The Islamic prohibition on idolatory and portrayals of the prophets seems to be a bit fraught with problems.
Oh, Crickey! has an example of a nice Persian painting of Muhammed and even a cheerful
Even a dot or a spot with a label that says "Muhummed" could be blasphemous possibly? What about a voice? Could a radio show or conversation be blasphemous if one of the voices is supposed to that of Muhammed? I recall a 60s or 70s film about the life of Muhammed on TV and they never showed him at all even though people were talking to him. Their technique was to show his horse and the camera was from his point of view so that people would talk direct to camera addressing him - which was a good idea and actually worked quite well. But I thought that by having us mortals seeing everyone through his eyes was perhaps more basphemous. (sp?)
It seems every blog has some sort of comment to make on this issue - and it is good to see the Malcolm Evans Star of David NZ Herald cartoon sacking case being mentioned. I thought his only racist stuff was the anti-Maori stereotyped filth that the Herald used to run all the time - and he gets the arse to satisfy Zionists!? How typical. There are oceans of hypocrisy washing around the world and this country on this issue at the moment. Muslims swarming all over the show to protest about a few silly cartoons instead of any number of other issues like slavery in North African Islamic states, Israel etc. Newspapers prepared to hand down the most sanctimonious editorial leaders against people who offend their ever-changing sensibilities proclaiming a right to offend. Govt. ministers tut-tutting... The Catholics jumping on the band-wagon to support the Muslims in order to strengthen their cult's hand... it's all so very stupid.
If we have to have a serious discussion about religion and toleration then I guess it might as well be over a dozen, lame Danish cartoons.