PDA

View Full Version : Good essay in Time over Danish cartoons/Muslims



OUDoc
2/8/2006, 11:51 AM
Not too long, but too long to paste here. It hits the nail on the head, to me.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1156609,00.html

Small excerpt:

The iconic image of last week was in the Gaza Strip. It was of a Palestinian gunman astride the local office of the European Union. All the diplomatic staff had fled, tipped off ahead of time. The source of the militant's ire? A series of satirical cartoons originally published in Denmark. Yes, cartoons.

A Danish paper, a while back, had commissioned a set of cartoons depicting the fear that many writers and artists in Europe feel when dealing with the subject of Islam. To Western eyes, the cartoons were not in any way remarkable. In fact, they were rather tame. One showed Muhammad with his turban depicted as a bomb--not exactly a fresh image to describe Islamic terrorism. Another used a simple graphic device: it showed Muhammad surrounded by two women in full Muslim garb, their eyes peering out from an oblong space in their black chadors. And on Muhammad's face there was an oblong too, blacking out his eyes. The point was that Islam has a blind spot when it comes to women's freedom. Crude but powerful: exactly what a political cartoon is supposed to be.

The result was an astonishing uproar in the Muslim world, one of those revealing moments when the gulf between our world and theirs seems unbridgeable. Boycotts of European goods are in force; demonstrators in London held up signs proclaiming EXTERMINATE THOSE WHO MOCK ISLAM and BE PREPARED FOR THE REAL HOLOCAUST; the editor of the French newspaper France-Soir was fired for reprinting the drawings; Afghan President Hamid Karzai condemned the publication; and protesters set fire to the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Damascus. The Egyptian ambassador to Denmark expressed disbelief that the government would not prevent further reprinting. Freedom of the press, the Egyptian explained, "means the whole story will continue and that we are back to square one again. The government of Denmark has to do something to appease the Muslim world."

Excuse me? In fact, the opposite is the case. The Muslim world needs to do something to appease the West. Since Ayatullah Khomeini declared a death sentence against Salman Rushdie for how he depicted Muhammad in his book The Satanic Verses, Islamic radicals have been essentially threatening the free discussion of their religion and politics in the West. Rushdie escaped with his life. But Pim Fortuyn, a Dutch politician who stood up against Muslim immigrant hostility to equality for women and gays, was murdered on the street. Theo van Gogh, a Dutch filmmaker who offended strict Muslims, was killed thereafter. Several other Dutch politicians who have dared to criticize the intolerance of many Muslims live with police protection.
Continued...

IronSooner
2/8/2006, 12:14 PM
Should non-Muslims respect this taboo? I see no reason why. You can respect a religion without honoring its taboos. I eat pork, and I'm not an anti-Semite. As a Catholic, I don't expect atheists to genuflect before an altar. If violating a taboo is necessary to illustrate a political point, then the call is an easy one. Freedom means learning to deal with being offended.

Exactly right. Unfortunately I think they have the same mentality the puritans did. They're not exactly interested in religious freedom so much as the freedom to press their ideology onto others. At some point they need to relax, just assume the rest of the world is going to hell and carry on.

mdklatt
2/8/2006, 12:20 PM
One thing the Muslims have a point on is the hypocrisy of the situation. Would the newspaper print an offensive cartoon of Jesus? From what I've read, they wouldn't even be allowed to print anything offensive about Judaism because of Danish hate speech laws. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

mdklatt
2/8/2006, 12:21 PM
They're not exactly interested in religious freedom so much as the freedom to press their ideology onto others. At some point they need to relax, just assume the rest of the world is going to hell and carry on.

Some people in this country should take note of this, too.

Rhino
2/9/2006, 12:05 PM
More people need to read this article.

Excellent read.

OUDoc
2/9/2006, 12:59 PM
More people need to read this article.

Excellent read.
I really thought more people might comment on it. :confused:

GottaHavePride
2/9/2006, 02:12 PM
I'm agreeing. Not much to take issue with. We only discuss stuff that ****es us off, apparently. ;)

mdklatt
2/9/2006, 02:17 PM
I'm agreeing. Not much to take issue with. We only discuss stuff that ****es us off, apparently. ;)

No kidding. Saying "yep" isn't any fun at all.

skycat
2/9/2006, 02:19 PM
One thing the Muslims have a point on is the hypocrisy of the situation. Would the newspaper print an offensive cartoon of Jesus? From what I've read, they wouldn't even be allowed to print anything offensive about Judaism because of Danish hate speech laws. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Eh... Maybe a little.

Of course even though there was quite a bit of outrage when "**** Christ" got hung on a museum wall, it didn't get taken down. Oh, and no arson either.

sanantoniosooner
2/9/2006, 02:27 PM
Some people in this country should take note of this, too.

We need to have a "come to Jesus" meeting.

;)

TopDaugIn2000
2/9/2006, 02:29 PM
These double standards reveal something quite clear: this call for "sensitivity" is primarily a cover for intolerance of others and intimidation of free people.


word

fadada1
2/9/2006, 02:33 PM
being politically correct is one of the biggest issues today - all because people (of any race, religion, sex, creed) take themselves WAY too seriously.

mdklatt
2/9/2006, 02:53 PM
Eh... Maybe a little.

Of course even though there was quite a bit of outrage when "**** Christ" got hung on a museum wall, it didn't get taken down. Oh, and no arson either.

That had nothing to do with the current situation.

Is it okay for it to be illegal (from what I understand) to defame Judaism in Denmark, but defaming Islam is fair game? Why the double standard? I mean, I know why there's a double standard, but is it right? IMO, nothing is out of bounds for criticism.

mdklatt
2/9/2006, 02:57 PM
being politically correct is one of the biggest issues today - all because people (of any race, religion, sex, creed) take themselves WAY too seriously.

Yep. The way Muslims are getting uncorked you'd think somebody wished them "Happy Holiday" during Ramadan or something.

skycat
2/9/2006, 03:09 PM
That had nothing to do with the current situation.

Is it okay for it to be illegal (from what I understand) to defame Judaism in Denmark, but defaming Islam is fair game? Why the double standard? I mean, I know why there's a double standard, but is it right? IMO, nothing is out of bounds for criticism.

Do you really believe that the riots are caused due to a difference in legality? I think that is an odd position to take. The violence would be the same regardless of the Danish position of printing material of anti-Semetic nature (of which I am completely ignorant). It is the printing of the cartoons themselves, that has caused the furor. The Danish government's refusal to censor its press , and any regualtion against anti-Jewish rhetoric are secondary considerations. This is why I believe my example has a great deal to do with the current situation.

Certainly it wasn't a question of hypocricy when Rushdie was targeted by fatwa for having written The Satanic Verses.

mdklatt
2/9/2006, 03:31 PM
Do you really believe that the riots are caused due to a difference in legality?

Not at all.

The Muslim reaction is indefensible, but that doesn't invalidate their claims of double standards and hypocrisy.

NormanPride
2/9/2006, 03:32 PM
OTOH, I think we're comparing this to the wrong group. White Christians are generally considered the majority in America, and our culture has dictated that making fun of them is standard. Now, if a white Christian paper came out and made fun of black Jewish people, there would probably be lots of anger and a few boycotts. Fires and beheadings? No.

skycat
2/9/2006, 03:36 PM
Not at all.

The Muslim reaction is indefensible, but that doesn't invalidate their claims of double standards and hypocrisy.

My argument is, that in the general case of Western treatment of Islam, which the reaction is demonstribly aimed at, witness anti-British and general anti-European and anti-Western sentiment, is not well justified. As my example, was one of many of Western nations tolerating what many would find to be offensive and sacriligious speech towards their own dominant religions.

mdklatt
2/9/2006, 03:38 PM
OTOH, I think we're comparing this to the wrong group. White Christians are generally considered the majority in America, and our culture has dictated that making fun of them is standard.

There's plenty of anger and boycotts when white Christians get offended, and they seem to get offended pretty easily. But no riots or beheadings, thankfully.

SoonerProphet
2/9/2006, 03:59 PM
http://www.reason.com/links/links020306.shtml

mdklatt
2/9/2006, 04:05 PM
http://www.reason.com/links/links020306.shtml


Free expression advocates have made an effort to frame the Jyllands-Posten cartoons as a responsible attempt to broaden the conversation on religious freedom, when in fact (as several of the cartoonists themselves acknowledged) the stunt is unambiguously provocative, juvenile, offensive, and irresponsible. That's why it needs to be defended.

Exactly.

TUSooner
2/9/2006, 06:54 PM
What can you say, but "amen!" to that.
Islam reeks of hate, intolerance, and hypocrisy.