The 'Funny (ha, ha)' side of religion

Shrap

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Damn...you got balls. :eek:

Hmm. I personally thought "Damn...you got no taste whatsoever. :eek:", but perhaps that's my sense of humour bypass



Edit: No actually, it's just disgusting and very fcuking unfunny. My humour is fine. Is this still the "funny ha, ha" side of religion or is it the "Mohammed rapes kiddies thread?"

RikuoAmero

Shrap wrote: »

Hmm. I personally thought "Damn...you got no taste whatsoever. :eek:", but perhaps that's my sense of humour bypass

Considering that there are Muslims in the Middle East who will quite gladly kill you and your family for merely not saying PBUH after saying Mu's name, drawing and waving this picture around is like painting a target on your chest.

Personally, I don't find it funny, and yes, the content is disgusting (it is showing a full grown man threatening a beating to a small girl if she doesn't allow him to rape her, after all), but that is what the historical record says. There are disagreements between us and the Muslims as to whether or not Aisha was co-erced of course, but the record is clear - she was pre-pubescent child, not yet double digits in years and he was in his fifties.

Shrap

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Considering that there are Muslims in the Middle East who will quite gladly kill you and your family for merely not saying PBUH after saying Mu's name, drawing and waving this picture around is like painting a target on your chest.

Couldn't give a monkey's mate. It's not bleedin' funny. At all. If I weren't on my way to bed I'd take it to a moderator, which I will do in the morning.

Is there ANYBODY here who doesn't already know that this is "controversial" and so therefore "should be allowed?" :mad: Does that mean taste and respect go out the fcuking window? What about people who are actually sickened by reading that cartoon, like me? There are people who might actually have been abused as children who could be looking at this FFS. :mad:
Idiots.

BTW, you can go ahead and mod me for the word "idiots", am very pissed at this.

Shrap

The day child-rape becomes a laughing matter because it's got Mohammed in the cartoon is the day satire dies. Get a grip folks.

robindch

For the sake of everybody's sanity, the controversial image above has been replaced with a link to the controversial image. Anybody who wants to see it, just click on the link.

I think there are funnier gags around on the topic of Mohammad's alleged unusual proclivities.

Worztron

Brian Shanahan

Worztron wrote: »

One problem with the whole suicide bombers thing is that the tactic was invented by the decidedly secular Tamil Tigers. It was a response to the asymmetric war they were fighting against the US and UK backed government forces in Columbo.

And that is why the various islamist groups have adopted it, because it the most effective use (in war terms) of their limited resources and relatively large pool of untrainable (by the groups) volunteers

obplayer

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

One problem with the whole suicide bombers thing is that the tactic was invented by the decidedly secular Tamil Tigers. It was a response to the asymmetric war they were fighting against the US and UK backed government forces in Columbo.

And that is why the various islamist groups have adopted it, because it the most effective use (in war terms) of their limited resources and relatively large pool of untrainable (by the groups) volunteers

Still a fukcing stupid idea.

Worztron

Peregrinus

obplayer wrote: »

Still a fukcing stupid idea.

Possibly. But not a religious idea. Which in the context of this forum is a relevant point.

Delirium

https://twitter.com/Fun_Beard/status/564921602102394881

bpmurray

Absolam wrote: »

We were still using them in the mid 80s to run the VECs 'mainframes'....

And we used to push the little squares back into the holes to correct typos

oscarBravo

GLaDOS

Worztron

silverharp

Worztron

robindch wrote: »

For the sake of everybody's sanity, the controversial image above has been replaced with a link to the controversial image. Anybody who wants to see it, just click on the link.

I think there are funnier gags around on the topic of Mohammad's alleged unusual proclivities.

It is not alleged. You sound a bit like an apologist for religion.

This smacks of censorship.

RikuoAmero

Worztron wrote: »

It is not alleged. You sound a bit like an apologist for religion.

This smacks of censorship.

I wouldn't call it censorship. All anyone has to do is click once on a link to see the image.
This line of thinking is oft repeated on the website Techdirt, where a small handful of trolls constantly complain of being 'censored' when all anyone has to do to see those comments of theirs that have been flagged by the community...is click once on a button.
That's it.

Worztron

Shrap wrote: »

Hmm. I personally thought "Damn...you got no taste whatsoever. ", but perhaps that's my sense of humour bypass

Edit: No actually, it's just disgusting and very fcuking unfunny. My humour is fine. Is this still the "funny ha, ha" side of religion or is it the "Mohammed rapes kiddies thread?"

Refer to my recent post here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=94270632&postcount=2680
I'm not saying death by crucifixion is funny but you would probably not get the humor in that post either.

Shrap wrote: »

Couldn't give a monkey's mate. It's not bleedin' funny. At all. If I weren't on my way to bed I'd take it to a moderator, which I will do in the morning.

Is there ANYBODY here who doesn't already know that this is "controversial" and so therefore "should be allowed?" Does that mean taste and respect go out the fcuking window? What about people who are actually sickened by reading that cartoon, like me? There are people who might actually have been abused as children who could be looking at this FFS.
Idiots.

BTW, you can go ahead and mod me for the word "idiots", am very pissed at this.

I won't report your name calling because you may get further offended and we wouldn't want that now.

So should we ban all movies and TV that portray violence because someone was once attacked?

Shrap wrote: »

The day child-rape becomes a laughing matter because it's got Mohammed in the cartoon is the day satire dies. Get a grip folks.

Please avoid Family Guy, and multiple comedians because you may get offended.

If you don't find the "controversial" post funny, that's fair enough - but to get offended? It was mocking the vile middle aged man. Clearly actual child molesting is an abomination. This is a cartoon - it's not REAL.

Consider watching this: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xl2w7q_easily-offended-then-watch-this_fun

obplayer

Worztron wrote: »

It is not alleged. You sound a bit like an apologist for religion.

This smacks of censorship.

The fact is the image was just not funny. Offensive without being funny is missing the point of satire.

P.S. just watched the dailymotion video and it was excellent. But it was also funny and this is meant to be a funny thread.

Sonics2k

Worztron wrote: »

It is not alleged. You sound a bit like an apologist for religion.

This smacks of censorship.

Nah sorry Worztron, usually I love your pictures and jokes, but that one wasn't actually a funny, even in the sense of satire. It's aim was nothing more than to insult and degrade. Fact or not, it wasn't humourous.

Also, censorship would be if the image and post was removed, rather than a link being provided instead. Also, mods can remove things as they wish, there is no "Free Speech" as such on boards.

Again, I love dark humour and offensive comedy, but that wasn't actually funny at all.

CramCycle

Worztron wrote: »

If you don't find the "controversial" post funny, that's fair enough - but to get offended? It was mocking the vile middle aged man. Clearly actual child molesting is an abomination.

I don't find it funny either. If it was trying to be satire, it failed.

It would be a suitable post in a thread on issues with religion or a thread on the despicable things that religious folk ignore because it is clearly abhorrent.

Can you explain the funny part of it? because it isn't clear to me.

silverharp

Worztron

robindch

Worztron wrote: »

It is not alleged. You sound a bit like an apologist for religion. This smacks of censorship.

Nope. The image is still there. And a number of people reported the post as being either excessively nasty, counter-productive and unfunny.

I certainly agree with the "unfunny" bit and have some sympathy with the other two. Hence the decision to replace the pic with a link to the pic. As I said, the image is still there, but one has to choose to open it, rather than have it appear whether one wants to see it or not.

robindch

Meanwhile, here's a guy from Alabama out trolling his neighbours:

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/02/12/alabama-redneck-hilariously-trolls-anti-gay-bigots-by-reporting-on-how-same-sex-marriage-is-affecting-his-county-video

Worztron

Worztron

obplayer wrote: »

The fact is the image was just not funny. Offensive without being funny is missing the point of satire.

P.S. just watched the dailymotion video and it was excellent. But it was also funny and this is meant to be a funny thread.

Sonics2k wrote: »

Nah sorry Worztron, usually I love your pictures and jokes, but that one wasn't actually a funny, even in the sense of satire. It's aim was nothing more than to insult and degrade. Fact or not, it wasn't humourous.

Also, censorship would be if the image and post was removed, rather than a link being provided instead. Also, mods can remove things as they wish, there is no "Free Speech" as such on boards.

Again, I love dark humour and offensive comedy, but that wasn't actually funny at all.

CramCycle wrote: »

I don't find it funny either. If it was trying to be satire, it failed.

It would be a suitable post in a thread on issues with religion or a thread on the despicable things that religious folk ignore because it is clearly abhorrent.

Can you explain the funny part of it? because it isn't clear to me.

Humor is subjective.

Worztron

RikuoAmero wrote: »

I wouldn't call it censorship. All anyone has to do is click once on a link to see the image.
This line of thinking is oft repeated on the website Techdirt, where a small handful of trolls constantly complain of being 'censored' when all anyone has to do to see those comments of theirs that have been flagged by the community...is click once on a button.
That's it.

The key words then are 'often' and 'constantly'. Never heard of that site.

Sonics2k wrote: »

Nah sorry Worztron, usually I love your pictures and jokes, but that one wasn't actually a funny, even in the sense of satire. It's aim was nothing more than to insult and degrade. Fact or not, it wasn't humourous.

Also, censorship would be if the image and post was removed, rather than a link being provided instead. Also, mods can remove things as they wish, there is no "Free Speech" as such on boards.

Again, I love dark humour and offensive comedy, but that wasn't actually funny at all.

Ok, partially censored then.

Worztron