Islam for Women

CARTOONS, CONTROVERSY, BIGOTRY

Here we go again, the same controversial caricatures about Islam are being published!

The Islam caricature controversy hardly needs introduction, it was in prime time news all over the world in 2005. The Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten invited cartoonists to participate in a caricature contest about Islam and its Prophet. Twelve cartoons were published on 30 September 2005. One of them, a man with a black turban bomb aroused the most furious protests.

It is strange, that already half a year earlier the same cartoons appeared in an Egyptian newspaper and went unnoticed by the large public. But this time Islamic activist spread the word and organized demonstrations, called in the media that was filming live burning flags and puppets. It turned sometimes quite violent.

The Jyllands-Posten newspaper claims the idea was starting a dialog about Islam and extremism, and freedom of speech. What hardly anybody knows and even myself found out only a few days ago is, that the same newspaper refused to publish well meaning cartoons about Jesus some time earlier of fear of upsetting its readers.

Article in the British Newspaper The Guardian: Danish paper rejected Jesus cartoons

Quote: Danish paper rejected Jesus cartoons

Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper that first published the cartoons of the prophet Muhammad that have caused a storm of protest throughout the Islamic world, refused to run drawings lampooning Jesus Christ, it has emerged today.

The Danish daily turned down the cartoons of Christ three years ago, on the grounds that they could be offensive to readers and were not funny.

In April 2003, Danish illustrator Christoffer Zieler submitted a series of unsolicited cartoons dealing with the resurrection of Christ to Jyllands-Posten.

Zieler received an email back from the paper’s Sunday editor, Jens Kaiser, which said: “I don’t think Jyllands-Posten’s readers will enjoy the drawings. As a matter of fact, I think that they will provoke an outcry. Therefore, I will not use them.”

The illustrator said: “I see the cartoons as an innocent joke, of the type that my Christian grandfather would enjoy.”

“I showed them to a few pastors and they thought they were funny.

But the Jyllands-Posten editor in question, Mr Kaiser, said that the case was “ridiculous to bring forward now. It has nothing to do with the Muhammad cartoons.

“In the Muhammad drawings case, we asked the illustrators to do it. I did not ask for these cartoons. That’s the difference,” he said.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

My opinion is, that here the idea is not freedom of speech but there is a political agenda. Why are the same cartoons published again, at this time when the US backed Middle East peace initiative has been jumpstarted again?

Do we need proof of Islamic extremism and terrorism, again?

And WHY back in 2005 a cartoon competition at all with the specific theme Islam and Prophet Mohammed?

The answer is very simple: because there are political interests and an agenda to portray Muslims in bad light, to fan hatred and extremism.

Why now? When the US backed Middle East initiative is on track again and Pres. Bush is determined to achieve a PEACE agreement between Israel and Palestinians in a years time?

Top news from Middle East since January is not Iraq and its messed up democratization but the closure of Gaza by Israel. (”Gaza plunged into darkness as Israeli fuel blockade takes effect· Blackouts as only power plant is forced to shut.”)

Is there an urgent need to divert the attention of the world media from it? It has worked before.

Could there be some kind of connection between the political outlook of Jyllands-Posten (the star in their logo reminds me of the Star of David), their Jewish editor Flemming Rose, whose interview can be read in the German Mazazin Der Spiegel (”I Don’t fear for My Life”) and the elusive Middle East peace?

Roughly half of the citizen of Israel reject a Palestinian state and most of them would never agree to a divided Jerusalem. Palestinians claim the eastern part with the great Mosque as the capital of their future state.

So is there a need to portray Islam as the religion of hatred and violence and they cannot be trusted and no peace deal cannot ever achieved with them?

And sadly enough this ongoing slander is bearing fruits and the image of Islam in most non-Muslim countries is at its lowest point.

If only Muslims would see through all this and not let use themselves as tools in their political game. Muslims around the world should simply ignore them.

I believe if Prophet Mohammed (p.b.u.h.) would still live today, He would not approve the violence in his name because of a few poor caricatures. His idea of not to let portray him was his fear, that the early Muslims could start to worship him as a saint. He often critisized Christians to whom Jesus was divine, The Son of God. To Muslims Jesus was a Prophet like the other prophets before him and Muslims believe in all of them.

Before Islam the Meccans had hundreds of gods, idols made of diffenent materials. In the early years it was not an easy task to teach them monotheism, that there is only one almighty unvisible God.

Salaam, may God grant us all wisdom and insight!

“The true servants of The Merciful are they who walk gently on Earth, and who, when the foolish address them, reply with (words of) peace.” (Quran 25:63)

“And insult not those whom they (non-Muslims) worship besides God, lest they insult God wrongfully without knowledge. Thus We have made fair-seeming to each people its own doings; then to their Lord is their return and He shall then inform them of all that they used to do.”(Quran 6:108)

“When you are offered a greeting, reply with a better one, or at least return it. “(Quran 4:86)

Hippocratic Oath

“ I SWEAR in the presence of the Almighty and before my family, my teachers and my peers that according to my ability and judgment I will keep this Oath and Stipulation.

TO RECKON all who have taught me this art equally dear to me as my parents and in the same spirit and dedication to impart a knowledge of the art of medicine to others. I will continue with diligence to keep abreast of advances in medicine. I will treat without exception all who seek my ministrations, so long as the treatment of others is not compromised thereby, and I will seek the counsel of particularly skilled physicians where indicated for the benefit of my patient.

I WILL FOLLOW that method of treatment which according to my ability and judgment, I consider for the benefit of my patient and abstain from whatever is harmful or mischievous. I will neither prescribe nor administer a lethal dose of medicine to any patient even if asked nor counsel any such thing nor perform the utmost respect for every human life from fertilization to natural death and reject abortion that deliberately takes a unique human life.

WITH PURITY, HOLINESS AND BENEFICENCE I will pass my life and practice my art. Except for the prudent correction of an imminent danger, I will neither treat any patient nor carry out any research on any human being without the valid informed consent of the subject or the appropriate legal protector thereof, understanding that research must have as its purpose the furtherance of the health of that individual. Into whatever patient setting I enter, I will go for the benefit of the sick and will abstain from every voluntary act of mischief or corruption and further from the seduction of any patient.

WHATEVER IN CONNECTION with my professional practice or not in connection with it I may see or hear in the lives of my patients which ought not be spoken abroad, I will not divulge, reckoning that all such should be kept secret.

WHILE I CONTINUE to keep this Oath unviolated may it be granted to me to enjoy life and the practice of the art and science of medicine with the blessing of the Almighty and respected by my peers and society, but should I trespass and violate this Oath, may the reverse by my lot.” (Modern Version of the Hippocratic Oath )

Original, ca.2400 yrs. ago

While surfing the net for news you can sometimes get really frustrated about the ignorance of the Muslims themselves and overwhelmed by the thought  HOW  to  straighten things out. Because news like this are extremely harmful to the religion itself and only heats up the discussion about the confrontation of cultures.

Great Britain has a large Muslim minority, most of them immigrants and their offspring from Pakistan and India. Other Muslims who come to interact with them tell stories of strange beliefs and practices.  Like when meeting someone who is coming from a pilgrimage or just coming near from there they come and touch you in the belief that they could catch some of the spirit themselves.

Their mother tongue is not Arabic and probably in the past preachers and self taught scholars have introduced beliefs that Islam does not accept.

According to this TIME news Article (and there are a lot more of them on the Net!) SOME Muslim medical students are refusing to examine female patients and to study about illnesses caused by alcohol and sexually transmitted diseases. Or pharmacists refuse to sell certain medication related to matters they object.

Quote: “Muslim medical students get picky

… Some Muslim medical students are refusing to attend lectures or answer exam questions on alcohol-related or sexually transmitted diseases because they claim it offends their religious beliefs.

Some trainee doctors say learning to treat the diseases conflicts with their faith, which states that Muslims should not drink alcohol and rejects sexual promiscuity.

A small number of Muslim medical students have even refused to treat patients of the opposite sex. One male student was prepared to fail his final exams rather than carry out a basic examination of a female patient…”

Another Quote from a professional: Dr Abdul Majid Katme, of the Islamic Medical Association, said: “To learn about alcohol, to learn about sexually transmitted disease, to learn about abortion, it gives us more evidence to campaign against it. There is a difference between learning and practising. ”

My opinion is that a medical student has to learn everything there is to learn about the profession as the Prophet himself instructed believers to attain knowledge wherever it is, even as far as China!

If a doctor refuses to treat a patient of opposite sex when there is no other doctor available and the patient is harmed by this or even dies, then the doctor has broken his or her oath and must be punished.

An ordinary person who does not help another person in distress is punishable by law. In this case it wuld be manslaughter by the doctor because his or her knowledge could have prevented the death!

Salaam, remain vigilant, my dear readers!