Muslim Response to Comedian Mocking Christchurch Victims

share this pageShare Page
Mohammed Hijab

Channel: Mohammed Hijab

Episode Notes

Episode Transcript

© No part of this transcript may be copied or referenced or transmitted in any way whatsoever. Transcripts are auto-generated and thus will be be inaccurate. We are working on a system to allow volunteers to edit transcripts in a controlled system.


00:00:05--> 00:00:34

Salam aleikum wa rahmatullah herd of cattle How you guys doing? This video is a response to a joke, I suppose a joke that a comedian made about the Christ Church events which took place last year, whereby 52 people were horrifically and monstrously killed in their place of worship, let's hear the joke. And let's hear the justification for the joke.

00:00:35--> 00:00:54

This Australian extremists storm this building this mosque, this room that people were saying their prayers and going about their business. And for me, the saddest thing about that it wasn't the 52 people who were killed. It wasn't the countless others who had their lives changed forever, because their family members were taken from them

00:00:56--> 00:01:01

was the hundreds of people that night who couldn't make it home from nightclubs in Christ Church because all the cabbies were dead.

00:01:15--> 00:02:00

So in trying to defend his views, this comedian has come out with a range of arguments, really, of justification. So let's say the first one key word there is it is a joke. It is not real. It is make believe I don't really feel like that. But that is what comedy is. What I've got here is the dictionary definition of what it is to be a joke is something such as a funny story or triggers Cambridge dictionary that is said or done in order to make people laugh. Your criteria of the joke having to be something which is or assumed to be something which is fictitious or make belief is not something which is indicated with the dictionary definition, I've looked at more than one diction

00:02:00--> 00:02:25

definition. So why is it that you want us to assume that a joke is something which is make believe fictitious, who doesn't correspond with what you believe in? Doesn't make sense. It's not in line with the definitions I have. The problem with this joke is not just the fact that you trivialize or minimize the plight of the 52 people that were killed in cold blood. Yes, and the families of those individuals who are also grieving and probably still grieving at this moment,

00:02:26--> 00:03:05

at such a horrific and monstrous event in the history of the world. It's not just the fact. But it's the fact that you homogenized this group of Muslim people, as if they are one ethnic group, all of which have one occupation a singular occupation, which is what taxi driving taxi driving, when, in fact, Islam and Muslims are a diverse group of individuals, and the people who died were different genders and different ages. Let's be frank, you might be saying, well, this is pedantic is a joke. No, sorry. I don't this does not work with me. It does not work with me because the word joke here. Yeah. What it means to be a joke. Is not this what you what you tried to put forward and for your

00:03:05--> 00:03:06

audiences with?

00:03:07--> 00:03:11

It's not that. So having said this, now, not only is that the case, but you.

00:03:13--> 00:03:56

You made it as if those individuals who are now homogenized and otherwise Yeah, those Muslims who are the taxi drivers have the sole job of taking people away from taking people home from nightclubs, living a liberal lifestyle and non Islamic lifestyle. So here, the point is this is that not only have you homogenized and otherwise, the Muslims, but you have made them the servant class, the slave class, whose job it is to facilitate the liberal lifestyles of those people who are enjoying themselves in clubs and pubs out on that night, and that is for you the tragedy. Now, you might be saying that it's not why I actually believe it's a lie is to make believe, but that's not

00:03:56--> 00:04:38

what it is to be a joke. And we're going to explain why your sacred values and I use those words, clearly, of freedom of speech. absolutism is in fact, flawed, in what follows, but we laugh about horrible things all the time. It's how people deal with tragedy. And he even says in another part of his video that we he himself made a joke about the Holocaust and about 911 it's not about you a white man here that lives in Australia making a joke about 911 or this or that. It's about Imagine if a Muslim Yeah, a practicing traditionalist Muslim, had made a joke about 911 that's the comparison. The comparison is imagine if a traditionalist Muslim who's clearly visibly practicing

00:04:38--> 00:04:43

his religion. Yeah, made a joke about nine that's the that is the correct kind of comparison.

00:04:44--> 00:04:54

Then how would the public the American public react to that? And would they have a right to react angrily to that? That's the question it's not about whether you as a white man who has

00:04:56--> 00:05:00

no connection to the to Islam or Muslims. Yeah. make a joke about

00:05:00--> 00:05:40

I live in a holocaust is about whether Muslims make that joke practice visibly traditions, practicing Muslims make that joke. Yeah. And whether that could be or would be a response, which I, I'm pretty sure they would be in England or USA or whatever it is. It is just laughing at horrible things and I understand why you're offended, because I'm offended by a two. That is the point. This is problematic because in the beginning of this whole video, you were showing us screenshots of people abusing you online cyberbullying. So if you really thought if you really thought that being offended should not be the criteria for people saying or not saying some things, why are you even

00:05:40--> 00:06:16

showing us the abuse that you suffered? By even showing us that? If you really thought that this was the case? Why are you showing us the fact that these people were saying mean spirited things to you online? Who cares if you felt offended by that? So really, it's one standard for yourself. But another standard for the community, which you think is a disposable one, which I think your learning is not, which is the Muslim community, if you treat me with respect, I will treat you with that same respect. And then I've minute 540, you talk about respect, as if you were going to really listen to you. Yeah, it's really let's be real. I mean, that's the joke. If you ever want to make a joke, you

00:06:16--> 00:06:55

want to make a joke. Yeah. That's the joke that you are going to start talking to us about all of after all you've done about respect. What is the what is the definition of the word respect? do you regard one of the definitions is your regard for people's feelings. So if you have respect for me, you're talking about reciprocity and respect, that if you have respect for me, I'll have respect for you, and vice versa, and so on. But what if we're telling you right, that what you're doing is disrespectful. And you continue saying, I'm going to do it. So is that is that respectful? According to what respect actually means? So you seem to be a contradictory man, a contradictory man, a man

00:06:55--> 00:07:14

who hasn't got his morality figured out. There's the problem. intellectually, you're bankrupt, you're morally bankrupt, you have no sense of direction when it comes to what can I say and what can I not say? I genuinely believe that everything is okay. Which means you are free speech absolutist.

00:07:16--> 00:07:23

But society, even liberal thinkers, okay, liberal thinkers who argued the case for freedom of speech,

00:07:24--> 00:07:36

they would restrict and sense of freedom of speech, as per the harm principle on certain occasions, for example, plagiarism, copyright,

00:07:37--> 00:08:16

leaking industrial secrets, of government, for example, military secrets, these are all examples of, I'm sure if someone took your video and put it on on their YouTube channel, you wouldn't like that. And you might even say, you know what, this is not the kind of freedom of speech? Yes, I accept, because this is copyright and plagiarism. Otherwise, you should make a video explaining to everyone that you allow your content on their channels. You should do this, if you are truly at free speech absolutist, but you will say no is copyright and plagiarism and so on and so forth. And if that is the case, and if that is your position, then you realize that there is a need a practical need, yes,

00:08:16--> 00:08:37

a practical need for some kinds of censorship. So if you realize that there's a practical need for some kinds of censorship in order for economy and society to move forward. The question is, who sets the parameters for such need? Where does it become inappropriate, or otherwise immoral? For certain things to be said or not to be set?

00:08:38--> 00:09:09

And what the contradictory set of propositions you're putting forward is, there is nothing sacred, and that is the way that comedy should be. But the irony, the mother of all ironies is the following. Is that for you, comedy is sacred. And not only is that not only is comedy sacred, but free speech is sacred as well. You're saying nothing is sacred. But you actually are upholding a sacred principle? In fact, you could even argue, depending on how you define religion, a religious principle, yes, that

00:09:10--> 00:09:20

free speech should be upheld, which is, in my understanding of it, a sacred principle. Don't make yourself out to be a neutralist when it comes to

00:09:22--> 00:09:59

free speech and so on. And so what do you do? prioritize and hierarchize? Yes, you do that a set of moral propositions over and above other more positions. Don't say nothing is sacred, because clearly you're upholding free speech absolutism as a sacred morality. And not only that, but comedy itself is sacred for you. So much so that you allow things to be said in the name of comedy that you would never properly allow to be said, in other contexts. For example, copyright, libel, defamation of character, and so on and so forth. My question is, how do you make such distinction on your moral philosophy

00:10:01--> 00:10:45

How do you make such a decision? How can you prove that on the one hand? Yeah, if you take functionalism out of the picture, how can you prove that it's immoral to plagiarize and defame? And on the other hand, yes. On the other hand, it's okay to say whatever you want in the name of comedy, The problem here is, you actually do have a god. You do have a god, you do have a religion. Don't make yourself out to be some neutralist, or some agnostic in the sense No, your religion is the religion of liberalism, and more particularly, free speech absolutism. That's your religious, what's sacred to you? Okay, so having said that, now, nothing is sacred would make no sense at all,

00:10:45--> 00:10:55

particularly the Muslim people who think I'm a horrible piece of [???]. You want to see me burn? Well, who said that? Some Muslims You see, this is the problem hasty generalizations.

00:10:56--> 00:11:41

Muslims, according to Pew, by the end of the century will be one of every three people on planet earth demographic, one of every three people a third of the planet will be Muslim. I don't think I don't think you've done a referendum. Yes. On 1.8 billion people. And in fact, the Quran itself says in chapter four verse 147, may a final ob either become in Chicago, my mentor McKenna logic, well, can Allahu shakin an element, that what has what would Allah benefit? What would God benefit with your punishment, if you are thankful, and you believe, and God is ever thankful, all knowledgeable? chapter four, verse 147. In fact, if Muslims are doing what Islam says, or what the Quran says, in

00:11:41--> 00:12:23

particular, they shouldn't want you to be bitten at all. Muslims should, yes, according to the Quranic discourse, want the best for you. And in fact, that's what I'll say to you. We don't want you to go to hell. In fact, the opposite is true. We don't want anybody to be been, will go to hell or have a demise in the afterlife, which is eternal, eternal, excruciating. We don't want that to happen to you. In fact, we want you to have a pleasurable, eternal life of goodness. And that's why we invite you to Islam, we invite you to believing in one God, as the Quran says, in shakaar, to momentum, to be thankful and gratitude, grateful, to be thankful and grateful to God, and to believe

00:12:23--> 00:13:02

in God. And with that, you'll have the ultimate purpose of life realized, the ultimate purpose of life, which is not to make other people laugh. That's not the purpose of life. I'm not saying you shouldn't, or you couldn't, you can do that as well. It's a subsidiary thing. But the crux of the basic human function is to believe in one God to worship one God. Yeah, for the sake of knowing your purpose, having a happy life, having welfare in this world, and in the next world, we don't believe that you're just going to turn into ashes. And that will be the end of the human experience. So something you should look into, and I invite you to look into that. In fact, I'm having happy to

00:13:02--> 00:13:40

have a conversation with you and bring you onto my podcast, the mph Podcast, where we can have a conversation, a religious conversation, a political conversation, a philosophical conversation about these things, free speech, about religion, about what you actually meant. And in that way, perhaps the Muslim community can look past your ignorance towards them. And perhaps, we as humanity can move forward together, hand in hand, not offending one another and as you said, in theory, respecting one another, but also in practice implementing such respect to another. salaam aleikum, wa Rahmatullahi wa