I think it's highly offensive to ridicule the beliefs of others. I believe in tolerance. I think it's possible to disagree without being disrespectful.
I can empathize with Muslims that are offended by cartoons that they consider to be mocking their faith. I understand their outrage. I really do.
As a Catholic, I am bombarded with affronts to my religion in the form of cartoons, jokes, editorials, and comments.
Constantly!
I have no problem comprehending the Muslims' feelings of being assaulted. On a regular basis, I share those same feelings in respect to my personal faith.
HOWEVER, I realize that I live in a free society, and being insulted comes with the territory. Liberty can be a double-edged sword. The society that permits me to practice Catholicism freely also permits others to freely degrade it.
The U.S. even grants tax dollars to support artists that choose to attack my religious beliefs.
If one of the cartoons, an image of Mohammed, hung on a gallery wall in New York would that incite violence or would it be art?
We know Piss Christ, Andres Serrano's photograph of a crucifix submerged in his own urine, was defended by liberals. That was deemed artistic expression, not desecration. Although it caused some uproar and offended some Christians in the U.S. in the late 1980s, there were no riots. The fact that the National Endowment for the Arts was supporting Serrano's "art," that tax dollars had gone to the creator of Piss Christ, irritated many; but there were no fires, no calls for beheadings.
In 1999, "artist" Chris Ofili's The Holy Virgin Mary, with its elephant dung and pornographic images in a picture of the Virgin Mary, was controversial and sparked protests. Again, no deaths or riots resulted because of this tasteless "work of art." Again, the secularist liberal elite championed it as a totally appropriate expression by an artist, rather than an affront to Christians.
ANYONE deeming these "art works" to be tasteless, inappropriate attacks on Christianity had the right to protest -- freedom of expression answered with more freedom of expression.
NO ONE deeming these "art works" to be tasteless, inappropriate attacks on Christianity had the right to make death threats, engage in rioting, or cause property damage.
In sum, I can personally relate to the anger Muslims are experiencing. My faith is berated by others every day. I know what that's like.
What I do not share is their response.
Feb. 4: Angry demonstrators set fire to the Danish embassy in Damascus.
Feb. 4: A Syrian firefighter struggles to extinguish a blaze inside the Danish Embassy in Damascus.
Feb. 4: Palestinian Hamas supporters burn a Danish flag during a demonstration in the Gaza Strip.
Feb. 4: Palestinian men draw a Danish flag with a swastika, a Star of David and a cross on the ground during a protest in the West Bank.
Today, the violence over images that were originally published back in September rages around the world. That reaction is extremely inappropriate. In my opinion, it is far more troubling than any insensitive cartoon could ever be. It appears that the rioters are just looking for an excuse to behave badly.
The Muslims' violent reaction reveals a disturbing instability and extremism that should trouble anyone who values their freedoms.
Another disturbing revelation is that some news outlets are not standing up for the precious right of freedom of expression.
LONDON (Reuters) -- Britain's normally provocative newspapers have so far refused to publish the cartoons of Prophet Mohammad that have outraged the Islamic world, prompting some commentators to question whether they have become too politically correct.
The best-selling tabloid Sun said it had chosen not to print the cartoons out of respect for its Muslim readers while other papers said it was important not to inflame religious tensions in the country.
What's with the Sun? Remember these?
Suddenly, the Sun has decided to be respectful. That's odd.
American Old Media are also running scared.
That staunch defender of free speech, the New York Times, writes:
Major American newspapers, including The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times and The Chicago Tribune, did not publish the caricatures. Representatives said the story could be told effectively without publishing images that many would find offensive.
"Readers were well served by a short story without publishing the cartoon," said Robert Christie, a spokesman for Dow Jones & Company, which owns The Wall Street Journal. "We didn't want to publish anything that can be perceived as inflammatory to our readers' culture when it didn't add anything to the story."
In a midafternoon meeting on Friday, editors at The Chicago Tribune discussed the issue but decided against publishing the cartoons. "We can communicate to our readers what this is about without running it," said James O'Shea, the paper's managing editor.
Most television news executives made similar decisions. On Friday CNN ran a disguised version of a cartoon, and on an NBC News program on Thursday, the camera shot depicted only a fragment of the full cartoon. CBS banned the broadcast of the cartoons across the network, said Kelli Edwards, a spokeswoman for CBS News.
What a load!
These outlets couldn't get enough photos from Abu Ghraib. Couldn't they have effectively communicated that story without REPEATEDLY publishing the offensive photos?
Oh, that's right!
Those photos served to inflame the Arab World with hate for President Bush, his Administration, and the American military. Those photos just had to be seen OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN, right?
The editors at the Times make me sick. In their world, breaking the NSA wiretapping story, something that has seriously undermined efforts to counter terrorism on American soil, was the right thing to do. They didn't care about how that would compromise national security; yet publishing cartoons offensive to Muslims is off limits.
HYPOCRITES!
How about a little consistency?
It is an abuse of our hard-won freedoms to exercise them recklessly.
I did not choose to post some of the "controversial" cartoons to offend Muslims or incite violence. I did not post the Piss Christ or The Holy Virgin Mary to upset Christians. I did so to illustrate that freedom of expression and tolerance are the foundations of a free society; and respect is an integral part of a civil society.
TOLERANCE.
_______________________________
Freedom of Expression Solidarity Blogburst
The Blog from the Core
Michelle Malkin
Face of Muhammad
Little Green Footballs
Barcepundit here and here
Slapstick Politics here and here
Wade's Inn
JamulBlog
Sobekpundit's photoshopSouthchild
Bastiat Says No
Scrappy O'Leary
Queer Conservative
FreeBornJohn
Willamette PI
Six Conservative Guys
Adventures of Prissy
Liberty Bell
Bbmoo's relations
Joe Gringo
Little Red Soapbox
Combat medic in Iraq
Holstein Grove
Frog Blog
Noonz Wire
Samir K
Extreme Centre
Out of the Valley
DANEgerus
RJ Lippincott
Steve Janke
II
Flagrant Harbour
My Side of the Couch
Don Singleton
Ed Morrissey
The Politburo Diktat
Transformed View
Thoughts of a regular guy
Kathy Shaidle
TJIC.com
Emily Zanotti
Andy MacDonald
Lifelike Pundits
Tales of a Wandering Mind
Church of Entropy
Two Babes and a Brain
Magnificat
The Citizen Journal
Wikipedia
Riehl World View
Savage Republican
Born Again Redneck
Don Miguel de la Piedra
Jihad Watch
Neal Boortz
WAmbulanceMichael Graham
Texas Rainmaker
Right Wing Nation
A Conservative Force
Wide Awake Cafe
Black Sheep Cafe
Robot Guy
commentary.co.za
Y-2-Dray 4-Ever
tjic.com
Western Critic
Air Force Pundit
Small Wars Journal
You Talk About
Mr Minority
Michigan Blog
Industrial Blog
Inside Larry's Head
Been there, done that
Right Number One
Drinking From Home
Civil Commotion
Marvin's Word
American Lights
Klein's Quips
Peenie Wallie
Limburg Letter
Scipio the Metalcon
JamulBlog
Bear to the Right
Dangerous Dan
WunderKraut.com
Posse Incitatus
Harleys, Cars, Girls, & Guitars
Left wing = Hate
Holstein Grove
The Noonz Wire
GOP and the City
Flagrant Harbour
The Political Pit Bull
Atlas Blogged
Random Thoughts Of Yet Another Military Member
FullosseousFlap’s Dental Blog
Don Singleton
Rocket's Brain Trust
Jessica's Well
TacJammer
Angry in the Great White North
UrbanRepublican
Dr. Sanity
Darleen's Place
Bill's House O Insomnia
House of the Dog
Freedom Folks
Small Town Veteran
A Blog For All
Church and State
Inside Larry's Head
Free Constitution
This isn’t writing, it’s typing
Rattrap's Rants
Hard Talk
Citizen Journal
Iowa Voice
Sugar Ray Dodge
NoisyRoom.net
Black Sheep Press
Red hot cuppa politics
CDR Salamander
A geezer's corner
Deep Keel
And THAT is MY Opinion...
Palmetto Pundit
Void Where Prohibited
Super Fun Power Hour
Striderweb
Oscar Poppa
Peaceful Display of Tolerance and Love
Stuck on Stupid
RightWinged.com
Mike's Noise
The Johnsville News
Truth Is Stranger
Irons in the Fire
Occasus Pars Clamo
The Citizen Journal
Freedom Eden
Fifth Virginia
Celestial Junk
Saturday, February 4, 2006
FREEDOM AND RESPONSIBILITY
Posted by Mary at 2/04/2006 03:36:00 PM
Labels: Religion, Sharia Law
SHARE:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
That was an excellent read, Mary! Bravo!
Thanks, WS. :)
Post a Comment