Patterico's Pontifications


Why iowahawk Opted Out of Draw Mohammed Day

Filed under: Humor — Patterico @ 7:01 am

Here are just a couple of the reasons:

Why I have opted out of this event? It depresses me that our culture has reached such a level of debasement that I feel compelled to list the reasons. Firstly, it is a well known codicil of Islamic law that visual depictions of their holy prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) are strictly prohibited. Like all religions we should respect their views, and the cartoons (which incidentally I have proudly refused to even glance at) seem only to cause hurt. Yes, they hurt the feeling of millions of Muslims. But, ultimately, they also hurt the misguided cartoonists who produce them. Because let’s face it: having a rusty scimitar hack through your neck can’t be a walk in the park.

Second, it violates my American sense of fair play. I firmly believe all religions deserve my respect — depending on how they respect me. Yes, it is true that in the past I have sometimes made fun of various world religious faiths: Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddism, Rastafari, Wicca, Scientology, Global Warmingism, that filthy cult of Wisconsin Synod Lutherans. Equally, without malice, and without issue. But trust me, once any of them starts emailing me credible violent death threats, I guarantee they’re gonna start challenging Islam for top spot in Dave’s weekly religion respect rankings.

Heh. I should note that there are people who did have valid and principled reasons not to participate, and so I don’t agree with any implicit message that people didn’t participate out of cowardice. But the guy is so funny, the way he words things, that I couldn’t pass up the chance to link it.

75 Responses to “Why iowahawk Opted Out of Draw Mohammed Day”

  1. Iowahawk’s subtly will be lost on many…especially those of the hyper-offended and Muslim communities. He’s a true wordsmith.

    jwb (f57cc4)

  2. Is David Obey a member of the Wisconsin Synod Lutherans?

    PCD (b3210f)

  3. I believe that while intentionalism as a method of determining the message of a written law is faulty, in personal daily communication we do take intent into account such as looking for sarcasm, etc. Hence, we know Iowahawk is not to be scrutinized in detail.

    For example, his grouping of Wisconsin Synod Lutherans with Global Warmingism is simply over the top. I knew a Wis. Synod Lutheran in college. “Disco” Ned was a nice guy in most respects. He listened to the Beatles (ALL the time), wore flannel shirts and blue jeans (unless he wanted to dress up, when he would put cords on), loved Wisconsin Hockey (and did not bother (70’s) with Wisconsin football). His nickname was due to his aversion to said music style, not a passion for it.

    In fact, about the only problem with “Disco” was he majored in an oxymoron, “civil engineering”, for everyone knew there was no such things as a “civil” engineer.

    One should interpret this with the same excruciating detail as an Iowahawk post, so no real need for engineers to get huffy.

    MD in Philly (88a119)

  4. 2.Is David Obey a member of the Wisconsin Synod Lutherans?
    Comment by PCD

    I would doubt it, unless things have changed drastically. Wisconsin Synod was pretty conservative, and likely took Iowahawks jibs for that. A pro-choice Dem and the Wisconsin Lutheran Synod mix like oil and water, usually. (Note, all proceeding said from general knowledge base, true investigation may state otherwise.)

    MD in Philly (88a119)

  5. You know I can be nasty, but humor should not be. I think Socrates would have enjoyed “The Clouds”. South Park, not so much.

    nk (db4a41)

  6. I disagree entirely. I will start showing muslims respect for Islam when they start showing respect for the Jews and our culture and religions. I have a whole catalog of screen grabs of muslims making death threats on Facebook yesterday. Their attempts at intimidation were out in the open for all to see and were done so for the simple reason people drew a stick figure of mo. Do a sweep through facebook and you’ll find a ton of anti-semitic garbage that is far worse than ANYTHING posted yesterday. Example: Everybody draw holocaust day

    Their right to freedom of religion does not trump our freedom of speech. I will not back down or submit to censorship because they feel that it does, or think that the rules of their religion apply to everyone. The moment we “submit” our freedom of speech to them is the day we lose all our freedoms. Look at what is going on in Europe, especially in Denmark. They found out quickly that if they give an inch their muslim population will take a mile and use censorship as a weapon.
    They were faced with a choice: censor yourselves or face an international muslim boycott. How long until our free speech is threatened like this here?

    I will not bite my tongue or accept silence in the face of violence or threats. The moment we do is the moment we all lose.

    J.R. (a535c7)

  7. OK, pictures of Mohammed are verboten. But how about imitations of his voice — without the picture?

    dchamil (bb7f48)

  8. How about pictures of Mr. I’minadinnerjacket with an Atomic Mushroom for a hat?

    PCD (1d8b6d)

  9. Is there a ‘draw insulting pictures of Jesus’ day too?

    JEA (59689e)

  10. Sure, JEA, when we can mock you, too.

    PCD (1d8b6d)

  11. JEA, you’ve not paid much attention have you?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  12. Hey, site signature has been reenabled? Yay!

    Monsignor Martinez (db4a41)

  13. Sorry – This must be some parody of IowaHawk. I mean look… I can’t really think of any better reason to create a cartoon of the Profit Pajammas than that I was instructed not to. As soon as I can expect – nay – intimidate people into not offending my Catholic sensibilities, I’ll let you know. All I can say for being unwilling to die for Liberty is that it reminds me of the color yellow.

    Enoch_Root (9548cd)

  14. Religion is a powerful and dangerous thing and nothing you want to take lightly.

    Monsignor Martinez (db4a41)

  15. JEA – Does it hurt to be that stupid?

    JD (d55760)

  16. MD or whoever saying ‘this is not for me’ and AW and others saying ‘this is for me’ is just plain old freedom.

    “Is there a ‘draw insulting pictures of Jesus’ day too?

    Comment by JEA”

    I think this is a bizarre reaction, but Jesus is mocked mercilessly, with very little (none that I’m aware of) violent reaction or attempt to deny speech rights. That’s the whole point of AW’s work. We want the kind of freedom to speak about Islam that we have to speak about other religions.

    There’s the show called South Park, have you heard of it? It’s broadcast by Viacom, where every day is ‘make fun of evil Jews and loony Christians’ day.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  17. JEA – every day is Draw Insulting Pictures of Jesus Day! Alternatively, every day in the Muslim world is Terrorize a Christian Day – though, the Chinese are quite adept at that too. But their reasons are secular, so, you know no biggie.

    Enoch_Root (9548cd)

  18. I second J.R.

    Iowahawk’s terrific wit is superfluous here. This is a issue which needs to be addressed directly and unhesitatingly. All the temporizing about “respect” for religions amount to incremental concessions to censorship and to the erosion of free speech. Mock away, mercilessly.

    rrpjr (a02dea)

  19. I was gonna rip IH a new one, until I read the whole article. The man is a gem.

    East Coast Chris (ded5f2)

  20. while the rest of you were busy debating the merits of “everyone draw Mo day”, i was busy paying the price for doing so: my Facebook account is still disabled.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  21. Talk radio host Mike Gallagher was opposed to the concept of “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” (EDMD), saying it was “crossing the line”.

    Well, no.

    It’s one thing for Muslims to say, “Making images of the Prophet is forbidden. Please grant us the courtesy of not making gratuitous images.” But when they add “…or else”, then they are crossing the line.

    EDMD is our way of pushing them back across that line.

    Now Gallagher might quite properly argue for a more targeted response. Perhaps the kid who put a threat aimed at the producers of South Park in his blog should be dragged off to prison for making terrorist threats. But until that or something equivalently public and unpleasant is done to him and others who append “…or else” to their requests for accommodation, we will have more “Draw Mohammed” type campaigns.

    Or, I suppose we could have vigilante action, if the critics of EDMD absolutely insist.

    Karl Lembke (ff486c)

  22. There’s the show called South Park, have you heard of it? It’s broadcast by Viacom, where every day is ‘make fun of evil Jews and loony Christians’ day.

    Comment by Dustin — 5/21/2010 @ 9:12 am

    That show does not come into my house, and I’m no “Jesus Freak”. It’s not funny, it’s just nasty.

    Monsignor Martinez (db4a41)

  23. interesting: i see new posts on the side bar, but the page stays stuck @ comment #18… just me, or yet another undocumented feature?

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  24. If you leave a comment here, you have to go to your browser and delete cookies or you will be stuck in a time warp.

    Monsignor Martinez (db4a41)

  25. I would be happy to draw a Mohammed cartoon, but my artistic development has not grown since the stick figures of the second grade. I can’t draw anything well enough to insult anybody. Damn!

    BarSinister (edbc1a)

  26. BarSinister, take a picture of your favorite Wahabist Mullah, fudge it a bit, then draw concentric rings on it. That ought to do.

    PCD (1d8b6d)

  27. I’m a day late with my drawing…

    So, here it is:

    (looks alot like Casper the Friendly Ghost….holding a rusty scimitar….with a smirk)

    Guess that makes me an intentionalist, doesn’t it?

    Then again, since I have actually drawn a cartoon of the Prophet Muhammed I’m at risk now….

    reff (b996d9)

  28. TEST

    Ron (9548cd)

  29. test

    DON (9548cd)

  30. test

    Jon (9548cd)

  31. The moment we “submit” our freedom of speech to them is the day we lose all our freedoms.

    I submit my freedom of speech continuously (at least that is my goal) to the idea that some things are good and helpful to say and others are not. If I make it my aim to not offend anyone unless it is the truth of what I say that is offensive to them, I am not losing any freedoms. It is exercising my freedom as Dustin commented.

    I just don’t buy the idea that to not participate in EDMD is to cave in on what Western Judeo-Christian culture stands for. I think one could make radical Muslims furious in many ways by telling the blunt truth. One could take things from anti-semetic sites and point out the truth and how the people making the claim are liars and no God could be be eager to reward liars. Put up the stories of abuse in Muslim lands and where people can email en masse different embassies or news outlets to protest and demand change. Expose people or groups with strong ties to terrorist groups or nations.

    Md in Philly (88a119)

  32. REDC1C4 – can you try to replicate the issue now?

    enoch_root (9548cd)

  33. I knew I shouldve read IH’s post before commenting. Yes, it is true – I am dumb

    enoch_root (9548cd)

  34. losing my FB account or being unable to see my post? 😀

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  35. ugggg – redc1c4 – being unable to see your post.

    enoch_root (9548cd)

  36. now i’m getting the new page, but when i post i get the “white screen of death”, so i have to reload/resend, which gets me the duplicate message message, and then i use the back button to get back to the main page and then reload it to get the new page.

    so easy a caveman could do it!

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  37. enoch musty be the IT trogg….

    he’s way too literal and not much fun 😀

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  38. redc1c4 – do me a flavor – pls – close browser. reopen. and try again. Patterico may be convinced to release you from your tithe

    enoch_root (9548cd)

  39. I am too lots of fun – like a hot poker in the eye fun though

    [note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]

    enoch_root (9548cd)

  40. So Iowahawk chickened out? He allowed Islam to control his right to free speech?

    Dennis D (e0b996)

  41. #

    So Iowahawk chickened out? He allowed Islam to control his right to free speech?

    Comment by Dennis D — 5/21/2010 @ 11:25 am

    No, rather he illustrated how absurd it would be to do that. It’s satire. Any time you see iowahawk, scrappleface or the Onion, bear in mind they are satirical.

    What’s sad is that if you aren’t familiar, Iowahawk’s joke is 100% realistic.

    Also, I do find South Park to be hilarious. And nasty, but unserious about its nastiness. This is in the context of nasty and pointless crap. At least South Park has a thoughtful message behind most of their nasty jokes.

    But Viacom is disgusting. Their website has antisemitic games, they have many Christian and Jew bashing themes, as well as black stereotypes. Since they refuse to have any muslim commentary, it comes across as deeply bigoted to have games about greedy Jew lawyers and producers.

    My point isn’t to say whether or not SP crosses a line of taste, which it does, but to say that Viacom’s decision is corrosive to freedom and society.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  42. redc1c4, does this link work for you?

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  43. One funny dude! His post on the 1 year anniversary of the November 2008 election was a classic.

    GeneralMalaise (8f3781)

  44. Humor, like everything else, is best when nice.

    (I know I am not nice but that’s just because I know what happened to the last Guy who was. 😉 )

    nk (db4a41)

  45. Over the Hedge seems to have been able to handle it.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  46. Oh lord, don’t click on #45… it’s not safe for work.

    Jeez, Red, you play by Chicago rules, don’t you?

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  47. currently clicking

    enoch_root (9548cd)

  48. It’s not safe for work and it is not pretty girls.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  49. unlike Ear Leader, i attended Harmony Church., and its precepts have stuck with me all these years. 😀

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  50. white screen again…. after restarting the browser

    FF3.6.3, if it matters.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  51. lets see if deleting cookies helped any, since everyone else is apparently tossing theirs…..

    (i call dibs on the big pieces! %-)

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  52. no joy… white screen again.

    maybe i’ll go do some yard *rk and drink a few beers: it’s nice afternoon outside.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  53. one last thingy to try before you get sauced – do you have the RSS feeder in your FF (presupposing you are using FF)?

    if so, kill it, pls and try again. Please with cherries on top.

    enoch_root (9548cd)

  54. never used it, so nothing to kill…. except this beer. see #51 for browser info


    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  55. ok – when doen killing the beer, pls proceed to erm punch me in the eye. that is all – muchas assgrabias for your help.

    enoch_root (9548cd)

  56. i thought i already did with #46…. 😀

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  57. as they say each dog barks loudest in his own yard

    EricPWJohnson (cedf1d)

  58. Interesting how heroic are those who can insult billions to watch ones and two’s react with violence to further justify their actions as look at them – they all are savages –

    Of course we are angry at that those who mock our lord and savior – yet – as many who do are also killed – this is of no consequence – its purely the intentionalism to show freedom to say anything without any responsibility morally or ethically for the indirect violence we intended to forment

    Sure freedom of speech means an impirical arrogant assumption of some kind of intellectual pedestal because we have laws that we simply cannot be punched in the nose without due process as most of us live in a comfort zone that few in the world can match.


    EricPWJohnson (cedf1d)

  59. The cool kids use Safari or IE8.

    nk (db4a41)

  60. EricPW – anyone ever call you a BuzzKill before? I think you’ve been watching too much Oprah.

    Enoch_Root (174a66)

  61. *~0)) :{(>

    Have Blue (854a6e)

  62. I’m with EricPWJohnson. Don’t go messing with people just because you can. Some people call it sensibility, others call it conscience.

    nk (db4a41)

  63. nk – are you suggesting one hasn’t been most patient?

    Enoch_Root (174a66)

  64. Let’s kiss the hand with the rusty scimitar in hopes that they will kill us last.

    Have Blue (854a6e)

  65. all i have to say to them, Have Blue, is “Kiss This!”

    Lan Astaslem.

    Not today.
    Not tomorrow.
    Not ever.

    redc1c4, the Dean's List Infantryman (fb8750)

  66. It being gay really ‘messing with Christians’?

    Is eating bacon antisemitic?

    Is drawing Muhammad messing with Muslims?

    Sure, it could be, if I drew the guy with some kind of unjustified hatred… but the rule against drawing him shouldn’t apply to people who aren’t members of that faith. Why would Muslims expect non Muslims to abide by this rule, such that I’m messing with them to draw Muhammad? Isn’t that a bit of an Islamic centered worldview?

    Now, while it’s messing with Christians to make fun of Jesus, it’s not messing with Christians to simply not act Christian if you aren’t, It’s not even like Muslims have always followed this rule.

    In fact, while I’m sure South Park would have bashed Muhammad if they could have, the example they wanted to use wasn’t messing with Muslims at all… except those terrible ones who want all the world to submit to their religion without their consent.

    By saying everyone is morally obligated to abide by this Islamic rule, such that they cannot draw a non hateful image of Muhammad, you’re actually making an extremely ugly statement that’s messing with everyone. You’re insulting our freedom to not be Muslims if we don’t want to be.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  67. Dustin

    If you drew tha cartoon with the sole intent to anger

    If you drew the cartoon with the sole intent to foster a frank and open discussion of the merits of islam

    these to me are two distinct and different forms of speech

    EricPWJohnson (cedf1d)

  68. By saying everyone is morally obligated to abide by this Islamic rule, such that they cannot draw a non hateful image of Muhammad, you’re actually making an extremely ugly statement that’s messing with everyone. You’re insulting our freedom to not be Muslims if we don’t want to be.

    Again, this is unfortunately a sad side effect of writing – people use comments to attribute their own agenda to it – let me state – I said no such thing

    I am fascinated at the hero worship of those who deliberately try to forment trouble

    Amazingly the bill of rights always is a comfortable blanket to wrap one’s justifications in except that its authority empirically ends at the 3 mile limit

    EricPWJohnson (cedf1d)

  69. Why would Muslims expect non Muslims to abide by this rule, such that I’m messing with them to draw Muhammad? Isn’t that a bit of an Islamic centered worldview? – comment by Dustin

    I agree with you that it is not logically reasonable for a Muslim to expect non-Muslims to obey their customs and beliefs. I agree that there is no moral imperative to obey Muslim customs. But for a non-Muslim to avoid purposefully offending a Muslim is not necessarily “caving in” to an Islamocentric world, I believe.

    I do not expect a non-Christian to obey the command to not take the Lord’s Name in vain. On the other hand, if someone goes out of their way to curse when I am around just to prove a point, I’m not going to be impressed by their intellectual integrity, but I will think the person is rude and disrespectful, perhaps to me personally, or to Christians in general, or to anyone they disagree with or don’t like.

    MD in Philly (cb8efe)

  70. EricPW – a good poke in the eye is exactly what the doctor ordered. I am not saying we should fly airplanes into buildings or strap on explosives and detonate ourselves in markets full of innocents. No, that is a whole other level of behavior. Drawing a cartoon of Pajammas is funny. It is irreverent, I guess, if you believe in allah (goat sh** on his head). In much the same way as peeps who don’t believe in God as man feel plenty free to mock Jesus. Why I have seen him in all manner of irreverent presentations. I don’t appreciate them and it makes me mad… but I don’t suppose to kill someone over it. Peeps get to answer to the Higher Powers they offend. That’s the beauty. There is no escape. Even for the likes of me. In the meantime, I think it is a worthy point to make that all expressions of speech are worthy of being bolstered. Whether drawing a picture of someone’s profit or sitting at the White’s Only counter. I can think of no other thing so worthy in fact of exercising.

    Enoch_Root (174a66)

  71. If you drew tha cartoon with the sole intent to anger

    If you drew the cartoon with the sole intent to foster a frank and open discussion of the merits of islam

    these to me are two distinct

    Very fair, EPWJ

    “if someone goes out of their way to curse when I am around just to prove a point, I’m not going to be impressed by their intellectual integrity”


    Cursing is being rude, of course.

    But just having a realistic depiction of Muhammad is not rude. It’s insensitive to political correctness, but I think we’re on the same page here for the most part.

    And I’m not even talking about a frank discussion of the terrible person Muhammad was. You can find a few examples in the Talmuid of taking land from ‘others’, but when I read my Koran, it’s rare to find a rule that isn’t normative generally, but rather ‘us vs them’. And the justification for killing, lying, and forcing submission betray something hideous. And in private life Muhammad makes Polanski look like a saint.

    So while I’m not after drawing a racist view of an arab or a bigoted view of a Muslim, I also want to note that a completely honest and complete depiction of Muhammad would be far, far, far more offensive to Muslims than a complete depiction of, say, Moses or Jesus. That might be why they changed their thinking on depicting him. You can’t really discuss or look at the guy in their religion, so that makes it hard to scrutinize him.

    anyway, I agree that going out of your way to be ugly is not necessary, while also agreeing with you in thinking it’s also wrong to tell people to obey the irrelevant rules of a religion they aren’t a part of.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  72. Dustin-

    I agree that we’re on the same page for the most part, and I appreciate the civil back and forth.

    I’m not against offending someone when necessary. My personal judgement, and it is that, is that I would rather offend a Muslim, if necessary, by asking hard questions based on the Koran about Mohammed.

    Now I think it is sensible for someone to say that Viacom’s decision was hypocritical and cowardly, because they make it their aim to be offensive and disgusting to everyone else, so why make exceptions.

    MD in Philly (cb8efe)

  73. ****
    * *
    * * * *
    * UU *
    * *
    * \__/ *


    Chris Hooten (3cecae)

  74. darn it. I guess not. Well I tried.

    Chris Hooten (3cecae)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2702 secs.