Jesus H Christ!

but is the blogsphere abuzz today or what on this cartoon thing?

I have many observations on it, but the only two that really matters are 1. that people are free to do what they want, and 2. actions have consequences. What few commentators on the topic seem to appreciate is how these two facts form a feedback loop.

You can print, say, or draw whatever you want. Just don't be surprised when - and let's frankly admit this - the people you are deliberately trying to provoke conclude that you're a complete jafi. A jafi, whose soaring rhetoric about freedom and respect for Islam and the sacredness of the cause to bring liberty to the middle east as a grand antidote for tyranny and oppression, just came off looking a lot less sincere. A lot less.

And if someone chooses to be offended at these cartoons, I say to them lakum di nakum valaya din. or in a more vernacular sense: get over it.

UPDATE: Neil Stevens at RedState steps up to the plate. Would that his fellow conservatives follow his example.

UPDATE 2. Some of his fellow conservatives have followed his example. Hugh Hewitt for example, says that we should not "cheer the vulgar and the stupid."

The jihadists are the enemy, not the Muslim world. Refusing to recognize how idiot cartoonists can indeed offend Muslims who are not only not Islamofascists but also our allies and even our fellow citizens is to refuse Muslims the right to at least the same level of disgust that Christians display when they denounce stupid NBC series like The Book of Daniel or shows like Will & Grace.

If this is a free society in which people have the right to be vulgar and stupid, then why is being offended at a deliberate insult akin to imposing dhimmitude?


Razib said...

ironic how this coincides with brass crescent. any article you would recommend on this topic?

Jess said...

I can completely understand that Muslims are offended by the images and I don't dispute the right to use any non-violent means of protest. No reasonable person would expect Muslims to react with any less vigor than Christians do when offended in such a manner. However, I have some questions.

Assuming that the Danish newspaper originally printed the cartoons to make a point (freedom of speech is absolute), do you think there is another way they could have made that point without offending moderate muslims? If so, can you give an example?

What responsibility do Arab newspapers have regarding anti-semitic cartoons? Does the offensive nature of these types of cartoons require the same amount of sensitivity demanded of Danish newspapers, especially when, unlike Saudi Arabia or Egypt, the Danish govt has absolutely no role in determining the content of the free press?

Finally, while I agree that re-publishing the cartoons is in many cases meant to be offensive, what other course of action might people who are sympathetic to the rights of the free press take to show solidarity?