I’ve been busy these past few days, but I have gotten a chance to read some truly good blog discussion about two issues that get my blood boiling. So I thought today I would mention them both, because censorship has very much to do with human progress.
The Muslim Caricatures
I’m sure we’ve all heard plenty about the caricatures of Mohammed, and formed opinions of their offensiveness (perhaps before seeing the cartoons themselves). A few bloggers over at Scienceblogs.com have been doing some well-reasoned writing on this topic, including Ed Brayton (at Dispatches from the Culture Wars) and PZ Myers (at Pharyngula). There have been, of course, countless such entries from the political left and right, but those voices tend to get a little strident and phony at times, so I’ve ignored them.
| Here’s my message to the Islamic world: God and Mohammed are not offended by those drawings |
Take a look at the cartoons if you haven’t already. My thoughts on them are that, first of all, they are a bit childish and don’t serve much of a point by themselves. But more importantly, the cartoons are not truly offensive from a non-religious standpoint. The one potentially offensive one would be the bomb-as-headdress caricature. But that’s the cartoon that actually serves the greatest point: Islam has been perverted in the eyes of the west, so that cartoonist is telling it like he sees it. Absent from religion, the cartoons are not at all offensive, and even within the sometimes irrational domain of religion they aren’t that bad. Think how many countless times Jesus is mocked in American media (in South Park for instance). He is portrayed in far worse a light that Mohammed is in those cartoons. But we don’t see Christians torching the offices of Comedy Central or demanding retractions from the government.
Here’s my message to the Islamic world: God and Mohammed are not offended by those drawings, you are. Your fragile pride is injured and for that you hold signs in protest saying “Exterminate those who slander Islam“. You have stood by with little to no outrage at the horrible televised slaughter of innocent hostages in the name of Allah aimed at “the infidels”, yet you feel self-righteous anger about a few drawings that are not truly offensive? If this is what your religion truly is, then perhaps I’ve been wrong to defend it as one of peace and humanity.
Attempts to Silence Science at NASA
For those who aren’t familiar with the basics, this article summarizes political appointees’ attempts to science James Hansen, a NASA climate scientist. Hanses has been making such outrageous statements as “2005 was the warmest year on record”, or “global climate change is real.”
| The administration’s political hacks live in a fantasy land where science can be twisted and molded to support a particular set of political and religious beliefs. |
The administration’s political hacks live in a fantasy land where science can be twisted and molded to support a particular set of political and religious beliefs. I’m sorry to have to say it, but science is apolitical and irreligious; those folks in both areas who continue to feel threatened by science will fight and kick and cry while science advances and pulls their phony arguments out from under their feet. Kudos to Hansen for speaking out and making the Adminstration look even more terrible in its handling of science issues. For some great blog discussion, see Chris Mooney’s blog (The Intersection, at Scienceblogs), and a great diatribe by the Bad Astronomer.
Well, I think your opinion on the Mohammed reactions are felt by most of the non-muslim world. The most interesting part is that all of this started because the Danish newspaper wanted to stop self-sensorship, where they had apparently been avoiding this because of fears that the muslim world would react negatively (although undoubtedly they didn’t expect this serious of a reaction). As of right now, the Danish embassy has been burned, Australian embassy attacked, four killed, a bomb diffused, and countless other violent acts. The editor of the newpaper in Jordan that reprinted the cartoon was arrested.
The thing is, which is going to cause more negativity toward Islam… a cartoon or worldwide violence, flag burnings, protests, and the call for exterminations and executions?
I couldn’t agree more, those burnings, and the ransacking of some Christian neighborhoods in Beiruit do nothing other than lend credence to the ideas expressed by those cartoons.
But the scariest part of it all to me is that the people are angry that Mohammed was represented AT ALL. They feel that it is okay to kill (or at least talk about it) merely because a person draws his likeness and publishes the image.
Now, I know that the more moderate elements of the Islamic world condemn the actions of the few who are responding so negatively. But their voices are lost in the cacophony. Moderate Islam has stood quietly for too long while its radical brothers kill and destroy in the name of Allah.
Well, there has been a number of muslims standing up against what they see is something terrible happening to their own religion. However, their voice is not amplified by the media in the same way that bombs and flag burning is.
Plus, a majority in Palestine voted for the terrorist group Hamas to be their leader, so at least in their case it’s not just a select few people causing the problem any more.
[…] See my earlier post on this matter for links to the cartoons, as well as to see how my opinions have changed on this matter a little bit. I’m not a religious man, but when I see who is speaking out and why I have to temper response a bit. The violent protests are ridiculous, and they are not entirely about the cartoons either. I don’t doubt they are begun by extremists and fueled by ever-present tensions between western and Islamic cultures. The world is not a simple place, but we should not so readily condemn the responses of a billion people as wrong. Most reasonable people agree that freedom of speech has limits, and I think everyone would agree that it should not be raised as a thinly-veiled justification for racism. […]