Doonesbury by Garry Trudeau for March 08, 2015

The genius of Trudeau, to take a shot at the “Prophet” without showing him.I just hope, GT doesn’t need around the clock protection after this one.

you Almost have the courage to draw an image of the imaginary muhammid … almost

It is possible to mock “crazy”, yet still respect the sensitivity of more sane folks in the religion. That applies to all of them, even though faith, facts, and sanity don’t travel in the same circles, we don’t have to let the extremists take us down the drain.

My wife’s cousin’s (an amateur cartoonist) tribute to Hebdo Don’t panic it’s a pencil!

This is a double tribute from Trudeau, because most of us had never actually seen the characters that were published in Charlie Hebdo before. Thank you, GT…

I’m with Wolinski on this one. You only go around once.

The best way to draw Muhammad: draw his house and say he’s inside.

Nice. Very we’ll done.

We’ll done.

I wonder if any papers refused to run it

Kudos to Trudeau for honoring the deceased specifically, and for the best by far Charlie tribute I’ve seen!!!

What no Muhammad?? Coward.

I just imagined what he looks like. Do you suppose I will imagine being assassinated for it?

Coward!

“My wife’s cousin’s (an amateur cartoonist) tribute to Hebdo Don’t panic it’s a pencil!”~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~You should advise him not to give up his day job ( IMHO).

WHOA!!

Epic fail. Allah just means God. Maybe, Moses?

RIP Charlie Hebdo! Thank you for a nice tribute Mr. Trudeau!

The past is not enemy of the future, as commenter pointed out, it is the foundation. Without knowledge of it, warts and all, myths and faux versions are inserted, from underneath, and there lies the enemy of the future, unless i misunderstand the statement. Re being respectful of religions, not of those individuals and sects to whom insult is punishable by death, brand notwithstanding. I do appreciate being introduced to the character creations of those who were murdered for their artistic expressions.

And does the prophet have “new clothes?”

Here ya go. In bed together, Jesus and Mo and Moses. (BTW, that is NOT Muhammad in the cartoon. It’s a body double!)

This is all rank exceptionalistic hypocrisy! France has just jailed a cartoonist for ‘anti-Semitism’ for publishing this: http://static1.squarespace.com/static/544680b5e4b0149c3cfddd3b/t/54f9bf87e4b05939e763dc18/1425653640048/zeon-2-3e4c8.jpg?format=300w. As much as I admire G.T. for goring sacred cows, he’s not done it here. I guess exaltation is only appropriate when it’s someone else’s cow getting gored, not yours. If the same Hebdo cartoons that so offended Muslims had featured Jesus taking it up the ass rather than Mohammed, my guess is that the ‘Army of God’ would have a rather pointed reply.

GT still has it.

There are world-class intellects in every religion, as well as among atheists and agnostics. Of course, the bozos in each category far outweigh the impressive ones, and even the average ones could stand a great deal of self-improvement. But getting back to today’s strip: can you imagine how Zonker would have dealt with this one?

Can a cartoonist portray Muhammad wearing a burka without fatal consequences?

Someone help me out here. My understanding is that many of Charlie’s most provocative drawings were created not to make any point about the target, but solely to offend. Doing something just to piss people off strikes me as childish and hard to defend. I condemn the murderers without reservation. But I don’t think Charlie’s juvenile actions become heroic just because some nuts killed some of their writers. Most of the people around me seem to feel otherwise. What am I missing?

For many people religion is the bag in which they keep all their values; believing in a divinity and donating to charity or helping a stranger in distress are acts of devotion and seen as religious. Unfortunately, some of the bag’s other contents may be a desire to please the divinity by attacking the non-believer, or an acceptance of his fellow man’s misery because the poor are ordained by the deity to remain impoverished; these are all seen as part of their religion.Atheists and agnostics can be unpleasant and snarky in their conviction that they are the rational ones but are less often seen attacking people of faith or waging war on them in an attempt to convert them to atheism. (Communism had atheism as a component but one that could be abandoned if too inconvenient,)

And to clarify my comments, offending to make a point is fine by me. Draw Clinton as a waffle to illustrate his lack of convictions, or draw W as a ratty Roman helmet to show that he’s a chicken hawk, great. But to draw Muhammad just because you know it will offend people? Doing something just to annoy is the kind of thing I did to my little sister when I was five. I don’t do it anymore, and I don’t admire people who do

Thanks GT for illustrating the artwork of those lost at Hebro.

Faith is an irrational belief in something that is logically impossible. (Bones) Why do religions continue to exist when they are clearly the product of a primitive culture?

“ALL religion will ultimately be the downfall of the human race. Guaranteed.”.So saith the Prophet?.How can a religion practiced by 300 in some remote Stone Age village on a remote island be involved in your prophesied downfall of the human race and why hasn’t it already if it is so certain?.

@marzipANn“Atheists and agnostics can be unpleasant and snarky in their conviction that they are the rational ones but are less often seen attacking people of faith or waging war on them in an attempt to convert them to atheism. (Communism had atheism as a component but”.Communism is a religion unsupported by facts and willing to kill by the millions those who reject it. Pol Pot, Mao, Lenin, Stalin, Fidel

> it definitely isn’t “anti-Semitism”…Both the Palestinians and Israelis are Semites..Historically, that claim has only been made by those trying to excuse their Jew-hating..I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume you’re just ignorant. Look up the history of the word.

Well, hard to argue with someone who defines words to support their positions.

I don’t. But you equated the number one definition and the number four definition when you stated that Communism was a religion (number four definition) in a discussion about religion (number one definition). Communism does not fit the definition of religion that was under discussion. But you gamed the semantics to make your false point about atheism causing the deaths of millions.

@DavidHuieGreen“Communism a religion? Only in a coffee-house debate among undergrads. Both of my dictionaries say that religion is defined by a belief in and reverence for a supernaturally powerful entity that had a hand in our creation and either controls or oversees our destinies. You can game the semantics of that definition all you want, but if communism is a religion, then so are any number of fervently-followed social or political systems, e.g., the Tea Party, eco-activism, the teachings of Ayn Rand, et al. And they aren’t.”.DavidHuieGreen “actualy, they are.”.“A cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith ".DoctorDan

@DavidHuieGreen“Well, hard to argue with someone who defines words to support their positions.”.DavidHuieGreen “I used definition 4 of the dictionary in my little Nook. I hope you don ’t think only Number one is valid.”.DoctorDan @DavidHuieGreen“I don’t. But you equated the number one definition and the number four definition when you stated that Communism was a religion (number four definition) in a discussion about religion (number one definition). Communism does not fit the definition of religion that was under discussion. But you gamed the semantics to make your false point about atheism causing the deaths of millions.”.Unlike you, I’m not committed to the Number One definition as the only valid definition of religion, nor am I inclined to claim I have changed the discussion because I didn’t use YOUR favored definition. There has been a vast amount of discussion on the exact definition and how sometimes it requires belief, other times it requires actions irrespective of belief, sometimes it requires supernatural, sometimes it requires some particular mind set..It would be silly of me to limit myself to your definition (unless your religion requires it).Being on my ancient eMachine right now, I pull up the Encarta definition:

1. beliefs and worship: people’s beliefs and opinions concerning the existence, nature, and worship of a deity or deities, and divine involvement in the universe and human life 2. system: an institutionalized or personal system of beliefs and practices relating to the divine 3. personal beliefs or values: a set of strongly-held beliefs, values, and attitudes that somebody lives by 4. obsession: an object, practice, cause, or activity that somebody is completely devoted to or obsessed by The danger is that you start to make fitness a religion.

5. christianity monk’s or nun’s life: life as a monk or a nun, especially in the Roman Catholic Church

Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved..If you really believe I can’t fairly use the ten year old dictionary definition 3 or any of the others online, then you are stuck in your thinking, dogmatic, one might say. So maybe it really is your religious requirement, Me not know..Nonetheless, I continue to maintain, many things are religions for different people to the point they can’t tolerate other ways of thinking. (Or maybe you just need a different dictionary to use as your authority.).“you gamed the semantics to make your false point about atheism causing the deaths of millions.”.Again, I didn’t game the semantics. I did not accuse athiesm of causing the deaths of millions. Athiesm is not one single religion if any.Communism is a religion and those pursuing it killed millions. They really did, this is not a false statement. They are really dead.

Thank-you, Gary Trudeau, for this bit of genius.

I wrote this just to get that long-winded previous post off the screen.

not long winded. I held my breath while typing.

And again Trudeau shows his cowardliness, man is more than happy to show the cartoonist’s Pope and political cartoons but totally wimps out on the all important Muhammad cartoon. Thank God there are people out there with the gonads and willing to point out the Idiocy of Political Correctness.