Anyone find this offensive?

[CKent]

http://i40.tinypic.com/2a7789k.jpg

I just got reprimanded for sig'ing it on another forum I visit. They must be in favor of child molestation if they censor people who speak out against it.

 

[Jeeebus]

please give me a refresher on how that is speaking out against child molestation...

 

[glenn beck]

please give me a refresher on how that is speaking out against child molestation...

this

 

[Lean L]

you disgusting sob... why would you take a picture of yourself doing that?

 

[grohl]

a bit disturbing

 

[CKent]

you disgusting sob... why would you take a picture of yourself doing that?

If it were a real photo the penor would be about 1/2" long. And they didn't have cameras in 650ad anyway.

And it's indirect criticism of this behavior, admittedly, but still valid criticism.

 

[techs]

I think its a cogent commentary, obviously referring to the recent situation where a 10 year old girl was allowed to divorce her abusive husband.

 

[her209]

Is that supposed to be an Muslim (with a hard on) dragging a young girl off to wed?

 

[Zargon]

wtf.

 

[Tristicus]

What the fuck is wrong with you?

 

[CKent]

Not sure how many of you get it... The koran states that one of the prophet mohammed's wives, Aisha (or however you prefer to spell it, no way is really wrong as anglicization varies) was 9 years old. Many modern-day muslims use this as justification to marry and rape prepubescent girls. Since images of mohammed are considered blasphemous, and insulting a religion's prophet is pretty blasphemous anyway, the image doubly criticizes islam, and indirectly as an extention, criticizes something muslims hold dear; the rape of prepubescent girls. Hence it is a criticism of child molestation.

I didn't used to have to spell things out for AT as I do to the general public or on most other forums /sigh

 

[brblx]

Not sure how many of you get it... The koran states that one of the prophet mohammed's wives, Aisha (or however you prefer to spell it, no way is really wrong as anglicization varies) was 9 years old. Many modern-day muslims use this as justification to marry and rape prepubescent girls. Since images of mohammed are considered blasphemous, and insulting a religion's prophet is pretty blasphemous anyway, the image doubly criticizes islam, and indirectly as an extention, criticizes something muslims hold dear; the rape of prepubescent girls. Hence it is a criticism of child molestation.

I didn't used to have to spell things out for AT as I do to the general public or on most other forums /sigh

perhaps you could express your thoughts like this, in paragraph form, instead of in crude mspaint pictures.

 

[CKent]

perhaps you could express your thoughts like this, in paragraph form, instead of in crude mspaint pictures.

The forum in question has a Draconian character limit for sigs. I suppose 'getting' it hinges on knowing the name Aisha, but there was no doubt about the image's intent among the moderators there...

 

[hanoverphist]

The forum in question has a draconian character limit for sigs. I suppose 'getting' it hinges on knowing the name Aisha, but there was no doubt about the image's intent among the moderators there...

while they may have gotten it, maybe they were looking out for the rest of the world that may not get it and see it as you advocating it. an ounce of prevention and all, ya know.

 

[clamum]

Draconian

 

[CKent]

while they may have gotten it, maybe they were looking out for the rest of the world that may not get it and see it as you advocating it. an ounce of prevention and all, ya know.

Not likely. It's a religion forum. And the sig invited muslims to click the link.

Draconian

Noted.

 

[spidey07]

Not sure how many of you get it... The koran states that one of the prophet mohammed's wives, Aisha (or however you prefer to spell it, no way is really wrong as anglicization varies) was 9 years old. Many modern-day muslims use this as justification to marry and rape prepubescent girls. Since images of mohammed are considered blasphemous, and insulting a religion's prophet is pretty blasphemous anyway, the image doubly criticizes islam, and indirectly as an extention, criticizes something muslims hold dear; the rape of prepubescent girls. Hence it is a criticism of child molestation.

I didn't used to have to spell things out for AT as I do to the general public or on most other forums /sigh

Oooohhhh, you're gonna get it. You know what they do to people that show likenesses or drawings of mohammed.

 

[frostedflakes]

So it was an Islam-related forum or something? Why are you surprised by their reaction?

 

[CKent]

Oooohhhh, you're gonna get it. You know what they do to people that show likenesses or drawings of mohammed.

'Will you walk into my parlor?', said the spider to the fly.

 

[Cogman]

Not likely. It's a religion forum. And the sig invited muslims to click the link.

Noted.

So, wait, your initial reason for not typing up what you mean for a sig was because the forum doesn't allow enough text to express your opinion, yet you went ahead and linked to a fairly vague picture that we are supposed to understand means you are speaking out against child molestation.

Why couldn't you link to text that says exactly what you meant by the picture instead of doing something that at best will be mostly misunderstood and worst cause a lot of needless strife in a religion forum filled with it?

 

[Schfifty Five]

So, wait, your initial reason for not typing up what you mean for a sig was because the forum doesn't allow enough text to express your opinion, yet you went ahead and linked to a fairly vague picture that we are supposed to understand means you are speaking out against child molestation.

Why couldn't you link to text that says exactly what you meant by the picture instead of doing something that at best will be mostly misunderstood and worst cause a lot of needless strife in a religion forum filled with it?

Because being vague and pretending to overly care about something you really don't on internet message boards is the cool thing to do nowadays.

Oh and on top of that, when people don't understand or don't agree with you, you are supposed to get all defensive and upset about it.

 

[importdistributors]

Eric, You like to talk about how AT used to be and yet you post something so stupid and contradictory, and you are trying to stir up some type of reaction, but you have to keep explaining your every move. Maybe you should just give it a rest. Yaawwwnn.

 

[CKent]

Re: the last 3 replies

I wasn't being vague. If you talked about Madonna and I didn't know who you meant, would it be your fault for not writing a paragraph explaining who she is?

There are 1.5 billion muslims in the world, all of them know who Aisha was as do a great deal of nonmuslims who are at least somewhat worldly, cultured and learned. In this thread, at least - and assuming most of you are American, as ATOT polls have shown most of you to be - the stereotype of ignorant, isolated buffoons is true.

 

[TruePaige]

So you can make a picture...because you can't write out your full post as your sig...

Why don't you just put the text in a picture then?

 

[Cogman]

Re: the last 3 replies

I wasn't being vague. If you talked about Madonna and I didn't know who you meant, would it be your fault for not writing a paragraph explaining who she is?

There are 1.5 billion muslims in the world, all of them know who Aisha was as do a great deal of nonmuslims who are at least somewhat worldly, cultured and learned. In this thread, at least - and assuming most of you are American, as ATOT polls have shown most of you to be - the stereotype of ignorant, isolated buffoons is true.

nice, because we don't know who specific religious icons are, all the sudden we are ignorant.

Can you tell me who Mohonrimoriacumer was? No? Ignorant fool, how dare you not know specifics about a religion.