Bloody Cartoons
Is a short documentary exploring how drawings featured several years ago in a small Danish newspaper caused such a furore with Muslims the world over, many of the enraged had not even seen the images. The film questions the extreme reaction to what after all are just pictures, and the danger this leads to censorship based on fear. In the UK we have laws against hate speech and incitement to religious hatred, but this reaction is the opposite, it's hatred based on what is seen as blasphemous. Also ironically the reactions mirrored the stereotypes the cartoons were depicting.
Blasphemy is of course a victimless crime and does not attack any individuals. The filmmaker films in Lebanon, Denmark, Syria, France, Qatar and Turkey. Personally I think to bow to such pressure against freedom of expression is akin to giving into terrorism and rewarded behavior makes such extreme reactions successful, and will and can only lead to further extreme action. It would be encouraging to hear more from less radical Muslims speaking out against such extremism, and the lack of this raises many questions.
It would be unfair not to mention here that the order for Salman Rushdie to be killed by the Ayatollah was not greeted with outright condemnation by other faiths, bar managing a few words on condemning violence, the Vatican, Archbishop and Chief Rabbi along with many other religious figures staggeringly sympathized with the Ayatollah, seeing blasphemy the greater crime instead of state sponsored (order)murder of Rushdie.
So irrespective of the offense religion causes most decent humane people, being offended is top of religion's list of bad deeds. I guess it's in line with the order of importance of the commandments, the fact of flirting with other gods is cited way before killing a person as a sin. Religion's priorities are like much of religion, pretty twisted.
Is a short documentary exploring how drawings featured several years ago in a small Danish newspaper caused such a furore with Muslims the world over, many of the enraged had not even seen the images. The film questions the extreme reaction to what after all are just pictures, and the danger this leads to censorship based on fear. In the UK we have laws against hate speech and incitement to religious hatred, but this reaction is the opposite, it's hatred based on what is seen as blasphemous. Also ironically the reactions mirrored the stereotypes the cartoons were depicting.
Blasphemy is of course a victimless crime and does not attack any individuals. The filmmaker films in Lebanon, Denmark, Syria, France, Qatar and Turkey. Personally I think to bow to such pressure against freedom of expression is akin to giving into terrorism and rewarded behavior makes such extreme reactions successful, and will and can only lead to further extreme action. It would be encouraging to hear more from less radical Muslims speaking out against such extremism, and the lack of this raises many questions.
It would be unfair not to mention here that the order for Salman Rushdie to be killed by the Ayatollah was not greeted with outright condemnation by other faiths, bar managing a few words on condemning violence, the Vatican, Archbishop and Chief Rabbi along with many other religious figures staggeringly sympathized with the Ayatollah, seeing blasphemy the greater crime instead of state sponsored (order)murder of Rushdie.
So irrespective of the offense religion causes most decent humane people, being offended is top of religion's list of bad deeds. I guess it's in line with the order of importance of the commandments, the fact of flirting with other gods is cited way before killing a person as a sin. Religion's priorities are like much of religion, pretty twisted.
No comments:
Post a Comment