Yes, I know that it's verboten to draw images of Mohammad and all, but I find it hard to work up much sympathy for the whole "death to anyone who insults my religion" attitude.
What's next? Riots when someone implies the Bible isn't the literal word of God? Smashed windows if one questions the divinity of the Dailai Lama? Widespread looting if someone says the Pope wears a funny hat?
I don't want to dismiss anyone's religious beliefs. I know the issue is complicated and all.
I guess I should not be surprised, however, by the Bush administration's position. When forced to choose between freedoms protected by our Bill of Rights and a bunch of religious extremists, one guess who they side with:
Inserting itself into a dispute that has become a lightning rod for anti-European sentiment across the Muslim world, the United States sided with Muslims outraged that the publications put press freedom over respect for religion.
"These cartoons are indeed offensive to the belief of Muslims," State Department spokesman Kurtis Cooper said in answer to a question.
"We all fully recognize and respect freedom of the press and expression but it must be coupled with press responsibility. Inciting religious or ethnic hatreds in this manner is not acceptable."
I don't think it too far of a leap for them to apply the same logic to a cartoon depicting Jesus decrying the injustice of tax cuts for the wealthy or for starting an unprovoked war.
The world sure has changed since Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses unleashed the fatwas. The death sentence for an author writing a book was fodder for late night TV jokes. Now such anti-humanist attitudes are endorsed by the U.S. government.
6 comments:
(1) Thanks for the Bill Hicks reference. Always makes me smile.
(2) I was hoping some comedian with some stones would stage an apology by pretending to cut the head off the author, editor, type setter, printing machine repairman, paper sales manager, paperboy... you get the image.
(3) This strikes me like a Biggie Smalls thing where people got from talking and making a living to being willing to die for the respect of people they openly dislike.
Agreed TJ; besides what's so funny about:
peace, love, and understanding....
I love your second point, Studio. But when the fatwa gets issued against you, I ain't never heard of ya.
But iRod, I think you're jumping to conclusions here about the US government stance on this issue.
The dude says "Inciting religious or ethnic hatreds in this manner is not acceptable."
Get it? Inciting hatreds in this manner is unacceptable. There's still a whole pile of ways to incite hatred that are perfectly acceptable. For instance, flushing Korans down toilets, rubbing menstrual blood on prisoner's faces, waterboarding innocent bystanders, and so on. These are all perfectly fine - no, patriotic - ways to incite ethnic hatred.
Get it? Inciting hatreds in this manner is unacceptable. There's still a whole pile of ways to incite hatred that are perfectly acceptable.
Thrillhous gets it. And what he gets is a one-way ticket to lovey Guantanamo Bay for re-education.
Not a bad idea. The only kink in it, I think, is Iran getting a nuclear program underway. That might make isolation too dicey.
Definitely interesting stuff, but I don't know if we could get an effective embargo on the middle east, cuz I don't know how many other countries would join in the embargo. We can stop buying their oil, but China would just suck it all up; in fact, a U.S. embargo of the middle east might be a great thing for China and the other growing consumers, none of whom particularly love us.
Of course, I just watched Syriana last night, so my perspective might be a little skewed today. I know my fingernails are feeling sensitive.
Post a Comment