Look, I am as outraged as anyone about the attacks on the offices of the French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo. I think it is insane that anyone can warp the words of a religion to justify killing other human beings, and that they actually believe that the offended ‘prophet’ they are supposedly defending wants them to kill in his name. I have done lots of posts that were aimed at pissing off the religious extremists who do this sort of thing… and I sure the hell don’t want to die because of them.
Also, I do hold that the freedom of speech is a cornerstone of democracy.
The thing is… and this is a thing that I find happens to me with lots of important issues… but the thing is I have mixed feelings about this.
Did they have the right to draw an image of the prophet in jest? They sure the hell did!
Was it a good idea? Probably not.
Freedom of speech, like any freedom, comes with qualifiers. Technically, it falls within the parameters of freedom of speech for racists to use the ‘N’ word. But we have collectively agreed that this word is wrong because it offends people. Even in comedy and satire, while we can’t stop anyone from saying that hated word, it can have a backlash on a person’s career… like that guy who played Kramer on Seinfeld… he shouted the ‘N’ word at a show and it stirred up a hornet’s nest.
So yes, I support the right of the people working at Charlie Hebdo to draw whatever they want on the cover. And I decry those who use violence to try to make a political or religious point… but the fact is that those pictures of the prophet angered millions of peaceful members of the Islamic faith too… and we all knew ahead of time that not all of them were peaceful…
So if you insist on poking the monkey, remember that monkeys can go ape. And they have teeth. And you can get mad at the monkey after he bites you, but it is a little late to do anything about it.
*(This post is in no way intended to compare any believers of any faith with monkeys)*
**(This post is not intended to condone violence against cartoonists)**
***(This post is meant to be mildly amusing and maybe cause people to spend a few moments thinking about very serious subjects and thereby begin a meaningful dialog about how we can all get along together and stop hurting one another with words, ideas, pictures… or bullets)***
Pouring My Art Out 
Just like it’s illegal to yell fire in a public place because people could get hurt, I think people should use some good taste in what they say. My speech could be full of 4 letter words because it is my right to say them if I like, but I wouldn’t: 1) because I might offend someone; 2) because it’s a lazy way to communicate; 3) because I prefer to think of myself as a cultured person who uses my full vocabulary.
exactly f$#@*&g right…
Nicely said Art. I’m with you 100% I wrote a similar (but monkey-free for fear that PETA would spike my post) post last week over at Willowdot21 https://willowdot21.wordpress.com/2015/01/10/if-we-were-having-coffee-guest-post-100115/ . It was inspired by – no less – a Doob post over at Mindful Digressions http://mindfuldigressions.com/2015/01/09/good-old-american-censorship-redux/ .
Thank You for being a cooler head – although with all those squirrels running around in there I suppose you must have some Heavy Duty A/C.
sorry… this one got spammed
I’ve never been spammed before – I must confess it is very liberating : no worries about political correctness, no one to argue with, etc. Ahhh, such a feeling of freedom!
enjoy your new lunch meat status
Have you noticed that everyone says “the pictures of Mohammad are offensive to Muslims”, but no one says why they are offensive? As far as I know, images of Mohammed are banned for a fear that they might encourage idolatry. So basically they fear they’ll worship a cartoon. And the ban technically applies to basically any living thing, not just Mohammed. So getting offended by a picture (any picture) of Mohammed because of an ancient rule that’s not being followed to the letter anyway just sounds completely ridiculous to me.
Also, i’d say that those peaceful Muslims who want to kill people for a picture do not deserve to be called “peaceful” at all.
A lot of Christians and Catholics are offended by homosexuality and use the few quotes in the bible that have been loosely translated as anti-gay as a reason to discriminate… but I never hear anybody ranting about menstruating women not being allowed in church. Everybody picks the rules they need to give reason to what they feel.
Funny you should mention menstruating women. I have a family member who’s in a church where that seems to still be a thing.
it would be a thing but even the hardcore nut jobs decided to get over it
That’s what I’m saying, in some churches they still didn’t.
crazy comes in many flavors
Well said. I don’t really see the point of offending people for no real reason. Do I hate what happened at Charlie Hebdo? Yes. Do I decry and put down heavily the people who perpetrated that crime? Yes. Do I support freedom of speech? Yes. Do I think what those people were writing about was stupid? Yes. Freedom of speech is a right. I just hope we use it wisely. I could make fun of many many people, just to jab them. Does that mean I should, though? I don’t think so. Why should I? Why should I be that mean-hearted?
thanks… for some reason people are taking parts of this the wrong way… my point is that I have the right to walk up and tell 10 Hell’s Angels to fuck off… but if I do, I have to expect that they might not answer my argument as eloquently as I gave it.
You would think that point wouldn’t be rocket science. Hell, we are entitled to our stupidity. But I am free to call idiots for what they are. Just as I am entitled to my own brand of stupidity.
I cannot wait for the point when people satirize the dead people at Charlie Hebdo… that’s bound to happen. I don’t think people will be jumping on the free speech band wagon then (to clarify – I fully support free speech but I don’t use it as a means to liberate my prejudices – mostly). Fuck man. Some things are just in BAD TASTE.
I really opened a can of worms, didn’t I?
It’s all good – this is worth talking about. I get sad about what I perceive to be prejudice in the form of debate – the use of apparent humour to exercise stereotype. But as X said, the line is somewhere out there, and we interpret it differently depending on where we stand. I honestly believe the world is better if we show respect… not to terrorists, of course, we should castrate them and burn all their porn – but to the other people who are not all that different from us. And there are more of those good folks than the shitty ones, many many many more.
right…
Is it acceptable to make fun of radical Muslims? I say it is. That original Mohammed cartoon with turban as a bomb is doing exactly that. So I wouldn’t call it “offending for no reason”.
see… now we are discussing stuff
Knock yourself out, X. Not my cup of tea, sorry. If you don’t get that showing this stuff is not offensive JUST to radical Muslims, you are missing the point. You are not aiming jabs at just fuck-knob terrorists. You are aiming jabs at perfectly innocent, reasonable people too. Generally, Sunni Muslims find such depictions offensive. Including the innocent ones, X – and I would suppose there are a fair number of them. So if you are thinking that you are making a directed, useful point, I would have to disagree. But of course it’s entirely your choice, and everyone finds their own means of expression I suppose.
We all have our lines somewhere. I would not mock someone – including Mohammed – for no reason as you say. But when there’s reason, that’s a different story.
And I get that the pictures are offensive to a lot of people, but I also want to know the reason. Was the reason I described in another comment on this post accurate?
wait… drawing a picture of a long dead person who has nothing to do with the violence perpetrated in his name in order to mock the people carrying out that violence at the expense of millions of people who never did violence or even disagree with it seems like a long way to go to make a point. and the history of violence perpetrated by the terrorists is right there in the satire, so we knew about it. I support the right of anybody to tell the Hell’s Angeles they suck, but I can’t condone it as a good idea… and this is more like saying their mothers suck.
Are you okay with including Jesus in a satirical cartoon making a point about Christian fundamentalists? And by the way, you do much worse with your Cheney pictures. 🙂
I am okay with any humor… I am not anti humor… I am anti violence… I am not taking sides on this as pro terrorist and anti satire. Just saying that any time you make fun of armed, violent people without a sense of humor it might come with a price. If a guy wants to walk on the Savannah I might tell him about the lions… doesn’t mean I am pro lion or anti human. Or anti taking a walk.
That would just be pro-commonsense.
I am strictly amateur-commonsense
Well, all right, had a look. I don’t know if this is a rationale perspective, but here goes. I don’t think I need to understand why Muslims believe this is important to them. I don’t think I will understand. Not sure it’s possible to do so. But I respect the fact that it’s important to them, despite my lack of understanding. I think that’s necessary sometimes. I don’t think we will ever understand everything. I don’t think we have to in order to show respect. I know a lot of Muslims. They are good people, nice people. They worry about their kids. They want nicer cars. They don’t like pork. When these atrocities occur in the so-called name of their religion, they seem uncomfortable. They don’t go out into the streets to protest, though. They just go about their lives, as I would.
I guess I see a world of difference between terrorists who pick a convenient reason to enact their barbarism (I hope they get their testicles mashed by a front-end loader) and the normal everyday people who live all around me – they also don’t want to see images of the Prophet. Should I tell them they’re wrong for this? Should I refute tradition and religion in that way? I guess I could. I simply choose not to.
I realize very well that all Muslims aren’t gun-wielding barbarians. I had a Muslim roommate and a Muslim cube-mate. I don’t have anything against people living normal lives, whatever religion they have. But they believe that I should not do something their religion finds offensive, and I find offensive when someone else’s religion tells me what to do or not to do. So here we are with this dilemma, their beliefs against mine (and surely not just mine). Now, not drawing a cartoon is not a hard thing to accommodate, but why not even a “please”?
And if I do this for them just because i’m nice, will that be the last thing i have to stop doing to not offend the peaceful Muslims? Or is there a whole shopping list? That’s not an anti-Muslim thing, I feel the same about radical Christians or anyone else.
I hear you. It doesn’t make sense for someone to impose views on us. I’m not sure that’s what the majority of Muslims do, though. But there are so many places were a bit of sensitivity is useful; I mean, I could mock the dying cancer patient or the starving kid in Nigeria. I could do those things. But I won’t. And I get that with religion, it’s a different line, because it’s a set of over-arching beliefs and systems that are impossible to substantiate, no matter how hard people true. It’s just all made up. And yet people live by this stuff, and they make rules, and then they live by those rules, and then they get upset when we don’t respect those rules.
I think in the grand scheme of things, showing some accommodation for perfectly nice, peaceful people who would never hurt you is not a massive price to pay. I would even say that it’s the type of thing that might make the world better. I am concerned about making the world better. Satire is wonderful, and I use it often (though not as well as you); but it’s just a thing, and must we use it to the detriment of someone else? Do I really really have a deep-seated NEED to mock someone’s religion? Is that really necessary?
I mean, I could invite my Jewish neighbor over for a bbq and serve him spareribs… I could walk into a gurudwara and keep my shoes on and my head uncovered… I could step into a Catholic church and and dry hump an image of Jesus… I could do all these things, and likely more. I’m within my rights to do so. Each of these religions have various rules they would like me to follow if at all possible; they all have expectations. They all have shopping lists. I don’t mind respecting their beliefs, I think it makes for a better existence. But I don’t have to follow their beliefs or even believe there’s any sense to them. If the price I have to pay for trying to be decent is not to publish photos of the Prophet Muhammad, that’s completely okay with me. I pay such prices all the time. If it’s only about me and what I would like to express, to the exclusion of the other people we share this planet with, I think we’re doing each other a disservice.
I will never get the image of you dry humping a statue of Jesus out of my head…
He had it coming!
hey now
also people have the right to walk up to me and tell me my wife and daughters are _____________ (insert something vile there) but I have to say that at a certain point I might get annoyed and do something stupid.
Yeah… I guess the instigator is within their rights to say what they want, but really, can’t we just be sort of decent about things?
well it is hard to get everybody to say what other people want them to
I already take off my shoes when I enter a mosque or a Buddhist temple, and cover my head when I enter a synagogue. That’s because I respect the rules and tradition of a place which I enter as a guest. (And I kind of expect the favor to be returned by Muslims and Christians living in a secular country.)
I don’t mock cancer patients and starving kids either, unless they give me a REALLY good reason – like a starving cancer patient kid being a ruthless dictator of some country in his spare time.
I know I could probably do these things but don’t, because I don’t want to be an asshole to people, and I don’t mind being nice to people. So in this gray area, where one has every right to do something, but that something that could offend other person, this is the area where it helps to respect each other and not be an asshole to each other. Because people often just don’t respond too well when others behave like assholes to them – including promising to kill them and their families, which is how a lot of the anti-cartoon protests look like. Would you not agree? (and just to clarify, I am not calling all Muslims assholes, just this very specific type of behavior where you threaten death and destruction for not getting something you may deserve but not entitled to – which is not uniquely a Muslim thing.)
So in this gray area, ideally, a Muslim would say: “I realize you have a right to do this, but I find this really offensive, would it be possible for you not to do that anymore?”, and I’d say “Well, it’s not that difficult for me to stop, so I’ll stop” (which would probably be my answer for a minor thing like a cartoon or saying “Merry Christmas”. Or I may say “I realize this sounds offensive, but doing what you are asking me to do represents too much of inconvenience for me, so I’ll continue doing what I’m doing”. And I may well say no, for example, in a situation where an Orthodox Jew or a Muslim demand a plane or lecture hall to be segregated by gender. That’s not a theoretical scenario, both situations (Jews/plane, Muslim/lecture) happened fairly recently in the US and UK, I believe.
But if all civility is pushed out of this gray area by screaming “death to infidels” or “burn in hell, heathen”, there is little hope for amicable solution. Instead, it’ll just be infinite loop of “you were an asshole to me, so take that!”
And finally, if it were only about a depiction of Muhammad, this would be so much easier to handle. Unfortunately, it’s not, and anything remotely critical of Islam is being dealt with the same way – anger and death threats – as the cartoons. Just ask Salman Rushdie, Theo Van Gogh, or Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
There isn’t any of that that I would argue with
I understand what you’re saying. But I think you are responding to the wingnuts, in a way, and giving them what they desire. It’s a bunch of radical blowhards that are killing people for drawing cartoons – aren’t we just responding to their very particular and minority-opinion views by reacting in this way? I feel that I can be critical of Islam and not be issued death threats. I could walk down the street and do it right now and I would be okay. I could go to work and do the same. I could find a random Muslim in the shopping mall and I’m pretty sure I would be okay. Must we define ourselves by the forced influence of craphole extremists? Honestly, if there is any generally-pervasive force that tends to impede my freedom or freedom of speech, it’s more related to my own government than it is to any religious thinking.
If continuing with with the cartoons and responding with a confrontation is giving wingnuts what they desire, and doing the nice thing and stopping doing cartoons is exactly what wingnuts want – well, then there’s just no way for me to win this thing, is there? 🙂
And speaking of being critical of something, I actually think that in the US it’s more dangerous to be critical of Islam than of a government – the chances are very small, either way, but our law enforcement doesn’t seem to be too happy with Obama themselves 🙂
I think what might upset the wingnuts the most is that we don’t respond with anger. I think responding in anger may unfortunately tip a few people into the wingnut category. You can’t win, X. Do what you feel is right, I suppose, cuss Obama a few times, have a beer (I know you don’t drink!) and saddle the horse, my friend. That horse needs a-saddling.
I like horses
Horses like you.
and if we argue… then the terrorists win..
They are angry people trying to make us angry too. Fuck em.
I may not be much of a drinker but I am also much of a contrarian. I might start drinking if someone demands that I don’t. :).
I am totally sending you a bottle of yummy scotch and demanding that you NOT drink it.
hey… I am a contrarian too… and I bet maple syrup scotch is awesome…
Crown Royal makes a maple blend. It tastes like maple syrup, but 40% alcohol… highly dangerous.
I demand that you do not not stop not drinking!!!
we aren’t going to solve these issues here
Oh – should we be solving them in the COMMENT HERE post?
oooohhh…. funny you should mentions that…
Why – does something need solving there?
maybe
no matter what, there are people who are going to kill other people… makes them feel powerful or at least relevant
This is true. Not really any point in living our lives because of the wingnuts. But living our lives with other good people, that’s possibly worthwhile.
I think maybe the point is there are people out there who have decided for reasons I will never understand… that killing in the name of their religion is a good thing. Knowing that, if you choose to call attention to yourself by angering them, bad shit can happen. I am not agreeing with their viewpoint. Just pointing out a reality. The odds of a satirical cartoonist being involved in a shooting by a maniac with a gun under normal circumstances is fairly slight… even in America where we excel at random gun violence. But purposefully calling attention to yourself seems silly. I don’t think we are even arguing here. When abortion clinics were being attacked, they took more security precautions. Maybe if you want to do satire aimed at crazy people, do so anonymously from a secure location and hire armed security.
But I do all my writing from inside your secret underground lair which is guarded by thousands of well-armed minions. Are you saying your place is no secure???
you should be fine… those minions are top notch… never make a mistake…
well said…
well… that and the fact that the terrorists do not have all that much of a sense of humor to begin with. and let’s not forget the fact that the French ideal of humor is Jerry Lewis…
I haven’t seen the actual cartoon[s] that supposedly offended the killers so much, but I know that most satirical cartoons don’t just make fun of the subject, they use the subject [i.e. Mohammed] to poke fun at someone or some thing that hides behind the subject [the terrorists themselves perhaps?].
If that was the case with Charlie Hebdo, then I think they had every right to make their point. However for Muslims, Mohammed is not the equivalent of the Catholic Pope. Mohammed is more the equivalent of the Christan Cross. I suspect many Christians would be up in arms if Muslims lampooned the /Cross/.
As an atheist I don’t care one way or the other about symbols, but I do care about the sanctity of human life, and no one deserves to die just for speaking words I don’t want to hear, or drawing pictures I don’t want to see. Murder is murder in every culture.
I agree absolutely.
I’m happy to be a monkey with a brain. Maybe my teeth are a bit dull, but I make up for it with swords (guns are illegal here),
maybe if humans had to fight using only their teeth, seems would be better.
Every word we write offends someone. So what then? Stop writing? Ahhh but then what of those offended by lack of things to read.
Choices can have consequences even if they seem unfair. When we choose to get into a car, the car can crash and kill us. It sucks, but it happens every day.
Art, you forgot: (This post is in no way intended to condone harm to monkeys)
because I like monkeys
I’d like to offer a few nuts of wisdom for your crack squirrels to chew on: Yeah, I agree it was insane to kill cartoonists over drawings some people felt offended about. But I don’t agree that it was, or is, a bad idea to draw such cartoons. But it certainly seems like a risky idea. Going beyond labels of good and bad, I also see it as a funny idea. And it’s an idea that can also be useful for helping people to overcome their superstitions. When they see the fallibility of their religious leaders in humorous, cartoon format, perhaps that can give them pause, and help them to not take their religion so seriously.
Not sure you can teach a sense of humor to people with guns and a willingness to use them.
You’ve got a point there. But most muslims, and most anyone else, do have a sense of humor. And if I was raised by religious fanatics, who pushed religion down my throat, I imagine I’d become rebellious. I’d probably savor satirical cartoons that poked fun at my religion.
Most people in the world go the way of the masses when push comes to shove.
It’s tragic, but true, and history proves you correct. But I wonder where this world would be if it weren’t for the few people who think for themselves, and who can be inspired by satire?
dude… I do satire and comedy… and I have poked at and pissed off bankers, gun nuts, racists, rich people, the NRA the NSA, Dick Cheney, serial killers, the KKK, and religious extremists. I am not anti-humor or satire. Or thinking for ourselves. Just pointing out that people with small minds and big guns might get offended if you break what is to them a main tenant of their religion. Not saying it is right or supporting their right to do so.
I guess you and I are on the same page, perhaps without quite realizing it. Most satire is pretty safe, but occasionally it can be dangerous, as you indicate. When someone dabbles in the dangerous material it would be wise for them to perform a careful assessment of the risks, and take the best security precautions they can muster. Then cross their fingers and maybe update their will.
Don’t punch a grizzly bear in the face
And don’t feed nuts to a crack squirrel. You could end up in the world’s longest blog debate. 😉
I do not feed my nuts to anybody…
By the way, Art, over on my “I ❤ New York" post, Elyse put in a link to this article, which speaks to the lunacy of what I was just commenting about.
right… I am not a big fan of overly done political correctness. Just pointing out that if you decide to offend any audience, remember if they have an armed, militant extremist wing.
I thought, when I sent that to you Doobs, that it was a joke. That the Washington Times was caught putting out something actually from the Onion. But nope.
We live in a stupid world.
I wish it was a joke.
Me too.
ha
yup
Everybody has an opinion… whether we want them to or not
I, too, have mixed feelings about this. As some have already noted, just because you can, doesn’t mean that you should. On the other hand, not everyone in the world is Muslim. In fact, more than 75% of the planet’s population is not Muslim. And yet, it seems that those who are Muslim expect those of us who aren’t to abide by their religious beliefs, rules, and taboos, even if it violates our own freedoms of speech or religious rules.
Hey, I understand when you wrote that “pictures of the prophet angered millions of peaceful members of the Islamic faith too.” There are so many religions, so many rules, rituals, beliefs, etc. that, when violated may offend people of those religions. Are we all expected to abide by the rules of everyone else’s religions?
Jews and Muslims don’t eat pork. Should all stores that sell pork products or all restaurants that serve pork or bacon be burned to the ground because Muslims or Jews might be offended? Many Hindus consider the cow to be holy. Should all of the cattle farms be blown up so as not to offend Hindus? Catholics consider the use of artificial birth control to be a sin. Should drug stores selling condoms be the targets of violence?
Follow the rules, rituals, and beliefs of those of your chosen religion. Obey your religion’s rules. But don’t expect everyone else to do the same.
You know what, Art? There are a lot of things that happen across the globe every single day that offend and anger me. But I don’t use that as justification for killing people.
I was very careful to say I do not support what how they expressed their anger. And you could argue that not everybody on the planet is black so why worry about the ‘N’ word? I am not pretending to have answers. And as a country we have gone to war numerous times because something someone else in charge of another country did angered us.
Sure. We can watch the Pats game?
Oops. Somehow I sent this to you when I intended to text this to my wife. Huh?
phew
I guess your wife must also be confused by a text about Muslims. 🙂
ha
I can’t… to me, organized sports make about as much sense as organized religions does.
Race is what you are. You don’t choose to be black or white or brown or yellow. Religion is a choice, and while you are born into whatever religion your parents practice, you can choose to believe or not to believe. You can choose whether or not you want to practice the religion. You can choose whether or not to be offended by the actions of those who don’t practice your religion. You can choose whether or not to harm or kill those who do not practice your religion the same way you do.
And that, to me, is the difference between getting offended by those using the N-word and getting offended by those who draw pictures of Mohammed.
true to a point… but being born into some religions in some parts of the world… where they still kill people for being something else, makes that a hard choice. It is like saying that kids born in Nazi Germany had a choice about not growing up to be a Nazi when everyone was spying against their neighbors and you could be killed by the sanctioned authorities of your own government. And how much are they being taught about other religions in the tribal lands in Afghanistan and other places like that?
I’m not worried about the monkey, it’s when they start poking the Bear, I get worried.
Leslie
what about a bare monkey
The monkey is nothng to worry about, it’s all about the BEAR.
Leslie
got it
Well said. The default reaction seems to be blind outrage with little consideration of the issue. Refreshing to read your thoughts.
thank you… this time I might make people on both sides angry