Hurrah! I got in first this time!
Smallvoice yesterday: stop griping about our beloved Author being slightly late. This one is well worth waiting a little longer for.
Thank you Author, for another well-timed putdown!
It would be better as a bad limerick.
“The Koran dictated to Mo
Was divinely perfect and so.
It was alright to kill
If you followed Al’s will
but no technology beyond the bow”
Deimos: Er, excuse me, but, if you read it again, it IS a limerick, and no more a bad one than your own. IMNVHO, they’re both pretty good. I have a spurious claim to expertise in this area, as my late father was a prodigious producer of doggerel. (Though he never attempted the strict discipline of the limerick.)
Just nitpicking here–I get it that Allah is supposed to be uncreated, but how could the Koran exist before it was dictated to Mo? Didn’t the act of dictating it create it? Or is that a sort of “if a tree falls in the forest” question?
Barmaid, this round’s on me. Perhaps some virtual liquor will lubricate our discussion 🙂 .
SoGgy, old son, I could, in the mood of comedy, repeat the expressed sentiment but I suppose that that, too, would apparently whoosh. It would also become less witty with each iteration.
English really needs tones in text but that would spoil the pleasant exercise the presently confusing language offers us when deciding exactly how a remark was intended and the joy of discovery when we find a jest inside the mutterings of supposed curmudgeons.
The only rational and polite recourse allowed by the limitations of our current textual medium, it seems, would be to chuckle quietly while asking the helpful and nice Barmaid to set up a second round for the House.
So done.
On the subject of creation, could not an all-powerful entity create itself in the far distant, pre-Eternal “past”? Indeed, would it not almost be a necessity in the logic of such things?
The gods exist because the gods decided now to exist then.
2CW, no, the dictating did not create the book, it only transmitted a copy to Mo’ and his merry friends. As every writer knows, writers have books in their heads that will never get onto the page – a good thing in many cases – because the transmission from mind to paper is hard work. Those books, nonetheless, exist in the form of software constructs, like MSWord documents on a screen (in RAM) before they are saved.
The K’ran was, according to the legend, always hanging around just waiting for the perfect recipient to be in the perfect mood and the perfect circumstances for its download to Humanity to have maximum effect.
“Uncreated” could still apply.
Sort of.
One of the benefits of keeping books in the mental spaces is that it makes revisions easier.
Not, of course, something that would apply to the Quran.
I was watching the unseen tapes of Manson last night. The similarity of Charles Manson to charismatic nutters of the past is obvious. Mohammeds nuttery and brutality makes Manson look like a pacifist by comparison…Final word of God my arse….
The qorann is only a book
while old it is still worth a look,
Not for any thing true
Nor because the writing is good
But only because it’s a relatively recently written historical artefact and an expression of abnormal psychology and therefore slightly interesting from psycho-pathological and socio-historical perspectives and some editions are beautifully printed and works of high art which are lovely enough to appreciate evn if one doesn’t read any Arabic.
Pink Squirrel: What contradiction? It’s perfectly possible to be in a cave and wearing a child’s dress at the same time. If I were wearing a wee kiddie’s frock (which I’m not likely to be doing!), I might well want to do so in a cave – so that no-one could see me.
Son of Glenner…I too am not a cross dresser, and even if I fancied my wife’s clothes at 194.5cm and 94kg I’m never getting into my wife’s size 10 clobber…..Good job, I may enjoy it.. .haha
And I’m sure that Mo wasn’t in the cave dressed as Shirley Temple…..sexually repression is possibly the cause of mo’s extreme violence to his fellow sapiens.
On the subject of mo (pink be upon him) and his gender fluidity….
According to several of his companions mo always urinated “like a woman “ and kept a leather screen or shield to prevent anyone confirming the layout/size of his genitals.
M27, plenty of males wear dresses, respectable, stable, pillars-of-the-community, Great-and-Good folks like monks, priests, Popes, Arabs, Ancient Romans, drag queens and many others. There is apparently no social stigma to men wearing feminine clothing. It’s considered quite normal in Western and Eastern cultures.
In addition, some clubs formed by respected, honoured men wear female style wigs to work, such as Judges and lawyers. Female clothing and hairstyles are indeed seen as being an indicator of higher status, higher wisdom, greater learning and social power.
Which is strange considering that women themselves are, on the surface at least, often not.
The robes worn by clerics, and Arabic robes are different from frilly dresses worn by that transvestite potter. I reckon I would cause a disturbance if I wore a miniskirt to the pub!
Jobrag, no, I didn’t forget about the denizens of the near-Arctic wastelands up north, I was just rather hesitant to call those forms of coverings “dresses”. The northern natives can get slightly shirty when their local customs are mocked.
They can be almost as touchy as those who follow another Mo’ and I’m rather fond of not being broadsworded into little bitty chunks.
I have a good proportion of muscle mass which skews the bmi I have 12% body fat. Son of Glenner…just had a well man check before a spine decompression surgery last week. I had equina Cauda and it needed surgical intervention….but recovering well now…
SmallVoice: As an occasional kilt-wearer, I thank you for not calling the kilt a dress. I note that “upskirting” is now illegal – I hope that also applies to drunken young women lifting up the kilt from behind, to check on underwear – if any, with fits of giggles, and asking the rhetorical question: “Are you a troo Scotsman?”
(Cue for old joke; Q: Is anything worn under the kilt?; A: No, everything is in perfect working order.)
M27Holts: I wish you a speedy and successful recovery.
Watch out everybody Son of Glenner is an “unexploded Scotsman”???? To be fair, a woman lifting up your kilt should be considered indecent assault. As it would be if you reciprocated….
M27Holts: In fact, on the few occasions when that action has happened to me, I did “explode” – pointing out that, if I had done the same to them, it would have been (rightly) called indecent assault, and urging them to never do it again to any kilt wearer. (This tirade very much out of character – I am normally all sweetness and light and friendly to anyone.)
Of course, consensual kilt lifting is a very different case!
Never worn a Kilt. But heterosexual cross dressing is far more common than most people think. Anyway only religious nuts care about such things. Let people wear what they want it’s what a free country should embrace.
two cents’ worth: When wearing my kilt, I am often asked (by an English person) if I play the bagpipes. My ideal response is to ask them if they play the cor anglais (“English horn” for the benefit of transatlantic readers). Unfortunately, I don’t always think of it in time, so the moment is lost!
Jesus & Mo (the characters) are absurd, blinkered, and oddly very sweet. J&M (the cartoon) is brilliant: sharp, delicious, irresistible. Salman Rushdie
Jesus and Mo cartoons are wonderfully funny and true. Richard Dawkins
Jesus and Mo make the world a better place, bless their little hearts. Ophelia Benson
In a world defined by outrage and offence and liberal spinelessness, Jesus and Mo is a treasure, whose value we should never fail to recognize. Read them. Laugh. And think. Kenan Malik
The brilliant, celebrated, freaking hilarious atheist comic strip ... Greta Christina
...rays of sanity in a befuddled world. Keri Hulme
The liveliest depictions of Muhammad currently available... Malise Ruthven
J & Mo is the funniest and most consistently thought-provoking cartoon strip on the Net. In a saner world, it would run in a major newspaper. Nelson Jones, Heresy Corner
Consistently amusing, frequently thought-provoking and often heart-warming. New Humanist
Jesus & Mo is one of the most wonderful things on the internet.. JT Eberhard
Wittily captures much of the absurdity of religious apologetics. Mano Singham
I love jesusandmo.net cartoons - witty and sharp! Katha Pollitt
Often hilarious, frequently wry, these cartoons do what all the best cartoons do: they tell the truth through humour. Terry Sanderson, NSS President
...a wonderfully acid British cartoonist... Nick Cohen
I love the scrappy mockery of Jesus and Mo. Freedom of speech
includes the freedom to mock any person, any thing, any activity, and
any belief -- and J&M stands up for this unflinchingly Richard Stallman
...empowering, important and deeply progressive, not to mention hilarious... Council of Ex-Muslims
December 27, 2006
Hurrah! I got in first this time!
Smallvoice yesterday: stop griping about our beloved Author being slightly late. This one is well worth waiting a little longer for.
Thank you Author, for another well-timed putdown!
Thanks, Author, worth the wait! I hope all is well with you.
“Griping”?
Fuck, does no one get humour any longer?
I blame the Real Millennials. Them and green monkeys.
It would be better as a bad limerick.
“The Koran dictated to Mo
Was divinely perfect and so.
It was alright to kill
If you followed Al’s will
but no technology beyond the bow”
Deimos: Er, excuse me, but, if you read it again, it IS a limerick, and no more a bad one than your own. IMNVHO, they’re both pretty good. I have a spurious claim to expertise in this area, as my late father was a prodigious producer of doggerel. (Though he never attempted the strict discipline of the limerick.)
SmallVoice: Pot & kettle!
Just nitpicking here–I get it that Allah is supposed to be uncreated, but how could the Koran exist before it was dictated to Mo? Didn’t the act of dictating it create it? Or is that a sort of “if a tree falls in the forest” question?
Barmaid, this round’s on me. Perhaps some virtual liquor will lubricate our discussion 🙂 .
SoGgy, old son, I could, in the mood of comedy, repeat the expressed sentiment but I suppose that that, too, would apparently whoosh. It would also become less witty with each iteration.
English really needs tones in text but that would spoil the pleasant exercise the presently confusing language offers us when deciding exactly how a remark was intended and the joy of discovery when we find a jest inside the mutterings of supposed curmudgeons.
The only rational and polite recourse allowed by the limitations of our current textual medium, it seems, would be to chuckle quietly while asking the helpful and nice Barmaid to set up a second round for the House.
So done.
On the subject of creation, could not an all-powerful entity create itself in the far distant, pre-Eternal “past”? Indeed, would it not almost be a necessity in the logic of such things?
The gods exist because the gods decided now to exist then.
Too simplistic?
2CW, no, the dictating did not create the book, it only transmitted a copy to Mo’ and his merry friends. As every writer knows, writers have books in their heads that will never get onto the page – a good thing in many cases – because the transmission from mind to paper is hard work. Those books, nonetheless, exist in the form of software constructs, like MSWord documents on a screen (in RAM) before they are saved.
The K’ran was, according to the legend, always hanging around just waiting for the perfect recipient to be in the perfect mood and the perfect circumstances for its download to Humanity to have maximum effect.
“Uncreated” could still apply.
Sort of.
One of the benefits of keeping books in the mental spaces is that it makes revisions easier.
Not, of course, something that would apply to the Quran.
The Koran is much like the Bible
In that any critique is libel
And once you are taught
Your mind starts to rot
Another psychotic disciple.
I was watching the unseen tapes of Manson last night. The similarity of Charles Manson to charismatic nutters of the past is obvious. Mohammeds nuttery and brutality makes Manson look like a pacifist by comparison…Final word of God my arse….
I miss NBH.
The qorann is only a book
while old it is still worth a look,
Not for any thing true
Nor because the writing is good
But only because it’s a relatively recently written historical artefact and an expression of abnormal psychology and therefore slightly interesting from psycho-pathological and socio-historical perspectives and some editions are beautifully printed and works of high art which are lovely enough to appreciate evn if one doesn’t read any Arabic.
“… evn if …” should have read “even if”, of course. I just plum ran out of edit time.
There is no need to miss NBH, anyone can write a rubbish limerick.
in a cave ? contradicts other accounts which say Mo’s best ‘revelations’ occurred while wearing his child-wife Ayesha’s robes
Pink Squirrel: What contradiction? It’s perfectly possible to be in a cave and wearing a child’s dress at the same time. If I were wearing a wee kiddie’s frock (which I’m not likely to be doing!), I might well want to do so in a cave – so that no-one could see me.
Son of Glenner…I too am not a cross dresser, and even if I fancied my wife’s clothes at 194.5cm and 94kg I’m never getting into my wife’s size 10 clobber…..Good job, I may enjoy it.. .haha
And I’m sure that Mo wasn’t in the cave dressed as Shirley Temple…..sexually repression is possibly the cause of mo’s extreme violence to his fellow sapiens.
On the subject of mo (pink be upon him) and his gender fluidity….
According to several of his companions mo always urinated “like a woman “ and kept a leather screen or shield to prevent anyone confirming the layout/size of his genitals.
There are a couple of surah on the subject.
I wonder….
M27, plenty of males wear dresses, respectable, stable, pillars-of-the-community, Great-and-Good folks like monks, priests, Popes, Arabs, Ancient Romans, drag queens and many others. There is apparently no social stigma to men wearing feminine clothing. It’s considered quite normal in Western and Eastern cultures.
In addition, some clubs formed by respected, honoured men wear female style wigs to work, such as Judges and lawyers. Female clothing and hairstyles are indeed seen as being an indicator of higher status, higher wisdom, greater learning and social power.
Which is strange considering that women themselves are, on the surface at least, often not.
Humans are weird.
Shirley Temples are also weird. Also too sweet.
The robes worn by clerics, and Arabic robes are different from frilly dresses worn by that transvestite potter. I reckon I would cause a disturbance if I wore a miniskirt to the pub!
@smallvoice,you omitted the Scots the Irish and the Northunbrians, all skirt wearers.
M27Holts: A propos of nothing, your BMI is ~24.8, just on the safe side of overweight.
Just thought you might like to know.
Jobrag, no, I didn’t forget about the denizens of the near-Arctic wastelands up north, I was just rather hesitant to call those forms of coverings “dresses”. The northern natives can get slightly shirty when their local customs are mocked.
They can be almost as touchy as those who follow another Mo’ and I’m rather fond of not being broadsworded into little bitty chunks.
I have a good proportion of muscle mass which skews the bmi I have 12% body fat. Son of Glenner…just had a well man check before a spine decompression surgery last week. I had equina Cauda and it needed surgical intervention….but recovering well now…
SmallVoice: As an occasional kilt-wearer, I thank you for not calling the kilt a dress. I note that “upskirting” is now illegal – I hope that also applies to drunken young women lifting up the kilt from behind, to check on underwear – if any, with fits of giggles, and asking the rhetorical question: “Are you a troo Scotsman?”
(Cue for old joke; Q: Is anything worn under the kilt?; A: No, everything is in perfect working order.)
M27Holts: I wish you a speedy and successful recovery.
Watch out everybody Son of Glenner is an “unexploded Scotsman”???? To be fair, a woman lifting up your kilt should be considered indecent assault. As it would be if you reciprocated….
M27Holts: In fact, on the few occasions when that action has happened to me, I did “explode” – pointing out that, if I had done the same to them, it would have been (rightly) called indecent assault, and urging them to never do it again to any kilt wearer. (This tirade very much out of character – I am normally all sweetness and light and friendly to anyone.)
Of course, consensual kilt lifting is a very different case!
Never worn a Kilt. But heterosexual cross dressing is far more common than most people think. Anyway only religious nuts care about such things. Let people wear what they want it’s what a free country should embrace.
What do elderly Scotsmen wear under their kilts?
.
.
.
Depends.
Don’t run with bagpipes! You could put an aye out, or worse, get kilt.
OK, OK, I’ll stop now 😉 .
Deimos: your grasp of the limerick form is the equal of Nassar ben Houja’s.
hotrats: Hardly a compliment to Deimos!
two cents’ worth: When wearing my kilt, I am often asked (by an English person) if I play the bagpipes. My ideal response is to ask them if they play the cor anglais (“English horn” for the benefit of transatlantic readers). Unfortunately, I don’t always think of it in time, so the moment is lost!
What about wild Haggis and the Loch Ness Monster? Son of Glenner…Have you got short arms and deep pockets? The stereotypes are myriad….