Bock The Robber

Islam and Christianity Find Something in Common

Posted on Wednesday, November 28, 2007

I wrote a post called Islamic Savages a few days ago, and some people thought I shouldn’t.

Don’t know why.

Some people said I should write about George Bush instead, as if I’d never expressed a view about that warmongering cretin. As if, somehow, I’d strayed off their one, true, right-on fucking path. And you know something? It pissed me off.

You see, not only have I written constantly about America’s involvement in appalling activities around the world, but I have also comprehensively taken the piss out of the lunacies of Christianity. And still you have these people coming on here and saying Well, what about this, and what about fucking that?

Well, what about you fuck off if you don’t like it?

Do you know something? I couldn’t give a fuck. I’m no longer a Christian, if I ever was one, but I’m — I suppose — a collapsed Catholic, in the sense that I rejected all that nonsense when I was about eight years old. And by the way, if any of those critics think I didn’t write about Catholic savages, they haven’t read this site very deeply, but that’s another story.

Nevertheless, nutty and abusive as Christianity is, it moved on from its insane medieval phase where it believed in fucking murder. And that’s the big difference with Islam today. If I lived in the fourteenth century, and if there was electricity (other than static, just in case you feel like being a smart-ass tech-fucker), and if there was an interweb, I’d probably have been writing about Christian savages.

So. What do you make of these Islamic savages in Sudan?

A female teacher had a class of kids who all agreed that their teddy-bear mascot should be called Muhammad after one of the popular kids in the school. That teacher is now facing forty lashes for disrespecting the prophet. Arrested! And men are out in the street demanding this well-meaning woman’s execution for such a dreadful crime.

I’m sick of these hypocritical Islamic bastards. Fuck off the whole lot of them. They’re just the very same as the mad catholic priests of my childhood: they hate women. Why don’t they just fuck off and admit it? They’re demented. They’re sexually fucked up. They have a big psychiatric problem, all to do with sex, and they call it Islam.

For fucksake! How the fuck can these people expect to be taken seriously when they wander around the streets beating themselves on the forehead and demanding death to everyone they don’t like?
If their Prophet was around today to see how his followers are behaving, he’d rise up in disgust and cut the heads off the whole childish fucking lot of them.

Finally, Islam and Christianity are united: the words of both their prophets are defiled by stupid, mad bastards, led by frustrated sex-crazed hypocrite priests.

Common ground at last.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Netvouz
  • description
  • ThisNext
  • MisterWong
  • De.lirio.us
  • kick.ie
  • Furl
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Simpy
  • Spurl
  • StumbleUpon
Stumble it!

19 Responses to “Islam and Christianity Find Something in Common”

  1. problemchildbride
    November 28th, 2007

    Well said, Bock. It is savage to demand someone’s arrest for the ridiculous matter of a name. It’s savage to call for people’s deaths. It’s savage to stone women to death. it’s savage to abuse children in your parish. It’s savage to burn people, to behead them and to lop off their hands for stealing things. It’s savage to exterminate people on the basis of their colour, creed, gender or race. It’s all savage - whether done in the name of religion or communism or Nazism or fascism - and it all deserves to be called what it is. In fact it is essential it is. At this moment in time, Islam is going through a period of horror and savagery - much like other peoples in other eras have. All cries for “cultural sensitivity” to things like the oppression of women and female genital mutilation and Sharia law, don’t amount to enlightened tolerance. Instead it’s tolerating other people’s intolerance. It is morally wrong and in its own way racist, to stand on the sidelines saying “Oh how cultural” and see people stoned and whipped in the name of religion. We’re all human beings with human rights before we are Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Hindu or any of it. The very least we can do is to call savagery savagery wherever it’s found. Anything else is moral cowardice.

    Flaubert said “Our ignorance of history makes us libel our own times. People have always been like this.

    Excellent post, Bock. I hope every one of your readers who tolerates savagery in any culture, including our own reads it. Especially in our own culture - we have to clean our own house too. Unfortunately George Bush saw fit to allow savagery done in the US’s name at Guantanamo and the torture camps he set up in other countries. Our own house is in a right mess too.

  2. galwaywegian
    November 28th, 2007

    None of this stuff is about religion. Never was, never will be. It’s about finding excuses for hatred and oppression of people who are different from you.

  3. 73man
    November 28th, 2007

    The choice of the word ’savages’ might well have been ill-advised. Would you have expected something similar if you wrote a posting on ‘black savages’?

  4. sheepworrier
    November 28th, 2007

    73Man: I suppose it would depend if the black people were acting like savages, would it not?

    Well said Bock.

  5. Bock
    November 28th, 2007

    PBC: You’re right. Humanity comes before religion.

    Galwaywegian: Religion is the chose vehicle for intolerance.

    73man: You’re going down a dead end with that one. Skin colour has nothing to do with savagery, but religious fanaticism does. Why would I call anyone “black savages”?

    Sheepworrier: I might call then savages, but it wouldn’t be because they were black, or pink or yellow or blue or green. It would be for acting like savages.

  6. Bigphil
    November 28th, 2007

    Great Post Bock.

    If this was in an opinion Column in a daily news paper you would probably be facing a fatwa,and be monitored by the Americans (for the Bush stuff)
    Barbarity is what it is and if you use the excuse of a god (whatever one you care to pick) then you are a coward and a fool.

    I could take out Westlife at there Crok park gig(one bullet if they can be lined up properly..at the “Stand up off the stool and change the key part of every song)..When aressted i could calim to have dont it in the name of Bill Hicks ,it still makes me a murderer.(no matter how jutified i would personally feel).
    Sorry bock i went off on one there..but you get my drift…

  7. 73man
    November 28th, 2007

    I am not sure. Why would you call anyone an Islamic savage?

  8. 73man
    November 28th, 2007

    I’m just trying to make the point that words have meaning and power. If you had titled your post Cruel Punishment or Inhuman Justice then we might begin to agree on something.

  9. Bock
    November 28th, 2007

    Well, if I had titled my post something else, it wouldn’t be my post. It would be yours.

    I called the people I was talking about “Islamic savages” because their interpretation of Islam drives them to behave in a savage way. The original post was about the sentencing of a rape victim to 200 lashes under Islamic law. If somebody out there doesn’t think think lashing a rape victim is savagery we’re on very different pages.

    Of course, when the time comes, I’ll talk about Christian savages, neocon savages, or whatever kind of savage happens to be on the agenda, but that time isn’t right now.

  10. eliza
    November 28th, 2007

    The saddest thing? She’s been arrested and could potentially be flogged….and the children, not her, named the bear!

    Religious justice is blind. Shit, all justice is blind.

    And Bock…as you got me thinking….it’s not any different than our religious forefathers burning women or flogging people for using Christ’s name in vain….It is as though all religions must evolve from a primitive state into a more enlightened state.

  11. eliza
    November 28th, 2007

    Actually, I should have just signed myself….

    “Burned at the Stake”

    LOL

  12. 73man
    November 28th, 2007

    “Well, if I had titled my post something else, it wouldn’t be my post. It would be yours.”

    Fair enough, I have the space, let me do it.

  13. Limerick Gal
    November 28th, 2007

    Great post Bock!

  14. Bock
    November 28th, 2007

    73man: There’s an interesting idea. The more perspectives on this thing the better.

  15. Ian
    November 29th, 2007

    you have mental issues. your desire for booze probably makes you behave in a savage way.

    you need to have a real problem - you mad fucking angry fucking cunt. Aggggh

  16. Bock
    November 29th, 2007

    Let it all out there, Ian.

  17. Green Ink
    November 29th, 2007

    The Teddy Bear Muhammad: http://greeninkpen.blogspot.com/2007/11/teddy-bear-muhammad.html .

  18. rockmother
    November 30th, 2007

    sav·age /ˈsævɪdʒ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[sav-ij] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation adjective, noun, verb, -aged, -ag·ing.
    –adjective
    1. fierce, ferocious, or cruel; untamed: savage beasts.
    2. uncivilized; barbarous: savage tribes.
    3. enraged or furiously angry, as a person.
    4. unpolished; rude: savage manners.
    5. wild or rugged, as country or scenery: savage wilderness.
    6. Archaic. uncultivated; growing wild.
    –noun
    7. an uncivilized human being.
    8. a fierce, brutal, or cruel person.
    9. a rude, boorish person.
    10. a member of a preliterate society.
    –verb (used with object)
    11. to assault and maul by biting, rending, goring, etc.; tear at or mutilate: numerous sheep savaged by dogs.
    12. to attack or criticize thoroughly or remorselessly; excoriate: a play savaged by the critics.
    [Origin: 1250–1300; ME savage, sauvage (adj.) < MF sauvage, salvage < ML salvāticus, for L silvāticus, equiv. to silv(a) woods + -āticus adj. suffix]

    I see nothing that alludes to race, religion or politics in the definition of ’savage’. Aside from that - do we now think that they are simply just making a point by sentencing, detaining and now deporting Gillian Gibbons in 15 days time? I absolutely understand that there are vast religious and cultural differences at stake here but isn’t the sad and disappointing outcome only happening because they need to be seen to upholding Islamic law no matter what the circumstance. The problem is - in our Western eyes it is seen as an affront. An infringement on civil liberty even. What has become of the child who named the teddybear in the first place? Or is there a separate law for that? It is a shame. I was hoping for there to be a happier outcome all round. Perhaps I am too much of an idealist? It is obviously too much to ask.

  19. Bock
    November 30th, 2007

    There’s some hope in the comments on the BBC site and also in the statement by the Muslim Council of Britain. Have a look at the post about Sudan.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Irish Bloggers

YOU'VE BEEN SHOUTING ABOUT ...


View blog authority
  • Recent Comments:


  • Blogroll