I have traveled to many countries around the world, and I believe that we have great freedoms in America.
Is that necessarily a bad thing? Well whether it is or not is beyond the point, the point is that this is our reality as it stands today. The FCC's introduction of a few seconds delay to Super Bowl half-time broadcasts since Janet Jackson's live wardrobe malfunction is an example of how we "stifle" unnecessary and out of place nudity. This is just one crude example, but bigotry is stifled everyday in America, just like public nudity is, and other forms of "unacceptable expressions" are. I believe that it should be legal for an artist to create and publish images that satirize or mock or even suggest untruths about any figure or any faith (short of actual libel as it is legally defined), and that such artists should be allowed to express themselves without fear of physical violence being done to them. I make no special exemption for those who criticize Islam.
#Blasphemous crossword clue free#
Constitution is that it does, in fact, extend to just such people, and that it's errant to ascribe to defenders of free speech the views espoused by all of those who practice it. If this conversation were taking place in the context of picketing, a boycott or other demands for sensitivity, it would be a very different conversation it would not provoke what you perceive as a "self-righteous" tone from me, certainly.įurther, it is not, in my view "an abominable misreading" of the right to free expression to argue, as I do, that it ought to extend to those with repellent opinions of all sorts. The reason this particular dust-up is attracting so much attention is that the protests have turned extremely violent and 45 people, at last count, have lost their lives, there is a $1 million-plus bounty on the heads of the artists and some or all of them have gone into hiding, fearing for their their lives. I suppose you can read into the images the strongest and broadest condemnation you want or the finest point you want - cartoons can be ambiguous in that way and often get people more worked up than mere printed word commentary.Īs you well know, cartoons have angered more than a few different groups over time. I disagree that the message of these cartoons that all Muslims are terrorists, any more than cartoons depicting pedophile priests send the message that all priests are pedophiles. If you fail to understand that, then the issue is much more serious than I initially thought. We can debate their message till the cows come home, but the simple fact is that it is unacceptable to project terrorism -– as practiced by a small though destructive minority of Muslims - unto all Muslims and the very faith that inspires them to goodness. Quite simply put: you have awarded the lofty ideal of freedom of the press to a handful of maverick bigots. Per American standards, Muslims opposing the bigoted cartoons are not asking for special treatment, but for equal treatment. But a few civil rights movements later, one would like to think that we in the West have for the most part moved beyond that ocean of ignorance and reached a consensus that all forms of bigotry need to be challenged.ĭenmark's tolerance for bigotry should not be seen as a heroic stance, but rather, a backward stance that we in America have moved beyond.
There was once a time when racist "golliwog" depictions of African-Americans were on Jam labels, let alone newspaper caricatures. If we did, protests would ensue – rightfully so. Our recent track record in the US indicates that this indeed is our standard: we will allow KKK websites and marches, but we will not allow KKK-inspired cartoons promoting bigotry against African-Americans into the pages of our mainstream press. Fine, I can accept bigotry on a freak website as freedom of expression, but for bigotry to make its way into the pages of society's mainstream press and receive our blessings in the process - under the disguise of upholding freedoms - is an abominable misreading of that license, not to mention an affront to universal ethical journalistic standards. One can argue that even bigotry is protected under freedom of expression and have a point – unless you are in Austria. That is not an exaggerated demand, is it?
Why is that, Eric? Please maintain equal standards for all.
0 kommentar(er)
