How do those who permit photography respond to the argument concerning the attachment of hearts to images and the fear of polytheism, and to the command to obliterate every image, especially since Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen permitted photography but forbade keeping the images? And is it permissible to display incomplete images?

The prohibition of photography is not limited to emulating Allah's creation. Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen holds that photography with a camera is of two types: that which requires developing and manual adjustment, which is closer to being forbidden, and instantaneous photography where there is no human intervention, which does not fall under prohibited photography, as it is merely a نقل (transmission/transfer) of a form created by Allah. However, owning these pictures is not permissible except out of necessity, or if they are insignificant. As for prohibited ownership of pictures: that which is for glorifying the photographed, or for enjoying looking at them, or for remembrance. As for owning pictures that are not desired and come incidentally with others, such as those in magazines and newspapers, there is no harm in it, and it is recommended to deface them if possible. As for pictures that are in a state of degradation, there is no harm in them. A picture is identified by the head; if the head is cut off, it is no longer considered a prohibited picture. The majority of jurists hold that if a picture has a part removed without which life cannot be sustained, it is not forbidden. Hanging pictures is absolutely forbidden due to the glorification they entail and the temptations they may present.