My 2 cents

Though not the result of a conscious decision, I have neglected to opine about the dustup over the Danish cartoons. I would like to say, though, that I have been VERY disappointed in the U.S. State Department and the British Foreign Office (or whatever it's called). I can't believe the wimpy approach they've taken to free expression. Anyway, Melusina and Vol Abroad both have covered the controversy in a way that pretty much sums up my feelings. Then of course there was the column by Mark Steyn (if you haven't already, read the whole thing) that pretty much hit the nail on the head as far as I'm concerned:

Jyllands-Posten wasn't being offensive for the sake of it. They had a serious point -- or, at any rate, a more serious one than Britney Spears or Terence McNally [read the whole thing to get this reference]. The cartoons accompanied a piece about the dangers of "self-censorship" -- i.e., a climate in which there's no explicit law forbidding you from addressing the more, er, lively aspects of Islam but nonetheless everyone feels it's better not to.

That's the question the Danish newspaper was testing: the weakness of free societies in the face of intimidation by militant Islam.

Anyway, there's been a lot of stuff out there like that, so I didn't feel the need to weigh in. The longer the controversy drug on, though, the more I felt compelled to speak up. Today was the breaking point. Actually today was the first day I'd had time to poke around and read lots of different takes on the issue. Regardless, what has caused me to speak out is the impression I get that almost everyone is missing the point.

I've read "letters to the editor" from mainstream Muslims (and non-Muslims) pointing out how offensive the cartoons are. I've read "opinion pieces" from papers' editorial boards about a lack of sensitivity and how much their papers have debated whether to reprint the cartoons. I've also read a lot of folks defending the Danish paper. Again, these folks are missing the point as far as I'm concerned. Of course I think the Danish paper had the RIGHT to print the cartoons. I understand that you can debate that point, but what I'm amazed about is that the majority of the coverage is focused on the wisdom of publishing the cartoons in the first place!

Would a Danish newspaper have published similar cartoons relating to the Christian or Jewish faith? That's irrelevant to me. To me, the real issue is the reaction in the Muslim world. So I've printed something and that has offended you. Well you can not buy my paper. You can write a letter to the editor complaining. If you feel strongly enough, you can boycott advertisers in my paper and stuff like that. What you are not justified in doing is threatening murder and terrorist attacks by Bin Laden because you didn't like something in my newspaper! It really is that simple! If you want to be treated with respect and understanding, don't threaten to behead someone you disagree with! Here's my favorite piece from a letter by one Tarana Alam (a self-professed educated Muslim) of Laguna Niguel, CA:

If the West is really interested in making lasting peace with the Muslim world, it needs to learn about the fundamentals of Islam and respect for the spiritual values of others.

Ring, ring, ... Hello, Pot, it's Kettle!

Since the Muslim world seems intent on making this a "you wouldn't do this with a Christian cartoon" issue, think about the reaction the last time Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, etc. made one of their loony condemnations. Was there a mainstream debate about whether society should have taken the actions that led to the offense? No, there was widespread ridicule of Falwell/Robertson and then the world moved on. Why are we not holding the offended parties to the same standard this time?

To me, the West's cautious reaction to the Muslim over-reaction proves Jyllands-Posten's original point about self-censorship.