unflinching idealism ... since 1997 archivessitemapabouthelpfeedback
where paths intersect
  • Home
  • InFocus
  • Themes
  • Columns
  • Articles
  • Fiction
  • iLogs
  • Gallery
  • Unplugged
  • Writers
  • Interactors
  • Tags
Sign in | Join Chowk
web chowk
  • Article
  • Interact
  • read writer comments
  • add to favorites
  • get rss feeds
  • print
  • email this link

The Sudanese Teddy Bear Saga

Hammad Siddiqi December 4, 2007

Latest comments   flat   threaded   latest   oldest   all
listing 16-32   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

#17 Posted by stuka on December 6, 2007 3:46:23 pm
I think the kids should be put to death for choosing the name Mohammad for the Teddy Bear. For Muslims themselves to show such disregard for the Prophet is inexcusable.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#18 Posted by abu_safwaan on December 6, 2007 8:32:34 pm
I guess i still dont quite get wat is offensive about naming a teddy bear muhammad..hows that disrespectful to the prophet (PBUH)...? I agree ignorance is no excuse to break the law of the land....lest we forger indigenous majority has a right to legislate however there lil heart desire....u can be president of cattle assoc. of america but u better not order steak in mumbai...because its against the law 2 eat 'god'....when in rome ......
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#19 Posted by rashid_s on December 6, 2007 8:51:24 pm
The charge against Mrs Gibbons is that she “allowed” the children to name a cuddly loveable toy to be named Muhammad by her class of innocent people. That was the children’s choice and their right. Muhammad respected the rights of children and loved them, so he would have been thrilled to be so reciprocated with love by the class.
To Mrs Gibbons, Westerner or not, a teddy bear is a symbol of innocence, love and comfort. She was not guilty of any thing wrong.
The fanatics, who elevate a ‘bashar’ like Muhammad to almost a ‘deity’ should take cognisance of the teachings of Quran. Muhammad was subjected to worst things by his enemies than being honoured by naming an innocent toy after him.
Islam can not be insulted by honouring or otherwise and by naming a person what ever.
This warped thinking is the result of “religion” – a church based on dogma, and its operatives the priests as its enforcers. And Islam is NOT a religion and tolerates NO priesthood.
There are millions named Muhammad in the world and a few I would touch them with a barge pole!
Dr Johnson’s saying fit the modern times to the hilt “Soldiers and Priests are the corrupter of the earth”.
Rashid
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#20 Posted by rashid_s on December 6, 2007 8:51:24 pm
The charge against Mrs Gibbons is that she “allowed” the children to name a cuddly loveable toy to be named Muhammad by her class of innocent people. That was the children’s choice and their right. Muhammad respected the rights of children and loved them, so he would have been thrilled to be so reciprocated with love by the class.
To Mrs Gibbons, Westerner or not, a teddy bear is a symbol of innocence, love and comfort. She was not guilty of any thing wrong.
The fanatics, who elevate a ‘bashar’ like Muhammad to almost a ‘deity’ should take cognisance of the teachings of Quran. Muhammad was subjected to worst things by his enemies than being honoured by naming an innocent toy after him.
Islam can not be insulted by honouring or otherwise and by naming a person what ever.
This warped thinking is the result of “religion” – a church based on dogma, and its operatives the priests as its enforcers. And Islam is NOT a religion and tolerates NO priesthood.
There are millions named Muhammad in the world and a few I would touch them with a barge pole!
Dr Johnson’s saying fit the modern times to the hilt “Soldiers and Priests are the corrupter of the earth”.
Rashid
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#21 Posted by rashid_s on December 6, 2007 8:51:29 pm
The charge against Mrs Gibbons is that she “allowed” the children to name a cuddly loveable toy to be named Muhammad by her class of innocent people. That was the children’s choice and their right. Muhammad respected the rights of children and loved them, so he would have been thrilled to be so reciprocated with love by the class.
To Mrs Gibbons, Westerner or not, a teddy bear is a symbol of innocence, love and comfort. She was not guilty of any thing wrong.
The fanatics, who elevate a ‘bashar’ like Muhammad to almost a ‘deity’ should take cognisance of the teachings of Quran. Muhammad was subjected to worst things by his enemies than being honoured by naming an innocent toy after him.
Islam can not be insulted by honouring or otherwise and by naming a person what ever.
This warped thinking is the result of “religion” – a church based on dogma, and its operatives the priests as its enforcers. And Islam is NOT a religion and tolerates NO priesthood.
There are millions named Muhammad in the world and a few I would touch them with a barge pole!
Dr Johnson’s saying fit the modern times to the hilt “Soldiers and Priests are the corrupter of the earth”.
Rashid
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#22 Posted by zeemax on December 6, 2007 10:44:41 pm
rashid_s,

We heard you the first time!
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#23 Posted by krashid1961 on December 6, 2007 11:50:40 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#24 Posted by dullabhatti on December 6, 2007 11:51:25 pm
Irony is that it is the same idolatry reverence of Muhammad that made 7 yr olds to name the teddy bear Muhammad on one hand and adult muslims to protest against it on the other.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#25 Posted by viqarm on December 7, 2007 12:36:37 am
Re: # 9 Sherbaz
"...mine has always been to try and see the issue from all sides and not be too judgemental".

Then, may be, you should also try to consider the fact that a teddy bear is an object that most children (don't know about the Sudanese) are very attached to and love dearly. Many refuse to go sleep without it clasped in their arms.

So something that they dearly love was named Muhammad by a European woman who wouldn't have had a second thought about naming one Jesus in a Christian country or, perhaps, Krishna or Ram in India.

After all, isn't it the idea that Muslim children should love Muhammad as Christians do Jesus, and Hindus do Ram?

In closing let me mention that I had no intention to be insulting either towards Jesus or Ram in hypothetically suggesting a teddy bear to be named after them.

Does that make any sense?
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#26 Posted by khakiflash on December 7, 2007 1:36:00 am
Whatever the rights and wrongs of the incident (did I say 'rights'?) it's clear that the episode has been a total gift to Islamaphobes, certainly in the UK - and I try my best not to consider myself as one - even though the memory rankles of Sir Iqbal Sacranie, (former leader of the Muslim Parliament of Great Britain) describing me and my ilk as "repulsive, diseased and morally deficient". Can we really carry on denouncing those who don't necessarily hold to the beliefs or behavioural strictures of our own 'group'? If one does voluntarily subscribe to them and then falls short, it may indeed be pertinent to cry "foul", but surely not otherwise - although I agree that for all individuals 2-way sensitivity is desirable. A bit more tolerance all round would certainly not be amiss. (By the way, isn't the forename 'Jesus' relatively common for males in Latin American countries?)
Khaki
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#27 Posted by hamidm2 on December 7, 2007 4:02:50 am


stuka,

........ i second your proposal .......... today those children named a teddy bear muhammad ..... what is next? ....... tomorrow they might name their favourite barbie doll aisha .... this kids are on a slippery slope and must be stopped! ...... i say, hang those little niggers! (sudanese are black even though they are arab wannabes like most pakis and mohammadens everywhere)
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#28 Posted by laddu on December 7, 2007 4:19:41 am
"This is no crime in itself, however it does reflect bad judgement on her part for which she has to take some responsibility. "

So you admit that she was responsible to some extent.
Pray, what if she 'deliberately' named that teddy bear as Mohammad ??
Would you allow the mob and the shariah courts to kill her?
Sure, there lies the limits of your 'progression' as a modern day muslim!!
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#29 Posted by laddu on December 7, 2007 4:28:32 am
Calling a cuddly non-violent Teddy bear Mohammad is indeed an insult to the Teddy bears!!!
Civilized world should never allow this!!
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#30 Posted by Urstruly on December 7, 2007 6:04:18 am

There is no one more dear to us Muslims than the person of Holy Prophet (pbuh). Our belief cannot complete unless he becomes more dear to us than our own selves, our children, our family, our wealth, and anything that this world has to offer. This standard is established by God and His Prophet themselves. We do not name animals or inanimate objects with his (pbuh) name out of respect. If anyone has a problem with that then suck it up. Its your problem. We know very well how to deal with our problems. So try not to sermonize us with "civilized world" crap. You can have your civilized world thank you very much.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#31 Posted by Dash_Dot on December 7, 2007 6:58:09 am
urstruly: "This standard is established by God "

can we call God as a witness to say this?

just curious
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#32 Posted by tahmed32 on December 7, 2007 7:01:13 am
Urstruly #30: Do you actually worship the prophet or are you simply being dramatic?
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
listing 16-32   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Interact Index

    #121 Salim_Chauhan
    #120 Salim_Chauhan
    #119 sherbaz
    #118 Kulharee
    #117 teshah
    #116 Kulharee
    #115 sherbaz
    #114 anil
    #113 masanamuthu
    #112 Salim_Chauhan
    #111 Salim_Chauhan
    #110 masanamuthu
    #109 Kulharee
    #108 teshah
    #107 Salim_Chauhan
    #106 Salim_Chauhan
    #105 Kulharee
    #104 arjun8
    #103 Eklavya
    #102 LOOP
    #101 arjun8
    #100 majumdar
    #99 masanamuthu
    #98 Salim_Chauhan
    #97 Salim_Chauhan
    #96 masanamuthu
    #95 Eklavya
    #94 Eklavya
    #93 nasah
    #92 HP
    #91 Salim_Chauhan
    #90 zeemax
    #89 rashid_s
    #88 abu_safwaan
    #87 stuka
    #86 tahmed32
    #85 LOOP
    #84 LOOP
    #83 LOOP
    #82 LOOP
    #81 LOOP
    #80 abu_safwaan
    #79 einsteinwallah
    #78 Kulharee
    #77 teshah
    #76 nasah
    #75 stuka
    #74 Kamath
    #73 Salim_Chauhan
    #72 Salim_Chauhan
    #71 laddu
    #70 abu_safwaan
    #69 abu_safwaan
    #68 masadi
    #67 Kulharee
    #66 hamidm2
    #65 Urstruly
    #64 sherbaz
    #63 laddu
    #62 stuka
    #61 laddu
    #60 Urstruly
    #59 sherbaz
    #58 laddu
    #57 Urstruly
    #56 laddu
    #55 Urstruly
    #54 laddu
    #53 laddu
    #52 Naqshbandi
    #51 Naqshbandi
    #50 Naqshbandi
    #49 laddu
    #48 tahmed32
    #47 tahmed32
    #46 laddu
    #45 Urstruly
    #44 rf786
    #43 tahmed32
    #42 laddu
    #41 laddu
    #40 Urstruly
    #39 Urstruly
    #38 stuka
    #37 laddu
    #36 Dash_Dot
    #35 stuka
    #34 tahmed32
    #33 tahmed32
    #32 tahmed32
    #31 Dash_Dot
    #30 Urstruly
    #29 laddu
    #28 laddu
    #27 hamidm2
    #26 khakiflash
    #25 viqarm
    #24 dullabhatti
    #23 krashid1961
    #22 zeemax
    #21 rashid_s
    #20 rashid_s
    #19 rashid_s
    #18 abu_safwaan
    #17 stuka
    #16 Urstruly
    #15 bubba
    #14 thinkingstorm
    #13 nasah
    #12 anil
    #11 hamidm2
    #10 nasah
    #9 sherbaz
    #8 nasah
    #7 sherbaz
    #6 aslam644
    #5 ShoreSahib
    #4 ShoreSahib
    #3 Kulharee
    #2 sherbaz
    #1 Kulharee

Latest Interacts

  • masadi: Anil sahib, nice try... Historian Amaresh Misra on
  • pakiturk: My friends, ML, MQM, PPP,... MQM - History and
  • anil: Masadi sahib: Your brain is... Historian Amaresh Misra on
  • masadi: Thinking sahib, Please pardon the... Fathers and Daughters
  • masadi: Anil writes "You show... Historian Amaresh Misra on
  • pakiturk: #86 Posted by hamidm2... MQM - History and
  • vatanparast: #107 Whatever I say is... MQM - History and
  • anil: Masadi sahib: Paranoia should... Historian Amaresh Misra on

THEMES

  • Pakistan's Struggle for Democracy
  • The Indian Story
  • Indo-Pak Relations
  • Personal Narratives
  • Religion Today
  • War on Terror
  • Role of Media
  • Call for Social Change
  • Hold Them Accountable
  • Environment and Us
  • Way of Life
more »

Top 5 Articles This Week

  • Popular
  • Living Gandhi and King Today: Unbroken Historic Continuity
  • MQM - History and Origins
  • Reforming Religious Fundamentalists
  • Fathers and Daughters
  • A Weak Pakistan is a Threat to Neighbours
  • Featured
  • There are a Lot of Monkeys
  • White Charade
  • Words of a Woman
  • FOX News and the Smelly Shoes
  • Dilemmas of Creative Children
  • 10 Years Ago
  • Disowning Altruism
  • The Overlooked Problem of Pakistani Racism.
  • Phool Na Loon to Kiya Karoon?
  • Communists and Congress Should Give Birth to ’Red Indians’
  • The Friend

Write on Chowk Interact Guidelines Privacy policy Terms Contact

Copyright © 1997 - 2008 chowk.com. All Rights Reserved
Reproduction of material on any www.chowk.com pages without prior written permissions is strictly prohibited