Since we don't know what the Prophet Mohammed actually looked like, an image of him is only an image if artist says it is.
-
-
@HeerJeet It isn’t exactly blasphemy, though. Muhammed didn’t want to become worshiped, so please don’t draw me. Ban hardened only later. -
@pastordan@HeerJeet Perhaps that's why Islam extends the proscription to all non-abstract art: any human (or cat) could be the Prophet ... - Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
@HeerJeet No. The "crime" is the representation, not the intent. The intent is a necessary condition but not the crime itself. -
@jays_ear But the representation is only a problem if intent is proclaimed. Same drawing without intent isn't blasphemy, right? - Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
@HeerJeet All sin is thought crime, no?Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
.
@HeerJeet@maxphillips that's not what thought crime means, if you're trying to go for an Orwellian thing.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
A prohibition against a thought -- INTENT to draw the Prophet -- is attempt to regulate that which is deepest in us: our ungoverned thoughts
-
@HeerJeet Disciple them, yes, submit them to the will of God. Not unlike Christianity in that regard.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@HeerJeet It's not the blasphemy itself that provokes the response. It's much more the disrespect. -
@studentactivism Yeah, I think that's true in this case. But some claim all representations are blasphemy. - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.