GZ Tan, it's quite simple. Islam does not condone PICTORIAL representation. Verbal representation is quite OK. Those of us who have progressed beyond picture books understand the difference. Words are not the same as drawings, alright? I don't suggest this is rational, but it's certainly comprehensible.

GZ Tan, you might note (as an item of humour) that the media did not publish images of all those Muhammed's running around Cronulla and other places. Some parts of the christain church are not really given to images of christ or his dad either. Members of those churches propbably don't tend to name their kids Jesus.

USA ARMY COP, if you have a read through Fellow Humans posting history you might find that he does not tend to advocate slaghtering us infidels. I get the impression that if FH was to kill me it would be a slow process of generous hospitality and an excess of fine food.

Some muslims might be into the death to infidels thing just as there are some christians seem to salivate at the fate which awaits non christains (none on this site, they are all deeply concerned). Likewise some athiests or agnostics might take survival of the fittest to an extreme which I would be opposed to.

No group can be fairly judged by their extremists. Some here want their own beliefs to be judged on their best whilst judging others by their worst.

R0bert

Pay closer attention to detail, some are up the garden path Blaming, George Bush, Blair Howard, The Neocons as they call them.
The trouble maker was not the cartoon depictions, it was Akhmad Akkari and Almed Abdel Rahman Abu Laban with their extra three pictures, on tour of the Middle East last year, and on another note, did anyone else pick up on the banners held by Moslem protestors in London? Did anyone else make the observation they were all written in the same hand writing? Why it took four Months before protests indicates the whole thing was orchestrated.
Why do you not know this?

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/vidino200602060735.asp

GZ Tan,

Historically, orthodox traditional Islam rejected the idea of picturing prophets (ie all prophets mentioned in the Quran including Moses, Jesus and David).
Some modern scholars allowed it limited to animated movies like in “Joseph, king of dreams” and “Prince of Egypt”. More modern scholars allowed it in Egypt for “The passion fo the Christ” based on demand from Muslims to watch the movie. His rationale, which modern and moderate Muslims accept was the ban of pictures was for the fear of idolatry and since everything in Islam is based on intent, there is no harm for Muslims to see Jesus pictured in a movie.

US Army Cop,

Yes you are mistaken, Islam accept other religions like Christianity and Judaism. Arab Christians (and Jews) lived in Muslim countries for the last 14 centuries and prophet Mohamed (PBUH) was married to a Christian woman “maria” who was the mother to Ibrahim, his only son. History tells us prophet Mohamed gave a part of his house to Christian monks for prayer when they came to visit him.

The Quran never address Muslims but ‘believers’ of good qualities. The opposite of believers, ie non-believers, is usually replaced with the word ‘infidels’ in missionary’s translations of the Quran. The Quran instructs believers not to fight those who do not fight and/or have peace treaty with them. The only ‘infidel’ meaning is related to those who are hostile to you, kill you or drive you out of your homes (ie in a military sense). Even with those the rule in the Quran was always ‘fight those who fight you and shall not transgress’.
To claim that a faith is not peaceful because it is allowed to defend itself is both naïve and unnatural. Self defence and territory defence is a natural right to animals and plants. Are you claiming that if the US is invaded tomorrow you won’t defend it?

Fellow Human. The US is being invaded...by the Mexicans.

Well said R0bert.

People are so quick to point out the the Quaran says that all infidels should be killed; completely ignorant to the fact that the Bible says similar things.

Here are some comforting passages I read to myself every night before I go to bed...

- "That whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman." (2 Chronicles 15:12)

- "But if this charge is true, and evidence of the girl's virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her father's house and there her townsmen shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father's house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst." (Deuteronomy 22:20-21)

- "If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death." (Leviticus 20:10)

- "A priest's daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death." (Leviticus 21:9)

- "Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death." (Exodus 21:15)

- "If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13)

Pleasant stuff eh? And the list goes on and on...

(No, I'm not a Muslim.)