Welcome to Gaia! ::

I'm a Muslim, and here to answer your question.

First of all, I personally hate those stupid Danish comics that are full of bullshit about the Prophet (S.A.W.W). Freedom of speech does not mean spouting hatred towards one's religion, nor any disrespect of it. And drawing pictures of Mohammed (S.A.W.W) is definitely a sin.

Why?

Allah, the God, dislikes images, such as paintings or sculptures. We should NEVER make a likeness of God's creation.

A hadith:
When the Prophet came to his house, his young wife Aisha had placed up a painting which depicted God's living Creation (i.e. animals or humans). Aisha had seen the Prophet's face turning red in anger, and he told her immediately to take the painting off. When his wife asked why, he said, "O Aisha! Do not depict the Creation of Allah. It is a grave sin and in the Day of Resurrection the painter/sculpture would be asked to make a soul on paper, which he would not be able to do and will be faced with a severe punishment."

It creates the likeness of His creation and we are imitating the Lord by creating things that are a likeness, such as animals and humans. It is especially discouraged and Mohammed disliked it very much.

However, on Wikipedia there ARE paintings of him of how he looked and the important scenes of Islam, which were created by ancient artists who had lived during his time. But, many people are not liking this and want the pictures to be down since there should never be a picture of Mohammed anywhere, since he discouraged having his face sculpted or painted.

I'll try to answer, but some of my point of view may be different from Sacred Night..

Actually, it's still a little controversial about pictures are forbidden in Islam.
Many say all of pictures are haram (forbidden), while others say only some of them are haram and the rest are makruh (better not do it, but not forbidden)

The pictures that definitely haram are those that contained a picture of something worshiped. A person or a thing that people respect until they worship them, while it's clear in Islam that Allah is the one and only that's allowed to be worshiped. And for this reason, the image of prophet Muhammad is prohibited, fearing that some people may worship him.

It's also forbidden for the drawings that try to stand up to or equal the creation of Allah. There are many scholar's opinions that saying the painting mentioned in hadith above only refer to specific paintings, and there's no hadith that clearly say that all pictures are forbidden

I don't know about Gaia avatar, but for photography, it doesn't really matter, since it's not something you "create", but "captured" on a film. Besides, the use of them are usually for documentation and for other information.

Every deed is depend on it's first intention. If the intention is bad, so will be the deed. But even if the intention isn't bad, if there's a possibility that people may take a bad use of it, then it's not good either.

Sorry, but I thought they were funny. I like things like that. I think that jokes should be allowed. It may be mean, but that isn't any less hilarious than making a white joke if your white, or a black joke if you black. (Personally, I make both white and black jokes. They are hilarious. And no one takes offense when I do.)

While freedom of speech allows many things, people's responsibility should prevent such an occurrence.

Just like you don't yell "BOMB!" in an airport, nor do you pay for advertisements that say "Ha ha, you've just downloaded my virus. Have fun with your hard drive melted!" you don't disrespect people's beliefs with such an image. Slightly different situations and public reactions, but it's all related to responsibility in speech.

Besides, how on Earth are you going to make such a depiction accurate enough to be respectful, aside from the religion's prohibition - go off of stereotypes?! Great, that's going to win friends and influence people. confused

This is the first I'm hearing of it. This is an interesting thread.

W'asalam Alyakum! Ironic, Freedom of speech here undermines the Constitution itself. The Freedom of Religion, including all of the doctrines therein.

confused no depictions? that's horrible. i can't imagine how people can enjoy their art world if images of living things are discouraged and distasteful....

also, Freedom of Speach actualy means exactly that. a person is allowed to say whatever they want, be it slanderous and hateful, or positive and loving. as much as i dislike the hatefull speach, i would feel personally disgusted to see a person's right to say it taken away. i hate the Patriot act for quite alot of that reason.

also, to say something is "definately a sin" is very judgemental and self-righteous. i'm not saying your wrong (although i personally believe that you are). just that you should try understanding the other side as well.

now, personally i don't see any reason for depictions of him to be banned (especially after the given reason), though i respect the idea behind it, and the religious right to believe that. still, i think it would be nice to have images in favour of a prophet that i'd be looking up to...