Update: this just in from HTH via email:
… paint it with lipstick and try to teach it to sing. It’ll never be Beverly Sills.
Similarly, dress up a religion of hate, mutilation, torture, mass murder and theft in contemporary phrases faking jihad as “inner struggle” and it”ll still never be a “religion of peace”.
No one disputes that the Prophet’s was the supreme role-model in his traits and in his behavior…
Indisputable facts:
1.) Anyone who seeks to be an honest disciple of Mohammed must support mass murder, rape, slavery, pedophilia, gluttony, theft, lies, torture and mutilation, for that is the record of the “perfect man,” Mohammed, in word and deed. Anyone who commits these acts in the name of Mohammed and his false god in order to advance the cause of Islam is a true disciple of the Butcher of Medina.
2.) Anyone who supports or commits such acts purporting to advance the cause of Jesus, the Nazarene, is a liar, because the words and deeds of Jesus do not support such acts. Indeed, he is on record indicating such folk are people of the lie, children of Satan, enemies of the truth.
So, whenever you read/hear cultural/moral relativists citing the Crusades or the Inquisition as evidence of Christian perfidy that is “as bad as” Islamic savagry, remember this: soi disant “Christians” who tortured, enslaved, murdered, raped, etc., supposedly to advance the cause of Christianity were denying, directly contradicting, the life and work and teachings of the one they claimed to follow! OTOH, Muslims who torture (note the present tense), enslave, murder, rape, etc., are simply immitating their “prophet” in sincere discipleship.
Just thought I’d make the difference clear: Put Islam in a dress, paint it with lipstick and try to teach it to be civilized; it’ll still be a savage brute, but at least folks’ll laugh at it.
Trackposted to Perri Nelson’s Website, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Rosemary’s Thoughts, The Bullwinkle Blog, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
And here’s a repost of last year’s “Mohammed in a Pink Dress”–the post where I was aiming for a fatwa and only got some fathead Muslim comments. *sigh* “I don’t get no respect.”
🙂
Recently, Mike Adams wrote an open missive to the National Endowment for the Arts and published it with the title, The Queer Muhammed: an experiment in tolerance. Here’s the leadoff:
I write to you today, not with a request, but with a demand. I’ve been sitting back patiently while the NEA has been promoting anti-Christian “art” for a number of years. In fact, one could say that I have been supporting it, too, given that my tax dollars have been spent on this garbage. And maybe I’ve been supporting it in another way by refusing to write you to express my frustration. That is, until now.
In the spirit of the “separation of church and state,” my demand is that you commission a painting — fully funded with tax dollars — that has one intention and one intention only: To offend Muslims everywhere.
In the spirit of the experiment Dr. Adams proposes, I humbly submit the following:
[N.B. UPDATE: Ya really ought to start the sound file, now… ]
I’ll say this for the old Butcher of Medina: he’s got gams. Such a pleasant singing voice, too. And though I prefer blondes (my Wonder Woman’s of solid Nordic stock), if he’d shave, I might even be tempted to give ‘im a twirl around the dance floor. But since I don’t swing that way, I’d never–not even in my wildest bachelor years–take it any further…
Second thought: I have to wonder if s/he uses “Essence of Goat Dung” as his/her personal fragrance… Yeh, there goes the invitation onto the dance floor, boys n girls. Not gonna dance with goat dung, no matter how good the attached legs are.
I respect ya, babe. 😉
and so it is..the madrASSa is slated to open in my very city!
the enemy is within the gates my friend and we are inviting them in
for tea!
Angel, what do you think we should do? We could be the Paul Revere’s of this day and age, but we would have to take care of the PC crowd…
It’s foolish to compare the teachings of a major religion to what is actually done it that faith’s name. The two have nothing to do with one another. This has been true of Christianity for centuries and continues to be true. It is also true for Islam.
The teachings of the prophets are only incidental, barely relevant, to the conduct of the religion as a whole and no large faith has a clean record of conduct.
Throwing the bullshit flag again, Thomas. Once again, you ignore the FACTS. Those who acts with savage barbarity in the name of Christ do so under false colors. Those who have consistently, for a millennium and a half and well into this day, commit acts of savage barbarity in Mohammed’s name do so in complete harmony with his life and teachings.
It is the savage brutes who are Muslims who ARE following the teachings of that religion honestly, genuinely and legitimately.
It is dishonest arguments like yours that allow Islam to continue in its practice of al taqiyah “so-called “holy deception”) fooling useful idiots who cannot see the fundamental differences.
And what is this bullshit?
“The teachings of the prophets are only incidental, barely relevant, to the conduct of the religion as a whole and no large faith has a clean record of conduct.”
What “prophets”? Mohammed claimed to be a prophet. (That’s one). Jesus claimed to be the Son of God. Calling him a “prophet” is a Muslim disingenuity. Either Jesus was a liar and a madman or he was who he claimed to be. Either way, he was not a “prophet” in the sense that Mohammed (the con man, mass murderer, rapist, slaver, torturer, assasin, thief) was.
And,
“It’s foolish to compare the teachings of a major religion to what is actually done it that faith’s name. The two have nothing to do with one another…”
Not according to Islamic imams and terrorists alike (as if there were any real difference between the two). And not according to every single solitary damned (and I use the term as a theological assessment, not a curse) Muslim on the face of the planet.
And,
“This has been true of Christianity for centuries and continues to be true. It is also true for Islam.”
Actually, as I have pointed out over and over and over again (and which you would know had you actually looked at both the Muslim “holy” writings and their extremely close parallells in Islamic history), the brutality of Islam is a direct result of Muslims taking their scriptures seriously and following in the teachings and example of their founder. The hoirrific acts of modern Islamic terrorists are simply an honest, genuine outworking of the actual teachinsg of Islam, according to the actual words left his followers by their con man, rapist, mass murderer, etc., founder as well as his deeds (which strangely enough were in complete agreement with his teachings; at least he was a consistent monster).
And again, for the slow of thought, Thomas: those who have engaged in acts that would be acceptable to Mohammed as good and virtuous (rape, pedophilia, murder, theft, torture, etc., whenever done to “unbelievers”) but have done so falsely claiming to be following Jesus of Nazareth in doing so are NOT in any way, shape, fashion or form justified by his life ot teachings.
It’s a criutical difference, Thomas, one which any child could readily unbderstand, but which you disingenuously refuse to acknowlege. I say disingenuously, because the only alternative is that you are a complete idiot. There is no middle ground.
The FACTS are clear: vicious brutality in Mohammed’s name can be justified by a direct, legitimate appeal to the life and works of Mohammed. And so it is quite easy for Muslims to accept Islamic terrorism, or at least, practicing “holy deception” to weakly protest (FALSELY) that the Koran does not permit such acts and that the “Islamists” have hijacked a peaceful *bullshit* religion.
No such legitimate defense can be made by those who perform monstrous acts claiming to do so in the name of the Nazarene, because there is NO support for them in the life and work of Jesus the Nazarene.
That you refuse to admit such and to admit that you are simply trying to blow smoke up my ass with your comments saddens me, Thomas. It is unworthy of even you.