A Little Caution? A Fine Idea
Yesterday, I asked, rhetorically, referring to the Muslim cartoon controversy: freedom of speech or deliberate offensiveness? Of course, freedom of speech covers even the deliberately offensive, as Fred and Clint both noted in the comments. However, I must say I was a bit taken aback by the glee with which this issue was jumped on…
Our good friend AJ has a good point here:
Just as Christians here in the US rightly do not appreciate their religion derided by secular Hollywood in exercises of free speech such as ‘The Book Of Daniel’, insensitive caricatures about Islam can do the opposite of what we want regarding the salvation of Islam.
I know some, including some of my regulars, do not believe that Islam is a religion of peace, as President Bush is fond of saying. I’m not an expert on the Islamic religion; I don’t have a great depth of understanding of its doctrine, nor do I know how seriously rank-and-file Muslims take the more inflammatory passages (and we must acknowledge there are inflammatory passages in the Bible, as well, particularly in what Christians refer to as the Old Testament).
I do know that Westerners, and maybe Americans in particular, because of the great penetration of our popular culture and economic and military might, make too many assumptions regarding other cultures. We need not roll over and apologize for exercising our freedom of speech – but neither should we make a fetish of thrusting it in the face of those we wish to work with…
Food for thought, if nothing else…
UPDATE 11:20 a.m.: More from the Anchoress:
Yesterday, I mentioned to Buster that France was standing up to the Muslim death-threaters and printing the Danish cartoons which some Islamists find offensive. Buster observed, rightly, that the first time France stood up for anything in decades, they were standing up for their right to mock what others find sacred. “Quite an impressive move on the part of France,” he declared, “‘we will fight for nothing but our right to disdain you…‘”
Wow, what a great line!…
European Media Displays Courage
The European press deserves credit for not only running some controversial cartoons ridiculing the prophet Muhammad but for rerunning them all across Europe. In this article titled Offending Cartoons Reprinted Molly Moore of the Washington Post Foreig…
[...] Meanwhile, onto the Muslim Cartoon Controversy: AJ Strata has serious cautions about those cartoons: What I hope everyone remembers is that moderate Muslims represent the salvation of not only Islam, but world peace as well. America has been very clear in discerning our views on radical Islam verses moderate Islam. While we prepared for war against the Taliban and Al Qaeda we walked with Muslims to protect them from any out of control backlashes from people who cannot discern a radical movement from an ancient religion. Mark at Decision ‘08 also urges caution and says: [...]
I perfectly understand the concept of free speech, but I also understand the concept of the abuse of that right. I also understand the difference between those who complain and ask that others use restraint and those who threaten others with death and bombs, but some people have just gone to the point of being ridiculous with drawing and flaunting more pictures just for the sake of being an irritant.
I think the difference here is one of location, Mark. The Muslims that are usually the most vociferous in their criticisms of “mocking” cartoons and so – called “inflammatory” artistic statements tend to be recently emigrated citizens to their host countries.
The problems that European countries are now facing is one of having a substantial minority of immigrants who have not assimilated into their new cultures at all, and are basically unchanged in their beliefs and outlooks. No question, their government’s policies of multiculturalism (accompanied in some cases by ostracism – see France) have borne some strange fruit as a result, but when new arrivals pledge their loyalties to their own particular religion above that of their new country, then it’s hard to sympathize with those who deem such parodies as blasphemous.
It should be obvious to new arrivals in Europe to understand that while they’re free to practice their own religion and it’s related beliefs, the first priority is to learn and adapt to their new country’s laws and mores, even if it means others will be allowed the same freedoms to criticize their beliefs and tenets.
Looks like the same old saw here, in my own humble opinion – freedom for me, but not for thee…
Mark, I am curious, do you know any muslims or have you ever been to the Middle East?
To the Middle East, no…I have two Muslim friends (well, one Palestinian friend who is a hardcore atheist and hates all religion, and the other an American who married a Syrian woman, converted, and is now a very devout, very serious Muslim who speaks and writes flawless Arabic)…
I have some knowledge of what it’s like to live on a Western compound in Saudi Arabia, secondhand, as an uncle of mine (unfortunately, now deceased) worked for Texaco in Saudi Arabia and I still recall some of his stories.
Bomb threats made against Danish paper over Mohamed cartoons
Radical representatives aka thugs of the so-called “religion of peace” have issued bomb threats against a Danish newspaper for printing cartoons some in the Muslim community determined were outrageous and ‘unfair’. Via the UK…
Well, I am a wiccan, and I am married to a muslim, strange huh? so, when I first met him I asked him what he loved most in life. I expected an aswer like, “My family”, but I got instead, “Allah”. This posed a new “issue” with me. First of all it was in February after 9/11, and I had known absolutely nothing about muslims, except for what I remembered as a child when the consulate in Iran was overtaken, and then of course what happened on 9/11. so i had some thinking to do. I have never been one to prejudge, and I am one for learning truths (it’s one of our creeds in my religion) so I studied up on Islam. Since I am a woman, I wanted to know how they were supposed to be treated, I saw the movie “Not Without My Daughter”, and I wanted to know what they believed in. At it’s core it is a pretty good religion. One of their most important ideals is to not offened anyone else’s religion. To them, Christians, Jews and Muslim’s all pray to the same God (they all have different names for him), and the Muslims and Christians share the same Prophets. They are supposed to treat women with the utmost respect, we are the teachers of their world. They are supposed to treat all animals with great respect. They are supposed to take care of all the children of the world, even the one’s that don’t practice their faith. They are supposed to protect those who cannot protect themselves. And, most crutial, they are supposed to stand up for their religion, and fight those who oppress them and who speak wrongfully of their beloved Muhhamd and Allah. What the Danish people did offened them as if I were to say “I hope your most beloved child gets tortured in the worst possible way.” Would that make you upset? Would it make you seeth? Would you boycott me?
Sometimes religion should be respected, even if you don’t like another’s choice of religion.
Islam treat women with the utmost respect? Hmm, I seem to remember:
“As for these from women, fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart and scourge them.” Quran 4:34
and
“Those of you who are afraid of their disobedience which symptoms become evident to you, threaten them with the fear of God and banish them to beds apart and scourge them.” Jalalan commentary.
and
“In case of a husband’s ill-treatment [of his spouse], the Qur’an permits reconciliation of the spouses and arbitration, but in the case of the wife it allows scourging her.” Imam Shafi’i
and
“Umar Ibn al-Khattab came to Muhammad saying, ‘Women have dared to disobey husbands.’ He allowed their husbands to scourge them. Many women approached Muhammad complaining against their husbands because Muhammad received a verse for the Qur’an which commands their husbands to scourge them.” Imam Al Nawawi
and
“On the authority of Muhammad (peace and blessing of Allah be upon him), he said: ‘Hang up your scourge in a place where your wife (or wives) can see it.’” Kash-shaf (the revealer) of al-Zamakhshari
and even comtemporary Islam promotes this peculiar form of “respect for women:”
“If admonishing and sexual desertion fail to bring forth results and the woman is of a cold and stubborn type, the Qur’an bestows on man the right to straighten her out by way of punishment and beating provided he does not break her bones nor shed blood. Many a wife belongs to this querulous type and requires this sort of punishment to bring her to her senses!” “You Ask and Islam Answers” Abdul–latif Mushtahiri
and
“If a woman is afraid that her husband may turn away from her or detest her, she will hasten to bring understanding and reconciliation. But if the husband is afraid that his wife may rebel against him, he hastens to bring mutual understanding by means of exhortation, then by abandonment of the bed, then by the scourging which deters.” (Deters!) “The Individual Guarantee In the Islamic Law” Ahmad Ahmad
Crap, need I go on with even more “respect” for muslim women?
I’m sure the genital mutilations, gangrapes, facial mutilations, and beatings would all label me a feminist if I used them on women…
uh huh
First I said they were supposed to. I don’t allow hypocrisy in my home. I also said that I saw the Movie “Without My Daughter”, I agree, they didn’t treat that woman with any respect or decency. Also, I said that fresh in my head was 9/11, which, if you can read between the lines, should tell you I saw the way women of Afganistan were treated.
Please don’t take things out of context when you quote the Qu’ran. And also remember their are radicals in all religions. Remember it was a Jew that killed Rabin.
Another thing I point out to my husband, almost daily, is that bin Laden and the zealots that follow him have given Islam such a bad name that most people are closed off from hearing anything other that “Kill them All”, and how horrible it is that they have no one paticular person to show the people of the world that they aren’t all bad.
And by the way, if this religion was so hateful and brutal towards women why on earth are so many people switching to the other side? Including woman?
Gosh, you’re right. Looking at sharia for America should make any sensible person just run to the nearest mosque to beg for admittance.
Islam is conquering hundreds of millions through murder and terror (and has done so for all of its 1400 years). Conversion at swordpoint or riflepoint is often expedient.
I quoted the Quran in context with appropriate commentary by Islamic scholars and Imams. Please don’t insinuate I’m “twisting” anything.
If you’re happy as a muslim (or a wiccan married to one), then we’re all happy for you. If you can’t be happy in this life, then what’s the point?
Your saying that Islam is the fastest growing religion in America because they are threating us to be?
Please tell me you are joking.
Well, I don’t know anything about whether your assertion that Islam is the fastest growing religion in America is true or not (I’d actually heard it was Mormonism)…but to reiterate the point of my post, French and German newspapers have the right to be as offensive as they want to be…but having the right to do something doesn’t make it a good idea to do it.
I look at cartoons depicting Muhammed (a big no-no to people of the Muslim faith) in the same way that I look at analogies that use Hitler…in 99 cases out of 100, the inflammatory aspect overshadows any ostensible point being made…
abu-penelope,
Would that make you upset? Would it make you seeth? Would you boycott me?
yes it would.
would it make you call for kidnappings?
murder?
the questions are not rhetorical.
you didn’t mention the imams in detroit who daily advocate the violent overthrow of the U.S. gov’t.
why?
could it be due to the duplicitous nature of the mid-east (read dysfunctional), not all muslims are terrorists, not all terrorists are palestinian, not all palestinians are muslims. if it is not in the religion, then it is due to mid-east culture. if it is not in the mid-east culture, then it is in the religion.
Mark, I am curious, do you know any muslims or have you ever been to the Middle East?
as a seeker of the truth would a question like, do you know any people who feel strongly about their religion or have you ever been to the mid-east or to scandanavia? have been a more appropriate/fair question?
but i have one for you, have you ever been to tehran?
i have.
have you ever met a mullah?
i have. two as a matter of fact.
although they weren’t called mullahs then, they were ayotollahs.
i worked for this guy for ten years, have known him for quarter of a century.
http://www.interpol.int/public/Data/Wanted/Notices/Data/2005/03/2005_25103.asp
his father is the only general who survived the purge of the shah’s army when the great ayotollah came to iran.
i went there to try and get his wife out of iran as neither were american citizens at the time.
why was his wife in iran you ask?
you did ask didn’t you.
she was becoming to americanized.
she was developing her own opinions and letting them be known.
he sent her back to iran for her to re-learn her station.
so you married a muslim did you? and you saw a movie did you?
and that gives you squat as an authority.
did you see “sleeping with the enemy” as well?
so the muslimes got their hair mussed a little. your comments didn’t say anything about “black september 1970″.
if you want to get offended by something start there.
why wonder why?
I guess you haven’t heard of Indonesia.
Islam in America is most rapidly spreading through outreach to prison inmates. Ever wonder why Islam seems to be more effective at prison proselytization than Christianity? Islam appeals to violence and, by happenstance, much of American society’s violent offenders are behind bars.
sorry mark, you’re right, we have strayed far from the point.
Mark, is Free Speech dependent on how any particular class or group might be offended?
I thought Free Speech was free speech for all. A double-standard will only breed resentment.
Of course not…I’ve said two or three times now that the right to do something doesn’t mean it’s a great idea…I have the right to do many things that I choose not to do, by exercising my judgment…
I go back to my Hitler analogy – inflammation outweighs any ostensible point being made.
The museum that showed that horrifically blasphemous ‘Piss Christ’ certainly had the right to do so…and the Christians that were outraged were certainly justified in being angry.
That doesn’t mean that Muslims offended by the Danish depiction of Muhammed in a cartoon can go on a murderous rampage…but if they, for example, choose to boycott Danish goods, as many have, they’re certainly entitled…
I’ve been to a number of Muslim countries, and my experiences were uniformly great, although very different. Malaysia is very modern (if you were blindfolded and taken to Kuala Lumpur, you might think you were in a US city) – although the women all wore veils. I could not have been treated more nicely in Egypt and Indonesia. I was hassled at the airport in Saudi Arabia, but my father-in-law (who was in the oil business) lived in Saudi and grew to love it.
As I live in the same town as Oracle – which hires lots of software engineers from the Middle East and South Asia – my kid goes to school with lots of Muslim kids, and we’ve become friends with their parents.
To view Muslims as one homogeneous mass of people is as ridiculous as viewing the Jews as an evil people and using the Protocols of Zion as your text, or viewing the Catholics as Papists trying to take over the world.
I believe in the boycott and I don’t believe in murderous rampages or the awful rhetoric of zealots, and i liken my trip to the middle east as a car racing arcade game. You hear CHECKPOINT alot and the driving is crazy, but on the whole I had a GREAT time.
“To view Muslims as one homogeneous mass of people is… ridiculous…” (Peter)
The implication is racism. Islam spans more than just one race, culture, or peoples… as your implication was meant to illustrate. Islam is a belief system; I am critical of the entire belief system, not the people.
There’s 1.3billion muslims in the world? That’s a lot, wouldn’t you agree? If the “majority” are kumbaya-loving peacenik-”moderates”, then there must be hundreds of millions of protesting muslims generating tens of thousands of news stories about how “moderate” Islam is affronted by the violence surrounding killing people over cartoons or mudering children in the name of Allah.
Seeing that majority means at least 51%, that means there’s over 650 MILLION enraged muslims. That’s one hell of a lot of news. Doing a check of the news? Even from MEMRI to get Islamic media viewpoint? Well, gosh. Something’s wrong because there’s not even one protest… anywhere.
Illustrating my point even further about this “moderate” muslim fantasy, check MEMRI’s Reformation page. Not even ONE muslim calling for change in Islam to a more peaceful, cohesively co-existant religion.
I am friends with former muslims (Iranians). This has nothing to do with racism. Claiming such is intellectually lazy. This has everything to do with treating Islam and the iron-bound adherence to Muhammed’s murderous dictates (“kill the infidels wherever you find them”) as akin to naziism. It is a political murder cult and it needs to be outlawed.
As far as freedom of speech… if FoS is all well and good, but if we need to be mindful out of fear, then we do not have free speech. Penelope and I might agree on nothing except her position on proper demonstration. She doesn’t like the cartoons? She’s boycotting Danish goods. This is her right and a proper way for a free and democratic society to function.
Mussolini,
I have a couple of questions, and I mean no disrespect.
You say you have Muslim friends. Have you spoken to them about your distaste of their religion? How do they respond to your dislike? Do you and your friends agree to disagree?
Have you spoken to the about the boycott? How do they feel?
And the last question, and feel free to not answer, are you an atheist?
p.s. are you sick of me yet? i mean that in a funny way
Not muslims – former muslims. I went on a European tour in 1980 with the son of the former banker for the Shah of Iran. Back in those days, he still carried an Islamic Revolutionary passport. I’m still friends with him and just before I moved out of state last year, we ate at an Iranian bistro (yes, a “bistro”). We traded porn jokes.
His views? He turned Christian, so I can’t say he really counts, but he deplores the violence that is Islam.
Two other friends that were muslim I have fallen out of contact with. One was an Egyptian who fought against the Israelis in the ‘73 war. He hated Jews and used veiled anti-semitic threats of violence. His stories of the war had my interest at the time since I was uninterested in Islam. The other muslim friend I had I cannot remember what country he hailed from. Lebanon, possibly. He regaled me with his readiness to die against the west and the virtue of jihad. He considered everyone non-muslim as an infidel, me included. He served ice cream to children at a drug store and he hated it. With him, I was fascinated by his hatred and willingness to die. I made no judgements with either friend.
I know of several other “former” Islamic people that I encountered because of my children’s schooling and my former occupation as a property manager. Most came to America to escape and all became Christian. That carries a death threat in most Islamic countries.
No, not an atheist. I used to be agnostic but came to my own understanding of the Creator in 1982.
Answer to ps: No. I have a passion for the truth. I understand and believe in positive thinking, but when well-wishing and fantasy ignore the truth, I feel compelled to defend the truth. I will discuss these issues until everyone becomes bored. I also try to admit as often as possible that I am wrong – that means I’m learning something and justifies my pursuit of the truth. So, no, I’m not sick of you, nor Peter, nor even Owen.
If we can’t talk as members of society, what good are we? If we can’t exchange ideas, we are failing our roles as members of a democracy.
Penelope-
“And by the way, if this religion was so hateful and brutal towards women why on earth are so many people switching to the other side? Including woman?”
That’s an interesting point that I haven’t heard before. Do you have a citation for the high rate of conversion to Islam? I wonder if you aren’t conflating the high birth rate in the Islamic world (or immigration into the U.S.) with conversion.
If you really mean the straight growth rate (as it sounded when you wrote “…Islam is the fastest growing religion in America…“), I believe you’re misinformed. These statistics seem to indicate that in raw numbers of adherents “Christianity” as a whole grew by more adherents (about eight million) in the U.S. than the entire U.S. muslim population (1 million). As a percentage, of course, the number of muslims more than doubled from 1990 to 2001 (+109%), but Buddhist adherents grew even faster (+170%) to about the same total population, as did Hinduism (+237%). (In the smaller faiths there are even larger growth rates — the U.S. Sikh population grew by 338% over the same time.)
Well, Clint, according to the stats you provided, I was WAY off on the Mormonism…
Perhaps we can all agree here that the issue is one of tolerance – tolerance for each other’s beliefs, mainly. Too many groups across the world (as well as here) have made it their business to be offended and claiming victimhood for perceived slights (both real and imagined) – in the end, truly a zero sum game.
As long as you don’t push your beliefs on others, why not live and let live in this arena?
Dmac… exactly.
I can live with muslims, religiously. How come they can’t live with me as an infidel?
Answer: because Muhammed commands the death of infidels. Because we are in Dar al Harb and Islam demands jihad and participation by all in its pursuit.
I’m willing to be tolerant; they are not.
Penelope-
For comparison, where does your outrage about the governments of Denmark and France permitting private newspapers to publish these cartoons depicting Muhammed fit on the scale of your outrage over the Egyptian government televising a miniseries based on the Protocols of the Elders of Zion; the Iranian President calling for Israel to be wiped off the map; the Chinese government’s jailing of Buddhist and Christian religious leaders; the Saudi government funding leaflet campaigns in American mosques expressing contempt for Jews, Christians, Muslims who don’t hate Jews and Christians, and for America; or a typical North Korean press release mocking the Western world.
Just to be clear, the outrage you direct at the government of Denmark is based on their failure to censor the offensive private views of their citizens, while the outrage which I assume you direct at these other governments would be based on their own offensive offical pronouncements.
Clint, I am not saying that droves of women are converting. I was taken aback by a friend, a female friend, that told me she had decided to convert to becoming a muslim. This was before I married one and knew nothing of the actual religion. The first thought into my head was “but you aren’t married to a muslim, or anyone else for that matter”, the second was, since when did you stop believing in christianity? And, as to the “conversion rate”, I may have been misinformed, and yes, I was including incarated men (which I said to my husband…These are the people you think are going to change the view of YOUR RELIGION???????? ARE YOU INSANE?????), but I do remember reading that it was the fastest growing religion, not the largest.
Mussolini, On a daily basis I say, “Violence will get you nothing but hatered”. I also don’t understand suicide bombings, I feel pity for them that they feel this is the only way they can voice their opinion. And I pray for and feel horribly for the mother’s who have lost children, as I am a mother who has lost a child in her arms. It is an will forever remain unfathomable to me.
In my house the rules are simple, resepect others rights to opinions, religions, seek the truth, and stand by what you believe in, even if that means agreeing to disagree and walking away.
clint, i am not outraged at freedom, MOST of the time. I am not OUTRAGED at Denmark or France. I am offended at the thought of attacking anyone’s religion, not OUTRAGED. And as for your other comments, I am offeneded by the leaflets, the “let’s kill all jews” statements, and for several other things stated by Imams, who I believe should limit their sermons to prayer for peace, and not the utter elimination of infidels.
ok, and by the way, i have been told by pretty much everyone, friends, family, strangers, that i am going to hell in no uncertain terms because of MY religious beliefs. I got over it.
Penelope-
I’m confused. You said you support the boycott — a boycott of all products from Denmark, because their government doesn’t censor speech that offends you.
Perhaps what I should have asked is: How many other countries do you boycott, and why?
Without getting in to a semantic debate over “offended” vs. “outraged” — boycotting the products of an entire nation is a fairly strong stance, and it seems like a strange reaction to the actions of private parties within a nation. In this context, as well, it seems clear that the protest is intended to pressure the government of Denmark to curtail the freedom of expression within its domestic newspapers — which seems to conflict with your stated “resepect [for] others rights to opinions.”
“Saudi government funding leaflet campaigns in American mosques expressing contempt…”
We may as well add in the recent $$ gift from the Saudi prince to Harvard to fund programs to better understanding and tolerance of the Muslim world in the West.
http://www.boston.com/news/education/higher/articles/2005/12/13/saudi_donates_20m_to_harvard/
What the…? Talk about moral relativism here – it should be the other way around, don’t you think? Sheesh, some of the ruling elite from the House of Saud are quite shameless, really.
Clint,
I support the IDEA of a boycott, ya know, over blowing sh*t up and people.
and i shop at a local store that carries all brands of everything in the middle east, including israeli made products, jordinian products, saudi products, and I even buy the Danish Butter, cause it’s cheaper than buying Land O’ Lakes.
You’re alright, Penelope. Keep your eyes open and watch out for the muslim side of your family. To believe Islam just a little is to believe it all.
That’s why there aren’t hundreds of millions of muslims generating 1000s of stories about their outrage over the murder of infidels.
Penelope,
Check. Now I’m with you — I too support the boycott as a method, even when I don’t agree with the goal.
Muss,
“To believe Islam just a little is to believe it all.”
Does the same apply to Christians? Or is it just Muslims who are either 100% or 0%.
You mentioned earlier that you have some friends who are ex-Muslims. Quick thought experiment: if your only direct experience of Christianity was by way of ex-Christians (a.k.a. fundamentalist atheists) how distorted a picture do you think you’d have of it?
*sigh*
Perhaps it was too much to expect even a private group (the editors of Soir) in France to show any sort of courage in the face of radical Islam.
The latest from the AP (or perhaps just details I wasn’t aware of last night):
(1) Islamic protestors threaten and demonstrate violence…
Armed Palestinian “militants” surrounded the E.U. headquarters in Gaza, and burst into hotels in the West Bank looking for Europeans to take hostage. (Hard to know what to make of the AP’s reference to “briefly kidnapped a German citizen” — perahaps they thought he was Danish?)
Danish (and the vaguely Danish-looking Norwegian) diplmats were withdrawn from the P.A.
(2) … the French find something white to run up the flag pole.
The editorial board of the Soir fired the managing editor who authorized the publication of the pictures.
On the flip side, it’s the Austrian Interior Minister who is urging the E.U. to issue an apology, while the French Interior Minister is speaking out for free speech.
Last thought — does it appear to anyone else like this mass effort to intimidate Europeans is really about nothing but making sure that no one in the E.U. dares to suggest that they cut off funding to the P.A. just because Hamas won the election? Sort of a “look how much trouble we can make over a trivial matter — don’t give us a real cause to get angry” threat?
CNN is now covering this — and they showed one of the cartoons, but pixelated out cartoon-Mohammed’s face, like an anonymous source.
On their web site, their story carries the disclaimer: “CNN has chosen to not show the cartoons out of respect for Islam.” (This isn’t such a bad reason, just not at all credible from the network that brought us Crossfire.)
Some things will never change.
I think that these sort of debates (Piss Christ is another good example) tend to turn up an idea of free speech and the way you deal with it that is different than mine. To me the idea is that speech is un-regulated by legislation. That’s it. The government can’t limit your ability to say what you want (within reason: the fire in a crowded theater example comes to mind), but that has nothing to do with how people respond to it privately.
Someone said it above. Just because you’re free to say it doesn’t mean it’s a good idea, and people are free to have negative reactions. If I celebrate the fourth of july by burning a huge stack of American flags and some founding father effigies, I shouldn’t be surprised if people don’t want to come to my barbecue, you know? And I certainly shouldn’t act as though my rights are being trampled if people don’t come. I have the right to express myself, and so do the people I invited.
That’s why I can see a boycott of these newspapers. They have the right of free press (or should), but that doesn’t mean people can’t be offended. If you’re publishing something that’s possibly inflammatory like that, you really, really need to be sure that you want to, because someone’s going to get mad. It would be wrong for the government to censor them but any private (and legal) action taken against them is no violation of the rights. The Piss Christ was actually more of an issue, as I recall, because it was displayed in a museum funded by public money, which is a lot more sticky.
It is also worth noting that the gunmen involved in the kidnappings you cited, Clint, were members of Fatah, not Hamas. So they actually weren’t radical Islamists, they were the members of the secularist government that everyone was so alarmed to see lose the election. In fact, if I read right, the one mention of Hamas was a member of their leadership promising protection to Christians in Gaza.
Furthermore, Mussolini, I can’t help but rise to the occasion once more. I don’t care if your prejudice isn’t racism, it’s still bigoted.
Look at your ideas of Islam. As Clint pointed out, is it only Muslims that convert with the all-or-nothing lightswitch of extremism? Is Islam the only religion that can be interpreted as condoning violence within its scripture. Consider the following portions of the Old Testament and tell me if we should also be defending ourselves from the dangerous, coercive, militant religion that is Judaism:
Exodus 21:7 “If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as menservants do.”
Exodus 21:17 “Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death”
Exodus 21:20 “If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, 21 but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property”
Leviticus 24:15 “Say to the Israelites: ‘If anyone curses his God, he will be held responsible; 16 anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death”
Deut. 22:20-24 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you. If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel. If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death—the girl because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man’s wife. You must purge the evil from among you.
But at least there’s no way to read Christianity as a religion of violent conversion, right? Except, of course, for the whole end of days, good and evil struggle:
Rev. 2:26-27 “To him who overcomes and does my will to the end, I will give authority over the nations— He will rule them with an iron scepter; he will dash them to pieces like pottery— just as I have received authority from my Father. (the iron scepter bit is a reference to Psalm 2, also a fun one)
Do any of these quotes mean that Christianity or Judaism are inherently violent? No. Does that stop some members of either religion from refusing to beat their swords into ploughshares? Of course not. Your characterization of Islam as some homogenous league of violence is silly. Furthermore, so are your repeated claims that no Muslims have spoken out against extremist violence. Again, the following link:
http://www.juancole.com/2005/07/friedman-wrong-about-muslims-again-and.html
And some of the links on that page lead to even more extensive catalogings of Muslims speaking out against violent Jihad and Bin Laden, both in official and unofficial capacities.
Owen, your “end-times” quote has nothing to do with the implementation of Christianity as it pertains to spreading the good news. It’s a pretty long stretch.
Ibn Warriq of the of the Institute for the Secularization of Islamic Society agrees with me. Isn’t that strange? Know what Ibn says? Lemme quote:
“There may be moderate Muslims, but Islam itself is not moderate. There is no difference between Islam and Islamic fundamentalism: at most there is a difference of degree but not of kind. All the tenets of Islamic fundamentalism are derived from the Qur’an, the Sunna, and the Hadith…”
Isn’t that what I’ve been saying? Oh, but I’m not muslim, therefore it is politically incorrect and I’m evil.
And Ibn also goes on…
“Only Islam treats non-believers as inferior beings who are expendable in the drive to world hegemony. Islam justifies any means to achieve the end of establishing an Islamic world.”
When Muhammed commands his followers to slay, kill, terrorize, burn, destroy, I think of that as preaching violence. When Jesus says to turn the other cheek, be meek, charitable, and sacrificial, then I think of that as preaching peace. Yes, there is a difference and not all the religions are the same with just a few name-cahnges.
I refuse, as a citizen of humanity, to condone, include, sanction, pardon, support, or otherwise ignore a political murder cult which has demonstrated that for 1300 of its 1400 years it is only interested in spreading Islam at the point of a sword.