Offensensitivity

[elfs]

One of the common themes out of the Dhimmi Watch crowd is the hostility that Islam has toward criticism. In the West, they argue (and with strong evidence), the Pentateuch, the Apocrypha, and the New Testament are "the word inspired by God," meaning that human beings wrote the words down and human beings can get things confusing or wrong, even when inspired by God; whereas The Quran is the word of God, written by Him, by His Hand, and to criticize it is to commit heresy, to insult God. Dhimmi watch keeps a long list of atrocities committed by Muslims whenever their religion is "insulted". The list is long and heartbreaking, and it's not worth the effort for me to repeat much of it.

But one example is illustrative. It is possible in the West to lampoon and cartoon Jesus and Jehovah; we do it all the time. Nobody has threatened Reuben Boll's life for his recurring character "God Man," and no comic book stores have been bombed for carrying bobblehead "Your Buddy Christ" dolls. In Denmark, however, Theo Van Gogh was murdered after he made a short film about women's oppression under traditional Islam. In the same country more recently, the artists who penned an editorial cartoon which depicted Mohammed in an unflattering light have had to go into hiding; a reward for their deaths has been issued by a group in Pakistan.

So, let me ask: when faced with this cartoon, does the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights defend the right of all people to speak their mind, to be critical of what they believe criticism-worthy in others, and to state unequivocally that neither vigilantism nor state-sanctioned force are acceptable responses to mere expression? Here's her response when asked about it by a representative from the Organization of Islamic Conferences:

I understand your attitude to the images that appeared in the newspaper. I find alarming any behaviors that disregard the beliefs of others. This kind of thing is unacceptable.

The scary thing is that our tax dollars actually pay part of her salary.

Lest you think I'm only coming down on Islam in this post, think again. Because I actually want to bring this around and point out that it's not just Islam that is so defensive of its tribal rights that it seeks to squash dissent. Paul Mirecki, a professer of religious studies at Kansas University, recently tried to put on a class called "Intelligent Design, Creationism, and other Mythologies." He might have gotten away with it too if he hadn't had the bad political savvy to also write in a Yahoo group that he really hoped to "rub the fundies nose in their nonsense." The post got repeated up the chain of command and the Kansas State Legislature got into the act. The class has been canceled, Mirecki was roughed up by two goons (although there's some question about that) and was unquietly made to resign his seat as a chairman of the religious studies college.

What inspired me to write this post, however, were comments by members of the Kansas state legislature. Senator Kay O'Connor threatened to withhold state money from the school unless Mirecki stepped down. She also for a hearing so that the senators could grill the Kansas University Academics Committee about what they would do to make sure that the school had "a balance of ideological viewpoints" and answer the question, "What benefit did the school expect to derive from teaching Intelligent Design as a 'mythology'?"

But she also said, during her speech, the following: "Mirecki's intent to make a mockery of Christian beliefs is inappropriate. We have to set a standard that it's not culturally acceptable to mock Christianity in America."

Comments

Re: Denmark? Nope...

[elfs.livejournal.com]

Among those of us who believe in free speech and civility, there is a phrase that ruins discourse on topics such as this. You've just said it.

"I'm not condoning, or even pretending tolerance toward or understanding of, murder, but..."

I understand what you said. I cannot accept it.