Thursday, February 7, 2008

Why this fuss?

This fuss is all bout respect. This is to save the ideology of religion. When we grow up in a world where religions are targeted and ideologies are criticized, where freedom of speech is used as freedom to abuse. Kids grow up watching such motive, TV serials and internet entries they became insensitive about these things. They start thinking its normal. And Anti social behavior become a symbol of pride. Neutral Point of View (NPOV) is used to promote extreme point of view.

In such situation we have to do something it’s a moral obligation of every citizen.

So I start my contribution with this petition.

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

It's the Islamic view on todays problems that are extreme and unrealistic. It is naive to think that just because someone may find something is offensive it should be regarded as such by the rest of the world. In my opinion a representation of "Muhammad" is not offensive, because the image has historic values and contributes in the understanding of the Muslim way. I myself am not a religious person. And I think websites like this are the poison that kills the society and general respect of the ways of other people.

question said...

When people exclaim, "Jesus Christ", I get offended. Should I take some action against them? No, of course not. I do not expect non-Christians to behave as Christians. Why do you personally expect Wikipedia or anyone else that is not a Muslim to behave as if they follow/adhere to the core beliefs of the faith? Thanks for your reply.

hypernation said...

It wasn't a problem to show images of the prophet Muahammad until the 20th century. So if you're REALLY after preserving the ideology of religion, you should be demanding for that rule about not showing the prophet to be reversed.

Muslim Unity said...

@question
so do u think wikipedia is only for non-muslims. then u should put a big banner on wikipeia. non-muslims only

Muslim Unity said...

@ hypernation
that media tell u, its a problem since day 1 of Islam. don't read what New York times says. go and do some research about this topic.

Anonymous said...

Did anyone take the time to look and see who created the illustration? A muslim. Al-biruni to be exact. A muslim phsyicist, scientist, mathematician etc. Born only 300 years after the prophets (PBUH)death. Another thing to realize is that we shouldn't be hyper-sensitive about this. It's not an offensive image. Though every day christians see Christ depicted in ways that could be considered offensive. Look at south park, Jesus apparently lives in colorado. Just voicing what was floating around in my mind. And remember, I'm a muslim. Does it make me any less a muslim to think that it shouldn't matter if this picture is up on wiki?

Muslim Unity said...

@ Anonymous
If a Muslim created them did not mean they are according to Islam and should represent Islam. he did good things and bad things. so we have to differentiate between them.
If other religious communities are not defending them selfs from such tedious things its there way. but we Muslims should defend our selfs other wise in some time they will start treating us like others.

Anonymous said...

@ Muslim Unity
If these pictures are not a representation of Islam, nor should they be. Then why make a big deal out of it? Why not put a disclaimer on Wiki saying that the pictures do not depict the prophet? Freedom of Religion can not be mistaken with Freedom of Speech--they are not the same things. Whomever keeps refering to them as such needs to study up. Freedom of speech gives me and you, and everyone else the right to say, speak or think whatever they want about whomever they want, and that's the right. Freedom of religion only means that everyone is free to worship as they choose. I mean, c'mon, do you honestly think this did Islam good? I am rooting for you guys... But get it together and quit whinning and start trying to make your own lives better for Prophet. I am sure he was referring to any image or thing that could be used as an idol. Like you computers. But no... Everyone likes those too much. Surely not!

Hamza said...

Asalamu aleykum wa rahmatulahi wa barakatu

This petition is pathetic. You are just harming the image of Muslims. "Weseterners" have every right to depict Muhammad. The prohibition against depicting Muhammad is controversial within Islam.

In fact, by focusing on it so much, you are placing Muhammad as the status of a deity. This is shirk.

If you want to protest against something, protest the death sentence being imposed in Afghanistan on a journalist who published an article critical of Islam. But instead, you are focusing on this. This is the problem with us as Muslims. We are always the aggreived party. Always the victim.

We do not have the right no to be insulted. As Muslims we will always maintain our dignity, because we follow the true path. If non-Muslims want to depict Muhammad, let them. It has nothing to do with us. Everyone is anwerable to Allah.

I support the freedom of non-Muslims to speak their minds.

If you are so concerned about respect for religion, then perhaps you should petition your local ulaema after khutbah prayer when they denigrate Christians and Jews.

We Muslims must wake up before it is too late. We do not worship Muhammad.

Wa salam wa jazak allahu kharain

Thomas Haidon

Muslim Unity said...

@ Hamza
u r confused, No Muslim will allow picture of any Prophet even ask any Shia schooler he will say so. and i personally did so.
why should i protest about that journalist in Afghanistan its so called modern westerners who are ruling Afghanistan not a Muslim government.
there is different between freedom and insult and everybody has to understand that.

Muslim Unity said...

@ Anonymous said...
-- @ Muslim Unity
u should put a nick because that will help during this conversation.
You just got my point these pictures do not belong to Islam. and Wikipedia is not ready to put any kind of disclaimer on any article. i think u did not read the full story and conversation between me and Wikipedians. that is why i make this petition.
yes i know freedom of speech and freedom of religion are different.
i don't agree with ur definitions. freedom of speech is expressing ur feeling in polite and logical way. and freedom of religion is not just praying but also practice religion, and implement that in life.
like one marriage law is not Islamic but Muslims are forced to follow that in non-Muslim countries and so many. In US non Christian can't became a president is that freedom of religion.

abdullah said...

salam!

firstly, i have to say that i do not agree with visual depictions of the Prophet (peace be upon him), nor would I advocate any. however, that is from a personal, muslim standpoint. the issue with wikipedia is that, firstly, it is a communal area, for which that community largely comprises of non-muslims from the west, i would say (you can see this pretty easily from the lack of muslim viewpoint on many articles related to islam).

i do not say that their publication of those medieval imageries of the prophet are right, but at the same time, as the area is shared, we would have to respect the rights of others to a neutral viewpoint too. if wikipedia were to censor itself to avoid offending a lot of people, then, on one hand, yes, we could probably have the images of the prophet removed, but on the other hand, we might also possibly lose whatever positive content on Islam that is right now present on the site, when atheists and secularists start finding anything explanatory of the beauty of Islam "offensive" (which i'm sure many of them do).

my point being, i'm quite well aware of how ridiculously biased some wikipedia articles can be with regard to Islam (there are saving graces, but few), but if wikipedia is really that openly editable, is all this bias purely the "fault" of these overzealous atheists/secularists?

or, is it, more profoundly, the fault of muslims, who do not take advantage of the open nature of wikipedia to insert a lot of Muslim viewpoint, or to even respond accordingly to the attacks on our religion?

when all is exposed and transparent, isn't that for the better? we learn more, know more, understand Islam better - is it the same those who know and those who don't?

i do not think the petition is "wrong" or anything, but i do hope that you will play your part as the one who started the petition (and thus brought this issue to worldwide attention) to not let this escalate into, God forbid, something ridiculous that would only further worsen Islam's already mostly misunderstood image in the world's eyes. i agree that we should at least make our voices heard - that we don't like the images planted there - but at the end of the day, i hope we all also realise that the removal must not be done by force, and that at some point and time, we will have to learn to agree to disagree.

i mean, there are a lot of other rubbish on Islam posted by Islamophobes everywhere else, but what really is the best way to counter this? by petitioning for their removal from a space we have no right or ownership over (eg someone else's website), or to make use of what space we have to provide an alternative, Muslim point of view to the issue?

I personally am thoroughly skeptical that wikipedia would oblige to the petition - a petition to have prominent contemporary Muslim scholars to be more active on Wikipedia would make more sense, in my opinion, or to have a Muslim think tank generating Islamic content on the website - if we can't remove the bad, then why not put in more of the good?

good going, anyhow.

salam, bro!

(my opinion is my own, I do not vouche for their infallibility. wallahualam.)

Anonymous said...

I didnt know where to place this comment so I thought I would just add it here. I can understand the need to remove the pic from wikipedia, but the real problem is with the muslims. By other muslims posting stupid racist comments (petition # 211,861) does not help. There are ways to fix problems and these comments do not help and do not reflect the values of islam. By doing good we do not want to make things worse, and Allah is the protector of all things! so please remind people who sign the petition not to be abusive and petition sensibly.

Anonymous said...

How can we aware others about this blog? I have an idea, in Pakistan SMS is cheaper so we can aware others about this blog by using sms chain.

Anonymous said...

Why can't you people just respect the Muslim Ummah? We don't have any problem respecting other people no matter what religion they're from. WHY can't you do the same. IT IS ONLY FUSS WHEN YOU MAKE IT A FUSS by publishing offensive pictures etc, especially on our Prophets.

Anonymous said...

"so do u think wikipedia is only for non-muslims. then u should put a big banner on wikipeia. non-muslims only"

That's the spirit, we should start a petition for that. I'll get right on it.

Gloria said...

I will personally start avoiding wiki at all cost and I will be getting my info from some where else beginning today.

Hello said...

Respect? Why should any one respect your primitive superstition? We can tolerate you if you stop forcing your beliefs on others - but respect never. Fanatics like you are a threat to the planet.