Can't help but notice that no one dares to show images of Mohammed for fear of Muslim violence. Can't help but notice no one dares to criticize Islam for fear of Muslim violence. Can't help but notice no one dares suggest anything negative about Islam for fear of Muslim violence.
Gee, three for three wrong. That's not easy to do. Well, maybe for it is.
If you've seen Mohammed imagery on tv lemme know what channel.
Actually, I haven't seen anti-Muslim imagery, anti-Jewish imagery or anti-Christian imagery beyond very mild stuff on broadcast tv at all. I don't know about cable. I saw some cartoon based show that cartooned Mohammed in a satyrical way.
I agree, as a religion Islam must be able to tolerate the disrespect of free speech without resorting to violence. That doesn't mean though - you should go out of your way just to insult one religion which is what you seem to call for. When Judaism is attacked with anti-semitic cartoons - people condemn it for what is (peacefully). When Islam is attacked with anti-Islamic cartoons - it's gorified as free speech. When Christianity is attacked with anti-Christian cartoons, no one seems to care much. Condemn it for what it is - peacefully. And condemn violence as an unacceptable means of communication. That's where Islam needs to head.
But if we continue to treat Islam as a special thing, refraining from doing what we know upsets them, then they've won.
This refraining extends to no other religion. But knowing the kind of rhetoric and angst we heaped on enemy countries during WWII
it's hard to understand why we're perfectly willing to insult and trash Japan with the most vile and racist posters and propaganda, but not Islam even ifonly showing their prophet in a neutral sorta way.
I would disagree. First, if you do a google of anti-Islam, anti-Jewish, anti-Christian cartoons - there's a plethora of them out there. Most never ever make it to mainstream media sources. The reason isn't retaliation or fear - it's a sense of common decency and respect for the audience. I can't recall ever seeing anti-semitic cartoons in mainstream news. I do recall seeing anti-Islam cartoons but none showing some of the disgusting and almost pornographic images of Mohammed that we see displayed on the internet.
Second, we DO treat another religion that way - Judaism. Anti-semitic cartoons are heavily critisized and condemned. Not so anti-Islam or anti-Christianity. As a matter of fact, anti-Christian stuff is very often ignored.
The other thing is - media has drastically changed since WWII, it is no longer newspapers and a very limited television broadcasting network. It's everyone - everyone is their own journalist and their own "expert" self proclaimed of course. That makes it easy to spread demonizing and often inaccurate rhetoric. During WWII the anti-Japanese rhetoric lead us to do something that today we consider reprehensible and that our courts finally gave reparations for - the rounding up and interning of American citizens of Japanese descent. I have faith that is an era now gone, I fear that if unchecked - it may not be as gone as I would hope.
What you are suggesting is we fling, non-stop, every disgusting and degrading anti-Islamic material into the public sphere without censor, empathy or responsibility in order to make Muslims realize they can't stop free speech with violence, but that's a two-fold sword. Not only does that hit those who are propose violence, it hits those who are not but feel very offended and feel, quite justifiably, that their faith is under attack in the west even if they do not support the extremes.
So what do you do? Free speech is not and has never been an unlimited right. It's a right that comes with responsibility and the expectations of self-censorship. When that doesn't occur, we - the people, should step in and make our opinions heard. NOT through legislation, outlawing things etc. but through a public condemnation of the material and a public act of support for the people being attacked. We do that with anti-semitic material and anti-semitic acts of vandalism. We should do it for any. One example would be how the Westboro Baptists are treated. They have a legal (and I support it) right to protest and picket, however offensive they might be. But we, the people, including most Christians who consider them an extremist fringe group have found ways to marginalize them. Surrounding the funeral of Matthew Shepherd with people wearing tall angel wings so they couldn't get past or see past. Entire towns parking them out of soldiers funerals so they couldn't find a spot near by. These are the ways people ought to behave when offensive degrading and demonizing acts, material, etc. is on public display. It makes more of a point than any violence or demonizing or legislative banning.
And that brings me to another point. I do agree with you that we can not allow the threat of violence to silence free speech. It's like blackmail or hostage holding - once you start, it never ends. Few countries outside the West truly have and value free speech (and that is not only Islamic countries). We tend to think it's a universal, and it's far far from it, even more of a reason to protect it from state censorship, religious censorship or censorship due to fear. What I don't agree with is your methods.
Yes, Islam should and is open to criticism and yes, it should be treated like any other religion. That means both in protections and in criticisms and in public support for the rights of American Muslims as American citizens and basic human beings when they are under attack. It means violence should never be allowed to silence anyone.
Sweden is an interesting example - based on several news events. After the Charlie Hebdo murders, there was a huge spike in anti-Islamic hate crimes including the firebombing of 3 Mosques as well as anti-Islamic cartoons and demonstrations. The first, obviously, is a criminal act. The latter two - free speech. But many Swedes didn't want to see their culture as one of exclusion - Swedish Muslims were Swedes and Sweden was inclusive. They showed their support by "flower bombing" the damaged Mosques and similar things. That is one example of how religiously offensive free speech can work and should work, when a society decides this is not the kind of society they want to be.
If we can't rebutt, criticize, and disagree with Islam then it's basicaly become the defacto system of government and law for whatever country refuses to oppose it. As here in the US.
I don't think I understand what you mean?
I don't wanna 'go out of our way to be dicks to people.' But if they're to be a respected religion, they need to accept not everyone agrees with them, and others are going to deliberately insult and be dicks. When you claim your imaginary friend from childhood is a real being, that's what happens.
You're kind of saying, in your OP, that you do want us to go out of our way (and over the top) to be dicks to people. I do agree however - that all religions should be treated equally in regards to free speech and that there are civilized ways to protest truly offensive material - whether it's through community, courts, or articles.
