. Mine is music ... less graphic but I can say in music what I often fail to do in words. And sometimes it's the only voice or way we can best express ourselves. How many volumes does a picture speak? Art rarely needs translation, though it's often interpreted and debated, especially when it's thought provoking. Art is dynamic, not appreciated one moment and treasured the next. If you don't like it, don't look at it, don't give it any more thought. If you feel a need to voice your discontent, then do so, peacefully. In Beijing, China, on display at a shopping mall, there is a sculpture of a crucifixion with the Mickey Mouse head body wearing high-heels (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/theweekinpictures/7725687/The-week-in-pictures-14-May-2010.html?image=23). Someone created something that said something and though I don't get it, is art and approved by the Chinese government. It's provocative to some, insulting and distasteful to others, meaningless to some others, and hailed as art by those who either get it or simply respect the technique. For me, I just clicked "next". When I see images like this it makes me think. That does not mean I approve or even understand it … it just makes me think. Artists interpret and express their feelings, politics, rage, whatever it is they want to say through their art, be it music, painting, sculpturing … what ever talent God has blessed them with. Mine is music … less graphic but I can say in music what I often fail to do in words. And sometimes it’s the only voice or way we can best express ourselves. How many volumes does a picture speak? Art rarely needs translation, though it’s often interpreted and debated, especially when it’s thought provoking. Art is dynamic, not appreciated one moment and treasured the next. If you don’t like it, don’t look at it, don’t give it any more thought. If you feel a need to voice your discontent, then do so, peacefully. In Beijing, China, on display at a shopping mall, there is a sculpture of a crucifixion with the Mickey Mouse head body wearing high-heels (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new.....l?image=23). Someone created something that said something and though I don’t get it, is art and approved by the Chinese government. It’s provocative to some, insulting and distasteful to others, meaningless to some others, and hailed as art by those who either get it or simply respect the technique. For me, I just clicked “next”.

]]> By: Mokhtar Badri http://freethinker.co.uk/2008/10/16/will-muslims-go-the-whole-hog-and-destroy-this-painting/comment-page-1/#comment-10226 Mokhtar Badri Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:09:44 +0000 http://www.freethinker.co.uk/?p=2140#comment-10226 Dear David, thank you for your quich reply to my request. Following is my comment: As the row has now calmed down, I hope that I can express my opinion and expect to be understood away from any kind of tension. The young artist Sarah Maple has chosen a controversial topic for her exhibition. She has the full right to portray herself in whatever appearance she likes. She has the right to express her opinion free of any kind of coercion or intimidation. We have no authority or intention to police artists’ works and we have never done that. However, we believe that we’ve all legitimate right to comment on her work once displayed in the public domain. I still think Sarah was not considerate enough to use Islamic imagery mixed with signs that contradict Islamic values. When asked by the Telegraph to comment on her work I insisted that nobody has the right to limit her freedom but warned that her work was provocative. the paper went on quoting that “MAB plans to visit the SaLon Gallery to demand that it remove Sarah Maple’s painting” and “She clearly wants to provoke a strong reaction from Muslims and that is what she will get”. These were misquotations by Mandrake. We wrote to the Telegraph asking them to correct the statement “in order to avoid misleading your readers” but they did not publish it. Other media outlets such us the BBC reported exactly what we did say. I wish that your readers and bloggers will take this into consideration. Mokhtar Badri, Muslim Association of Britain Dear David, thank you for your quich reply to my request. Following is my comment:
As the row has now calmed down, I hope that I can express my opinion and expect to be understood away from any kind of tension.
The young artist Sarah Maple has chosen a controversial topic for her exhibition. She has the full right to portray herself in whatever appearance she likes. She has the right to express her opinion free of any kind of coercion or intimidation. We have no authority or intention to police artists’ works and we have never done that. However, we believe that we’ve all legitimate right to comment on her work once displayed in the public domain.
I still think Sarah was not considerate enough to use Islamic imagery mixed with signs that contradict Islamic values. When asked by the Telegraph to comment on her work I insisted that nobody has the right to limit her freedom but warned that her work was provocative.
the paper went on quoting that “MAB plans to visit the SaLon Gallery to demand that it remove Sarah Maple’s painting” and “She clearly wants to provoke a strong reaction from Muslims and that is what she will get”. These were misquotations by Mandrake. We wrote to the Telegraph asking them to correct the statement “in order to avoid misleading your readers” but they did not publish it. Other media outlets such us the BBC reported exactly what we did say.
I wish that your readers and bloggers will take this into consideration.

Mokhtar Badri, Muslim Association of Britain

]]> By: Mokhtar Badri http://freethinker.co.uk/2008/10/16/will-muslims-go-the-whole-hog-and-destroy-this-painting/comment-page-1/#comment-10224 Mokhtar Badri Wed, 26 Nov 2008 15:36:32 +0000 http://www.freethinker.co.uk/?p=2140#comment-10224 I can't see my comment while I've been heavily criticized! Mokhtar Badri I can’t see my comment while I’ve been heavily criticized!
Mokhtar Badri

]]> By: Stuart W http://freethinker.co.uk/2008/10/16/will-muslims-go-the-whole-hog-and-destroy-this-painting/comment-page-1/#comment-8736 Stuart W Fri, 17 Oct 2008 23:54:04 +0000 http://www.freethinker.co.uk/?p=2140#comment-8736 This story and the resulting argument on the forum illustrates how the religious are sadly all too prone to going around in circles when it comes to the issue of freedom of speech. It just doesn't add up to stress that you believe in it at exactly the same time that you are trying to ban something. What Badri and others actually mean is 'We grudgingly except that the artist has the right to offend us... which should be forfeited if we make enough of a high-pressure fuss'. This story and the resulting argument on the forum illustrates how the religious are sadly all too prone to going around in circles when it comes to the issue of freedom of speech. It just doesn’t add up to stress that you believe in it at exactly the same time that you are trying to ban something.

What Badri and others actually mean is ‘We grudgingly except that the artist has the right to offend us… which should be forfeited if we make enough of a high-pressure fuss’.

]]> By: Scottish Muslims Protest Over “Harassment” at Glasgow Airport. Yes, GLASGOW Airport! « Tony Blair http://freethinker.co.uk/2008/10/16/will-muslims-go-the-whole-hog-and-destroy-this-painting/comment-page-1/#comment-8730 Scottish Muslims Protest Over “Harassment” at Glasgow Airport. Yes, GLASGOW Airport! « Tony Blair Fri, 17 Oct 2008 10:11:12 +0000 http://www.freethinker.co.uk/?p=2140#comment-8730 [...] The Freethinker, has a post about Muslims taking umbrage at an artist’s works. Pigs and bananas seem to figure as anger-making subjects for some in the “religion of perpetual outrage”. [...] [...] The Freethinker, has a post about Muslims taking umbrage at an artist’s works. Pigs and bananas seem to figure as anger-making subjects for some in the “religion of perpetual outrage”. [...]

]]> By: Citizen Kane http://freethinker.co.uk/2008/10/16/will-muslims-go-the-whole-hog-and-destroy-this-painting/comment-page-1/#comment-8727 Citizen Kane Fri, 17 Oct 2008 08:12:40 +0000 http://www.freethinker.co.uk/?p=2140#comment-8727 Of course Muslims do have the right to protest about this picture, they live in a free Western society and can do so with impunity. They should be thankful they do not live in a 'Muslim land' where such demonstrations would be unthinkable and probably punishable with barbaric violence against them. But of course the artist too has a right to freedom of speech and her views are especially pertinent because of her experience of Islam. What gives Muslims the moral authority to demand the removal of this picture, thus stifling the freedom of speech of an opposing view? Of course Muslims do have the right to protest about this picture, they live in a free Western society and can do so with impunity. They should be thankful they do not live in a ‘Muslim land’ where such demonstrations would be unthinkable and probably punishable with barbaric violence against them.

But of course the artist too has a right to freedom of speech and her views are especially pertinent because of her experience of Islam.

What gives Muslims the moral authority to demand the removal of this picture, thus stifling the freedom of speech of an opposing view?

]]> By: TERMINUS EST http://freethinker.co.uk/2008/10/16/will-muslims-go-the-whole-hog-and-destroy-this-painting/comment-page-1/#comment-8724 TERMINUS EST Fri, 17 Oct 2008 01:50:40 +0000 http://www.freethinker.co.uk/?p=2140#comment-8724 Kalamas Illuminatus I am going to write in a different style than I usually do. This is because I want everyone to understand. One, I completely agree with Ed Haz. Two, as an schooled and thinking person, I decide for myself. I can look, study and think hard about god. I can decide that there is no clear evidence of a god. And then I can decide for myself that there is no god. Three, people fight because they believe in their god or gods. And a thinking man may get angry at first when they see paintings like this. But a truly honest person will ask himself, why is this offensive? Why am I mad over something as silly as this? It's just a picture of a woman holding an animal. Why is this wrong? Who is being hurt? That truly honest person will give up their anger and maybe even realize that not everything they have been told or read is true. That person is the person this picture is for. Some honest, peaceful people may not think about it and may be very offended. What should they do? They should walk away and refuse to look at it or talk about it. Time itself destroys all things. If it is truly bad and if enough people forget it, it will go away. Yes, some people who stay angry may hurt themselves or others over this. That is bad, but what can you do about someone who always wants to fight? They will always find something to fight over. If not this, they will hate and fight over something else. Don't hate. Hate destroys, first everything around it and later the person who has it inside them. Kalamas Illuminatus

I am going to write in a different style than I usually do. This is because I want everyone to understand.

One, I completely agree with Ed Haz.

Two, as an schooled and thinking person, I decide for myself. I can look, study and think hard about god. I can decide that there is no clear evidence of a god. And then I can decide for myself that there is no god.

Three, people fight because they believe in their god or gods. And a thinking man may get angry at first when they see paintings like this. But a truly honest person will ask himself, why is this offensive? Why am I mad over something as silly as this? It’s just a picture of a woman holding an animal. Why is this wrong? Who is being hurt?

That truly honest person will give up their anger and maybe even realize that not everything they have been told or read is true. That person is the person this picture is for.

Some honest, peaceful people may not think about it and may be very offended. What should they do? They should walk away and refuse to look at it or talk about it. Time itself destroys all things. If it is truly bad and if enough people forget it, it will go away.

Yes, some people who stay angry may hurt themselves or others over this. That is bad, but what can you do about someone who always wants to fight? They will always find something to fight over. If not this, they will hate and fight over something else. Don’t hate. Hate destroys, first everything around it and later the person who has it inside them.

]]> By: the val http://freethinker.co.uk/2008/10/16/will-muslims-go-the-whole-hog-and-destroy-this-painting/comment-page-1/#comment-8723 the val Fri, 17 Oct 2008 01:32:52 +0000 http://www.freethinker.co.uk/?p=2140#comment-8723 Someone, somewhere around the world, an opinion is being expressed that is counter to someone elses belief. You can either, look around with paranoid eyes at everyone and wonder if it's he or she that expresses such a view, or you can go on with your own life, minding your own business and not care what other people think about you. I think the muslims that go out of their way to make a scene about this need a lesson in humility, or did the koran toss that to the side along with womans rights? Someone, somewhere around the world, an opinion is being expressed that is counter to someone elses belief.

You can either, look around with paranoid eyes at everyone and wonder if it’s he or she that expresses such a view, or you can go on with your own life, minding your own business and not care what other people think about you.

I think the muslims that go out of their way to make a scene about this need a lesson in humility, or did the koran toss that to the side along with womans rights?

]]> By: aZerogodist youtube http://freethinker.co.uk/2008/10/16/will-muslims-go-the-whole-hog-and-destroy-this-painting/comment-page-1/#comment-8722 aZerogodist youtube Fri, 17 Oct 2008 00:27:03 +0000 http://www.freethinker.co.uk/?p=2140#comment-8722 So does that mean the film "Babe" should not be show on tv, as someone would be offended by an intelligent talking pig. If fear becomes the only reason not to show art, well then you are kissing freedom away. I am so tired of hearing about this racist idology being offended and then trying to impose their views onto everyone else, because in their eyes we are nothing but infedels to be conqured and controlled. So does that mean the film “Babe” should not be show on tv, as someone would be offended by an intelligent talking pig. If fear becomes the only reason not to show art, well then you are kissing freedom away. I am so tired of hearing about this racist idology being offended and then trying to impose their views onto everyone else, because in their eyes we are nothing but infedels to be conqured and controlled.

]]> By: Ed Haz http://freethinker.co.uk/2008/10/16/will-muslims-go-the-whole-hog-and-destroy-this-painting/comment-page-1/#comment-8721 Ed Haz Fri, 17 Oct 2008 00:02:49 +0000 http://www.freethinker.co.uk/?p=2140#comment-8721 @ Kalamas Illuminatus I think that you miss the point when it comes to free speech. Yes, these pictures will undoubtedly be offensive, regardless of whether or not the artist is asking a valid question through her work. However, it must not be up to those who are 'offended' to decide what may or may not be put on public display. The whole point of a public display, when coupled with freedom of expression is that it must be the public who decide what they want to see. If you do not like the art, do not go to see it, and let others who are interested go and see it. If you do not like the televsion you are watching, then change the channel, no-one is forcing you to watch it. Everyone's tastes are different, but what is ok to publish, and what is not, should not be decided by special interest groups, or by those who are caused offence, but by the public as a whole. If people are not interested in the artwork, they will not go to see it, but if it is something they want to see, then no-one else has the right to prevent them from doing so. The free-market of foot-fall must decide the issue, for the preservation of freedom of expression, and fairness. @ Kalamas Illuminatus

I think that you miss the point when it comes to free speech. Yes, these pictures will undoubtedly be offensive, regardless of whether or not the artist is asking a valid question through her work. However, it must not be up to those who are ‘offended’ to decide what may or may not be put on public display. The whole point of a public display, when coupled with freedom of expression is that it must be the public who decide what they want to see. If you do not like the art, do not go to see it, and let others who are interested go and see it. If you do not like the televsion you are watching, then change the channel, no-one is forcing you to watch it.

Everyone’s tastes are different, but what is ok to publish, and what is not, should not be decided by special interest groups, or by those who are caused offence, but by the public as a whole. If people are not interested in the artwork, they will not go to see it, but if it is something they want to see, then no-one else has the right to prevent them from doing so. The free-market of foot-fall must decide the issue, for the preservation of freedom of expression, and fairness.

]]>