Apple: No Jesus on the Jesus Phone Continuing their policy of random offence, Apple has rejected an application that places the user's face onto religious figures, while changing their mind on the Nine Inch Nails and allowing a test for manic depression. Me So Holy puts a photograph of the user's choice into the face of a holy figure, much like a sea-front cut …
... an option in the camera which is called "frame", if you select a frame is superimposed
to the picture - there are no animal or holy images - you can select to appear in a classic
"western" "wanted" poster.... does that mean that with iPhone you have to pay for it?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
WOW... this is one of the dumbest things I've gotten to read about today (aside from my run-on sentence). And to think that people really buy this thing knowing full well that the company that makes it excessively tries to restrict what apps are put on it. I wonder what would happen if they ever made a line of automobiles...
You have a point, stubbing out a smoke into the image of Jesus could be offensive to some, especially those who have learned nothing about cheek turning from the book. Being offensive wasn't the main purpose of my comment, it was to illustrate the lengths some go to in order to commercialise religion and prey upon such beliefs for their own selfish gain. How respectful is it to create such an item as an ashtray with an image of Jesus? Personally I find it hilarious.
If you are offended I would like to apologise, although to me it is like apologising for defacing an image of Mickey Mouse or any other fantasy based character.
Truth is irrefutable it does not need any defending, where as religion, god and Apple would have all fallen by the wayside if it wasn't for the ignorant defending and supporting them.
If your faith is not strong enough to defend your sensibilities from what you perceive as an attack perhaps your faith should be questioned?
Ridiculous that Apple should make a big issue out of what is, let's face it, one idiotically pointless app amongst a vast number of idiotically pointless apps.
I have to agree with adnim, albeit a bit more broadly: if your religious faith is so fragile that you need to police what other people do with such imagery then you would benefit from some quiet reflection on your beliefs.
For myself as a religious person, it's not my place to tell other people what they can and can't do with images of the gods. That's up to them. Other religions have laws prohibiting the pictorial depiction of their holy figures, but those laws can bind only the followers of that religion and no-one else.
There's a long-standing claim that religious people demand disproportionate respect for their beliefs and insist that they can't be questioned or challenged. I don't think that's the case for most religious people - it certainly isn't for me. Inasmuch as we each have our own outlook on the world, I believe that eventually we will have to accept that 'respect for religion' isn't so much demanded as simply inevitable: sooner or later people will have to realise and accept that different people see the same world in very different ways, and that no matter how much either side rants and bawls and threatens and cajoles, there really isn't all that much anybody can do about that.
On the same principle, I say let the Apple flunkies have their comedy pictures of prophets. They'll have a laugh and then forget about it. The app will come and go and be forgotten, as is always the way with pointless gizmos.
I'd be very surprised if offence to members of certain faiths were not the major factor in the decision not to host this application.
You can't blame Apple for wishing to avoid large proportions of the World's population embarking on iPhone burning sprees or far worse.
Dozens of people died following the Jyllands-Posten cartoons and those behind their publication probably still walk in fear for their lives. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4670370.stm
You've got to pick your battle and your battlefield... and this juvenile app was neither.
This whole thing is mental.
There's no such thing as "an image of Jesus", it's possible that someone like Jesus existed, many prophets "exitsted" or at least there were stories about many miracle workers, including stories of resurections, cures etc. which one of these people Jesus was is anybody guess. What's sure it that none of this rather tenuous documentation included pictures, and the "images" that people call Jesus are of a white european man, certainly not a dark skinned arabic looking Jew.
Muhammad did exist however (his family and life are well documented), images existed too, there's nothing in the Quran forbidding images of Muhammad, even the hadith only forbids Muslims from creating images and this is to stop people worshipping him (worship should be for God only)
What's really behind this is that religous people have stupid faith based beliefs that they live their life by, you don't expect a rational response to people who trivialise it do you?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
