Gay Patriot Header Image

Draw Mohammed, May 20th

After having dilligently scrubbed through all the posts here in the past three days so as to not run afoul of our intrepid readers ;-), I submit likely one of the most useful things to come from Dan Savage in about a decade. (Not that I don’t like his stuff, but rarely is he this good.)

Over at The Stranger, Dan asks his readers (and I ask ours) to join him for “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” on May 20th in support of my fellow Centennial StatesmenTrey Parker and Matt Stone:

Would that their bosses had the brass ones to support them.

Who’s with me? I’m thinking of including a feather boa and fabulous shoes!

-Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from an undisclosed secret HQ)

Share

80 Comments

  1. “You do realize that Trey and Matt were threatened with death only for depicting Mohammed, right? They didn’t depict him disrespectfully. They didn’t do anything like what I suggested, a Piss Mohammed.” – ILoveCapitalism

    Yes, I did and do realize that. Sorry if it wasn’t clear in my earlier posts. My only point is that Christians can stand up against this crap without going against our faith.

    Comment by longviewcyclist — April 25, 2010 @ 6:33 pm - April 25, 2010

  2. “My only point is that Christians can stand up against this crap without going against our faith.”

    Agreed. People are constantly demanding that I, as a Christian, apologize for Pat Robertson, apologize for Jerry Falwell, apologize for this one’s homophobia or that one’s sexism or whatever. It really wears thin after a while.

    It doesn’t matter what Christians do, some people are always going to see Christianity as an evil and oppressive system. But for the gay Left, who all too often give even radical Islam a free pass, to be that closed-minded against ALL Christians has gone well beyond hypocrisy.

    The Gay left seems always willing to look the other way when gay people in Islamic countries are beheaded or hanged simply for who they are. I wish I had a dollar for every time somebody in “the community” huffily informed me that no matter what Christians did to atone for homophobia in the American church, it would never, never, never, never, EVER suffice.

    Even allowing for inflation, I’d have myself a pile of dough.

    Comment by Lori Heine — April 25, 2010 @ 7:11 pm - April 25, 2010

  3. Pat,

    Its not about religious sensibilities being more important than other sensibilities. That is the FALSE narrative that libs have constructed. (I thought conservatives were wise to the fact that liberals construct false narratives, but apparently some are not that bright)

    Its about not sh*tting where you eat.

    Our troops have been working their asses off for the past six years, putting their OWN lives at risk, in many cases giving UP their lives, to garner the support and cooperation of these people, to convince them that we have no problem with them in GENERAL, but only with SPECIFIC terrorists.

    And now these blithering idiots come along and say, “Hey! America says f*ck ALL OF YOU!

    And why? Because their freedom was at risk?

    Anyone who really believes their freedom is at risk is an idiot.

    You are more likely in America to be killed by a LIBERAL who doesn’t like what you have to say than by a Muslim who doesn’t like what you have to say.

    yet are any of these SIMPLETONS organizing similar protests to draw a line in the sand for all Democrats? No. Because it would be silly to. Nobody in their right mind thinks ALL Democrats want to silence you with acts of violence, yet these dumbsh*ts are behaving as though ALL Muslims want to silence us with acts of violence.

    Apparently some dumbasses havent learned over the last six years that there is a DIFFERENCE between terrorists in specific, and Muslims in general.

    It is the utter stupidity of having what amounts to a “F*ck ‘You People’ Day” and instead of telling only the small group of people who deserve to be told to f*ck off, to f*ck off, intentionally adding another billion people who dont deserve it.

    it is people too stupid to understand the difference between the concept of “general” and “specific”

    Its gratuitously painting with a broad brush for what amounts to absolutely NOTHING more than masturbatory purposes.

    And the idea that “people need to learn to get over it” is equally asinine.

    They WILL get over it, and they HAVE gotten over it when its been done in the past, but thats not a reasonable justification to antagonize people our military has been risking their lives to garner the support of!

    I am accustomed to this level of obtuseness from liberals. I THOUGHT conservatives were smarter. Apparently not.

    Comment by American Elephant — April 25, 2010 @ 7:38 pm - April 25, 2010

  4. I would also point out, that Dan the dildo columnist Savage with his “F*ck all Muslims Day” is doing EXACTLY what liberals claimed President Bush and Republicans were doing with the war on terror — they claimed we were going after “Muslims” not terrorists and that we risked “enflaming the Muslim world”.

    All of which we rightly denied, because the war was targeted and specific.

    I guess supporters of “F*ck All Muslims Day” were full of shit when they denied that our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were not attacks on Islam itself.

    Like I said, I am used to hypocrisy, incoherence, contradiction and obtuseness from liberals. I THOUGHT conservatives were intellectually consistent. I apparently thought wrong.

    Comment by American Elephant — April 25, 2010 @ 10:39 pm - April 25, 2010

  5. Here’s an idea that was proposed to me earlier: depict Mohamet the way islam does. As a man who married a 9 year old girl, as someone who killed 800 Jews, etc. If muslims believe that that is true, then the only offense they could possibly take to it is the fact that we drew it.

    As you know, Trey Parker and Matt Stone didn’t even do that much – and they got death threats for it. That’s plain evil.

    Likewise, “Draw Mohammed Day” doesn’t even propose to do as much as you, longviewcyclist, just proposed. So I guess you support it in the end.

    A person, or a society, which cannot bring itself to draw Mohammed in defiance of evil terrorists is a dhimmi – a person/society which has lost their freedom.

    As for someone doing a Piss Mohammed type of depiction: I don’t see how the Golden Rule applies here because, as I’ve indicated, I personally have no problem with someone doing a Piss Christ – as long as they are doing it with their own money. A person/society whose money is expropriated by force of government to support Piss Christ (or Piss Mohammed or Piss Buddha or whatever), is a person/society who has lost a key piece of their freedom.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 25, 2010 @ 11:58 pm - April 25, 2010

  6. I do get the idea of not lowering onself to make a point. But something has to be done to show that we will not be stopped by following someone else’s rules that we are not bound by. If there is a way to do this without offending all Moslems by doing so, just the fascist extremists, I would be all for that.

    Pat: Just draw Mohammed. Or support people who do. As longviewcyclist said, we can “depict Mohamet the way islam does”. Zombietime provides an archive of such depictions: http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/islamic_mo_full/

    Any Muslim who values free speech will not be offended; valuing free speech as they do, they will support it. And any Muslim who is offended, is a Muslim who doesn’t value free speech. That’s a clear and important distinction.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 26, 2010 @ 12:03 am - April 26, 2010

  7. How about a picture of Mohammed crying because some idiot blew up a building and killed civilians in his name.

    You can be blunt, brutal yet poignant.

    Comment by Matt from California — April 26, 2010 @ 1:23 am - April 26, 2010

  8. Matt – excellent idea!

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 26, 2010 @ 1:24 am - April 26, 2010

  9. Trying to pretend that the Stranger’s “F*ck Muslims Day!” is some sort of respectful protest is yet more disingenuousness on top of disingenuousness. Especially when the ORGANIZERS of the event themselves are promoting it as an event to directly mock Islam by drawing Muhammad as a dog-purse, a box of pasta, etc, or, if you read the comments, butt plugs and the like:

    If I draw Mohammed as a butt plug, is that taking it too far? Cuz I think it would be just far enough…

    Its not intellectual, its juvenile. Its not clever, it’s clumsy, inept and obtuse. Muslims see our commitment to free speech every day. The world is saturated with American free speech. They understand that we CAN say anything we want. They have no doubt whatsoever that we are not bound by their customs, and UNTIL NOW they understood that while we COULD say all sorts of offensive things about Islam if we wanted to, that we were CHOOSING not to out of a desire to be respectful, to differentiate Islam from terrorism, and to try to get along.

    Now a bunch of bumbling, blithering idiots claiming essentially that “if you dont tell Muslims to fuck off, the terrorists will win!!!” are making clear to Muslims that we DONT differentiate radical extremists from Muslims and we have no intention of being respectful or demonstrating that we want to get along with the general Muslim population.

    Its just slapping muslims in the face to establish that we can slap them in the face if we want to — something that has never been in doubt — while our troops have been busting their asses for 6 years to ensure Muslims that our only quibble is with specific terrorists and engender trust and cooperation among the general Muslim population.

    It’s masturbatory. Or as Sarah Palin said to Obama recently (on a different topic) just because you CAN do something doesn’t mean you should.

    this liberal protest, like all liberal protests is stupid, childish, unimaginative, overbroad, incoherent, hypocritical, ineffective and actually counterproductive. The first red flag should be that its a LIBERAL PROTEST! All that’s missing are giant puppets, a drum circle and hairy topless lesbians.

    meanwhile, our troops have to deal with the fallout. I wonder how much of their work will be undone? how much harder the “F*ck Islam Day” will make it to get help from the Iraqi and Afghani Muslims they are working with?

    Comment by American Elephant — April 26, 2010 @ 5:12 am - April 26, 2010

  10. Trying to pretend that the Stranger’s “F*ck Muslims Day!” is some sort of respectful protest is yet more disingenuousness on top of disingenuousness. Especially when the ORGANIZERS of the event themselves are promoting it as an event to directly mock Islam by drawing Muhammad as a dog-purse, a box of pasta, etc, or, if you read the comments, butt plugs and the like:

    If I draw Mohammed as a butt plug, is that taking it too far? Cuz I think it would be just far enough…

    Its not intellectual, its juvenile. Its not clever, it’s clumsy, inept and obtuse. Muslims see our commitment to free speech every day. The world is saturated with American free speech. They understand that we CAN say anything we want. They have no doubt whatsoever that we are not bound by their customs, and UNTIL NOW they understood that while we COULD say all sorts of offensive things about Islam if we wanted to, that for the most part we were CHOOSING not to out of a desire to be respectful, to differentiate Islam from terrorism, and to try to get along.

    Now a bunch of bumbling, blithering idiots claiming essentially that “dur, if you dont tell Muslims to f*ck off, the terrorists will win!!!” are making clear to Muslims that we DONT differentiate radical extremists from Muslims and we have no intention of being respectful or demonstrating that we want to get along with the general Muslim population.

    Its just slapping muslims in the face to establish that we can slap them in the face if we want to — something that has never been in doubt — while our troops have been busting their asses for 6 years to ensure Muslims that our only quibble is with specific terrorists and engender trust and cooperation among the general Muslim population.

    It’s masturbatory. Or as Sarah Palin (who if nothing else is evidently much smarter than this lot) said to Obama recently (on a different topic) just because you CAN do something doesn’t mean you should.

    this liberal protest, like all liberal protests is stupid, childish, unimaginative, overbroad, incoherent, hypocritical, ineffective and actually counterproductive. The first red flag should be that its a LIBERAL PROTEST! All that’s missing are giant puppets, a drum circle and hairy topless lesbians.

    meanwhile, our troops have to deal with the fallout. I wonder how much of their work will be undone? I wonder how much harder the “F*ck Muslims Day” will make it to get cooperation from the Iraqi and Afghan Muslims they have been trying to build relationships and cooperation with risking their own lives in many cases to do so?

    So unbelievably stupid.

    “If we dont draw pictures! the terrrists WIN! ”

    soooooo monumentally stupid.

    Comment by American Elephant — April 26, 2010 @ 5:18 am - April 26, 2010

  11. 53.Pat,

    Its not about religious sensibilities being more important than other sensibilities. That is the FALSE narrative that libs have constructed. (I thought conservatives were wise to the fact that liberals construct false narratives, but apparently some are not that bright)

    AmericanElephant, I do my best to not add meaning to what other people write. And my apparent wrong assumption had nothing to do what you believe the liberals (as well as conservative) have constructed. You made a point of saying religious sensitivities, and differentiating between that and other sensitivities, which is what led to my conclusion. I’ll stand corrected now.

    Our troops have been working their asses off for the past six years, putting their OWN lives at risk, in many cases giving UP their lives, to garner the support and cooperation of these people, to convince them that we have no problem with them in GENERAL, but only with SPECIFIC terrorists.

    And I don’t see how, even if misguided, this protest changes that. If we are all valuing freedom here and abroad, then those who may be offended should recognize that this. We want freedom for all Iraqis even though almost all of them regard Jesus as only a prophet, in contradiction to what most of this country’s citizens believe.

    Its about not sh*tting where you eat.

    When you are calling one of the blogmasters “a blithering idiot,” aren’t you doing that? Or is it just the liberals who support this that are blithering idiots? Or everyone else but Bruce?

    And why? Because their freedom was at risk?
    Anyone who really believes their freedom is at risk is an idiot.

    Perhaps you are attributing the wrong reasons that some (or even most) are participating in this protest.

    The first red flag should be that its a LIBERAL PROTEST!

    Interesting. First of all, it seems that as many conservatives as liberals, if not more, are participating in this protest. And also, it seems like it’s the left that usually excuses bad behavior from Moslems.

    Comment by Pat — April 26, 2010 @ 7:29 am - April 26, 2010

  12. “As you know, Trey Parker and Matt Stone didn’t even do that much – and they got death threats for it. That’s plain evil.

    Likewise, “Draw Mohammed Day” doesn’t even propose to do as much as you, longviewcyclist, just proposed. So I guess you support it in the end.” – ILoveCapitalism

    I was arguing against the ideas some folks were proposing about drawing Mohamet in ways meant to be offensive (i.e. ‘drawing him as a buttplug’).

    I thought that was obvious. Sorry if you misunderstood. It should also be obvious that I believe that death threats are evil.

    After having read and thought about American Elephant’s posts, I am reconsidering the wisdom of Draw Mohamet Day period. He has valid points.

    Moving on now. Have fun. 🙂

    Comment by longviewcyclist — April 26, 2010 @ 8:07 am - April 26, 2010

  13. Any Muslim who values free speech will not be offended; valuing free speech as they do, they will support it. And any Muslim who is offended, is a Muslim who doesn’t value free speech. That’s a clear and important distinction.

    ILC, I’m not sure about this. One can value free speech and at the same time be offended by some free speech. In this case, many moderate Muslims are offended by depictions of Mohammed on the one hand, but believe that others have the right to do so. So what I question is, should we participate in a protest that will insult people who are innocent in this whole matter? On the other hand, are we talking about something that is petty enough that we shouldn’t worry about whether people are insulted about it (i.e., tough noogies to those who are offended by the depiction of Mohammed)? How constrained to others’ sensibilities should we be to fight back?

    Here’s an idea that was proposed to me earlier: depict Mohamet the way islam does. As a man who married a 9 year old girl, as someone who killed 800 Jews, etc. If muslims believe that that is true, then the only offense they could possibly take to it is the fact that we drew it.

    Longviewcyclist, I understand your points as well, but found this to be inconsistent with what you later wrote.

    I was arguing against the ideas some folks were proposing about drawing Mohamet in ways meant to be offensive (i.e. ‘drawing him as a buttplug’).

    I’m not a Muslim, and certainly not Mohammed. But if I had to choose between being depicted as A) a buttplug or B) someone who married a 9-year-old child or C) someone who slaughtered 800 persons, I would choose A hands down.

    Comment by Pat — April 26, 2010 @ 9:12 am - April 26, 2010

  14. I was arguing against the ideas some folks were proposing about drawing Mohamet in ways meant to be offensive

    How nice of you, longviewcyclist to finally at long last say what you supposedly meant all along.

    ILC, I’m not sure about this. One can value free speech and at the same time be offended by some free speech.

    First, let’s go back to Piss Christ. No, I don’t think it’s art. Yes, I am basically offended by it. But, if it were the case that the artist hadn’t looted me to make it, I would defend absolutely his right to offend me. That’s because I value free speech.

    Now let’s go back to Draw Mohammed Day. What most people (leaving me out) have proposed there is nothing remotely like a Piss Mohammed. And the people who are offended are people who despise free speech and who will either murder to abolish it, or at least applaud murder. Offending them (in ways so light and moderate as Draw Mohammed Day) is necessary to defend free speech, that is to say, it is ethically mandatory.

    So what I question is, should we participate in a protest that will insult people who are innocent in this whole matter?

    But the only Muslims who are “innocent in this whole matter”, other than children (who are easily shielded), are the Muslims who actually value free speech. What I question is, should they or will they actually be offended – if it is true that they value free speech? See above.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 26, 2010 @ 10:02 am - April 26, 2010

  15. longviewcyclist – don’t worry about what I said at the top of #64, I was going for a joke that didn’t come out right (as sometimes happens) and isn’t worth explaining.

    When [one calls] one of the blogmasters “a blithering idiot,” [isn’t one crapping where one eats]?

    Pat, that is a fine point and what I have long had to say to many who come to this blog, only to insult Bruce or his positions (in silly, stupid ways I won’t repeat). This blog costs money to run, and I have a good guess who pays it. And in this controversy, as in the entire Long War with the Islamists, real people have undergone real death threats. Freedom is very much at risk.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 26, 2010 @ 10:20 am - April 26, 2010

  16. AE – the point is that Muslims (obligatory disclaimer: not all, moderate, etc) do want us to change. They’re succeeding in Europe and Canada – and in the US (look up CAIR, the flying imams, disappearing Somali “refugee” “youths”, and the fact that we’re sending soldiers to die for “that which cannot be named”).

    A draw Mo day seems silly on many levels but it’s not gratuitous.

    I’ve become far more isolationist and “xenophobic” than I used to be. There are 56 member nations in the OIC. Muslims that want to live in a sharia state should certainly be able to find one nation from the 56 with whatever level of sharia they feel up to living under. Ditto for people wanting to live in a Hispanic culture, Scandinavian-style welfare state with hedonism for all, etc).

    If drawing Mohammed means that some Afghan or Iraqi is less helpful to our military – fine. All the more reason for us to get out with a stern warning that the next time they attack us, we will be back to kill their people and wreck their stuff – leaving them with the aftermath. Other than that, if they want to live in the 7th century, let ’em have at it.

    With freedom of speech comes offense. I am offended by something or other everyday but I accept the offense as the price I pay to live free from fear of being persecuted for my opinions.

    Comment by SoCalRobert — April 26, 2010 @ 11:08 am - April 26, 2010

  17. If drawing Mohammed means that some Afghan or Iraqi is less helpful to our military

    SCR, whoa. I have skipped many of the comments here. Somebody seriously tried to claim that would happen? God I hope not, it would be stupid beyond belief.

    With freedom of speech comes offense. I am offended by something or other everyday but I accept the offense as the price I pay to live free from fear of being persecuted for my opinions.

    Hear, hear!

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 26, 2010 @ 11:23 am - April 26, 2010

  18. P.S. If any of the rational people here do have concerns about Draw Mohammed Day hurting our troops in theater, please feel free to state your concerns in your own words, in a comment addressing me, and I will be glad to answer / give my reasons for not worrying.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 26, 2010 @ 11:46 am - April 26, 2010

  19. First, let’s go back to Piss Christ. No, I don’t think it’s art. Yes, I am basically offended by it. But, if it were the case that the artist hadn’t looted me to make it, I would defend absolutely his right to offend me. That’s because I value free speech.

    ILC, since I am ambivalent here, I’m probably not making my point clearly. If I understand you correctly, you had a problem with public funding for “Piss Christ.” But even if that was not an issue, you would be offended by it, but obviously would not threaten violence to any party to the “art.” If I have the correct, that’s fine. And that’s all part of free speech.

    Also, I have no problem (sort of) with Muslims also being offended by the South Park, as long as they accept it as part of free speech.

    So my question is, should we do something that we know that is going to offend even those who are innocent (even though we know they understand free speech and all that)? Or should we even worry that a simple depiction of Mohammed is offensive to some, just as most Christians are not offended by Muslims who regard Jesus as only a prophet.

    I don’t know if this clarifies my point. Or perhaps this is an area of disagreement here.

    If drawing Mohammed means that some Afghan or Iraqi is less helpful to our military – fine.

    SoCalRobert, good point that I meant to address before. One of the supposed liberal arguments for not going to war with Iraq is that the people are not ready for freedom. While I was against the war, I didn’t believe the line about the Iraqi people not being ready for freedom (just that there are other factors, like powerful persons, who will do anything to stifle freedom). However, if Iraqi or Afghan soldiers are not going to be helpful to the cause because of this protest, then perhaps they are not ready for freedom.

    Comment by Pat — April 26, 2010 @ 12:05 pm - April 26, 2010

  20. So my question is, should we do something that we know that is going to offend even those who are innocent (even though we know they understand free speech and all that)?

    Yes. Fair question. And my question back is: Who’s innocent? Answer: Those Muslims who truly value free speech. (You would understand that Muslims are not children and are perfectly capable of valuing free speech.) But, being *by definition* Muslims who truly value free speech, they would be happy to defend the Mohammed drawings as, say, I am happy to defend artists who offend my religious sensibilities. Otherwise, no, they don’t truly value free speech.

    I am saying that the only Muslims who would truly be offended by Mohammed drawings are the ones who have already registered their outrage, in the form of death threats (or death “predictions”, wink) on Trey and Matt. Islamo-fascists whom we have, if anything, a moral obligation to offend.

    Or should we even worry that a simple depiction of Mohammed is offensive to some

    My answer to that is: No. (Reasons given above)

    if Iraqi or Afghan soldiers are not going to be helpful to the cause [of freedom] because of this protest, then perhaps they are not ready for freedom.

    That’s one way to put it. Here’s another. Ordinary Iraqis and Afghans have much, *much* bigger things to think about, than this protest. For example, escaping al Qaeda torture. The ones who are going to be offended by Draw Mohammed Day and motivated by it against the U.S., are the ones already fighting us and perpetrating such torture on their fellow citizens.

    That’s to the extent they even know about the protest. They already know enough, in a general way, that we aren’t Muslim and that we do things like, say, drinking alcohol, and Piss Christ (which offends them, BTW – Jesus is one of their prophets), and gay sex, and Britney Spears, and a host of other things besides drawing Mohammed. Trust me, I’ve been to Muslim countries and they already know, in a way that is general but fully adequate to their decision-making, about our devotion to free speech. That ship sailed a long, long time ago.

    Finally, let’s remember that CP is in the military and he’s the one who brought up Draw Mohammed Day. Evidently, he’s not all that worried. (I imagine, for reasons similar to what I just gave.)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 26, 2010 @ 1:10 pm - April 26, 2010

  21. I think it’s important to note, as well, in this debate what freedom of religious expression does and does not mean.

    It means your freedom to practice and express your faith, and my freedom to do the same with regard to mine.

    No one is talking about forcing Muslims, at gunpoint, to draw pictures of Mohammed. They are not being compelled to take part in this exercise.

    I’m not sure if anything very constructive can be accomplished by the whole “Draw Mohammed” thing, either. I don’t think I’d go very far out of my way to participate in it. But I do think that free speech is no less sacred for Christians than it is for Muslims.

    If the only difference we can find is that Muslims threaten to kill people who offend their sensibilities, while Christians don’t, sorry, but I don’t see the difference as one worthy of my respect as an American.

    Comment by Lori Heine — April 26, 2010 @ 5:08 pm - April 26, 2010

  22. After having read and thought about American Elephant’s posts, I am reconsidering the wisdom of Draw Mohamet Day period. He has valid points.

    Thank you Longviewcyclist! Its a great relief to have someone see reason.

    the point is that Muslims (obligatory disclaimer: not all, moderate, etc) do want us to change.

    SoCal, yes, your neighbors want you to change the color of your home. Do you go out and paint “F*ck You!” on the windows using the color they dislike just to establish that you still have the right to? That is EXACTLY what this childish liberal protest is doing. Actually its not, because in order to be akin to this mindless protest, you would have to paint “F*ck You’ on EVERY SIDE of your house, addressing it to ALL your neighbors, not just the ones who object to the color.

    Think that’s going to help your relations with your neigbors?

    No, because its gratuitous and your rights are not in doubt.

    Believe me, with the world saturated in American free speech there is no doubt that we retain the right to offend Muslims if we want to. In fact, Hollywood and the music industry offend them, making your point for you, every day of the week. So why is there a need to make a big show of intentionally pooping on their religion?

    All sorts of people want us to change in ways we aren’t going to change.

    Its actually the “F*ck Muslims Day” supporters who are changing their behavior.

    They’re succeeding in Europe and Canada – and in the US

    Ahhh, but as I said before, people in hell want ice water. Radical Islamic Fundamentalists want sharia. What people WANT is not an issue, what we give them is the only thing that matters. And the people who are changing their behavior are GIVING them power over them. They are changing their behavior. They are validating the tactics.

    More importanly, you are blaming Muslims when your real complaint is with liberal judges, politicians and bureaucrats who gave in to those demands out of political correctness.

    That’s the only danger to our freedom of speech here too.

    But flipping the bird to all Muslims certainly doesn’t make them want to change us any less, indeed it makes moderate Muslims LESS likely to listen to our arguments.

    When you want people to consider your ideas, it behooves you to not tell them to “f*ck off” while doing it. Save the insults for the douchebags we dont care about. Target them SPECIFICALLY. Instead of this childish lashing out at all Muslims.

    And when there are over 1 billion Muslims on Earth, we need to care about finding as many moderates as possible. Just as we need to care about making clear that our war is against Islamic extremists, not Muslims in general.

    This childish inept demonstration does the exact opposite, lumping ALL mulims in with the extremists who are our enemy.

    Something President Bush, our military and most conservatives who understand this war have gone to great lengths to NOT do.

    No one ever accused the left of intellectual consistency, but its disappointing to see so many on the right lose sight of it. (Well, some douchebags never had it)

    If drawing Mohammed means that some Afghan or Iraqi is less helpful to our military – fine. All the more reason for us to get out with a stern warning that the next time they attack us,

    The first problem with this arguement is that we DIDNT get out with a stern warning. Our troops are there in harms way, with a mission that will be FAR easier with cooperation from the people this demonstration would offend.

    The other problem is that it makes light of the many ways in which cooperation is in OUR interests.

    You dont want moderate Muslims informing on al Qaeda?

    I suspect you understand the value of that.

    With freedom of speech comes offense.

    Muslim countries dont HAVE freedom of speech. We’re talking about how to relate to people with different values.

    On the one hand, you are saying let them live in the 7th century with Sharia law, on the other hand, you are demanding that they value free speech.

    Sorry, you cant have both. And as I just explained, there are many reasons America needs to garner the support of, not spit in the eye of, moderate Muslims.

    Again, the first indication that it was a stupid, inept, counterproductive idea should be that it came from “progressives”.

    Comment by American Elephant — April 26, 2010 @ 7:09 pm - April 26, 2010

  23. Still following this story here and there. I missed this clip earlier: Ayaan Hirsi Ali on the South Park controversy:

    It is an assault on the freedom of expression, and we have to defend it tooth and nail. And that means we all stand by Mr. Stone and Mr. Parker.

    That’s just a teaser, STWT (about 7 minutes). Shockingly (to me at least), Anderson Cooper very nearly gets it.

    As sane people have no trouble seeing, the actual point of Draw Mohammed Day will be to defend our freedom by spreading the risk of retaliation. That is how the public can help brave souls like Stone, Parker, Hirsi Ali, and others who exercise and defend our freedoms at no small personal risk. Honestly, I’m still mulling over what my exact participation is going to be. But I will sure be proud of everyone who does participate.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 26, 2010 @ 8:07 pm - April 26, 2010

  24. American Elephant @ 72:

    And as I just explained, there are many reasons America needs to garner the support of, not spit in the eye of, moderate Muslims.

    This, AE, like everything you’ve said on this thread, is completely stupid.

    A muslim either understands that others are not required to agree with and abide by the strictures of Islam, or his isn’t a moderate muslim.

    There is a depiction of Mohammed on the US Supreme Court building in DC. Should we remove it because it might offend “moderate muslims”? Of course not.

    If the supposed moderates within Islam want their religion respected than they can take the front in fighting the nutcase fanatics of Islam. Or they can prepare to be offended.

    Comment by Classical Liberal Dave — April 26, 2010 @ 9:43 pm - April 26, 2010

  25. If the supposed moderates within Islam want their religion respected than they can take the front in fighting the nutcase fanatics of Islam

    Exactly. The “innocent” ones are the ones, and only the ones, who do that. And they’ll understand EDMD.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 26, 2010 @ 10:34 pm - April 26, 2010

  26. If these people didn’t run around flinging poop and screeching like monkeys every time anyone — however inadvertently — offended them, would this even be an issue?

    The folks in Europe are beginning to turn away from their longstanding dhimmitude and recognize that women don’t have to put up with being raped because people WHO CHOSE TO LIVE AMONG THEM are offended by their clothing, gays born and raised in a country should be safe living there regardless of what foreigners WHO CHOSE TO LIVE AMONG THEM happen to believe about them, etc.

    If you don’t think this is coming — and soon — to an American city near you, just think again. Leftists swoon over all the stale, crazy notions that float across the ocean from Europe.

    My initial reaction to this post was, I must admit, that the whole “Draw Mohammed” exercise sounded pretty frat-boy. But I understand the explanation that if we all stand together against having values hostile to our own forced upon us, those who screech and fling poop (or bombs) will have too many targets to handle.

    Comment by Lori Heine — April 27, 2010 @ 12:00 am - April 27, 2010

  27. This, AE, like everything you’ve said on this thread, is completely stupid.

    I’m sure that James Taranto, the editor of The Wall Street Journal’s Opinion Page and author of the invaluable daily, Best of the Web would be amused to know you think it’s stupid. Because he not only agrees with me, but his language and ideas are so similar to mine, it sounds as though hes been reading my comments:

    Everybody Burn the Flag
    If we don’t act like inconsiderate jerks, the terrorists will have won!

    …Until 1989, it was a crime in some states to burn the American flag as a political statement. In Texas v. Johnson the U.S. Supreme Court held that this is protected symbolic speech. In ensuing years members of Congress repeatedly tried to propose a constitutional amendment permitting the criminalization of flag burning. It is the view of this column that flag burning is and should remain protected speech. We deplore it nonetheless, and we think holding an “Everybody Burn the Flag Day” would be stupid, obnoxious and counterproductive if one seeks to persuade others that flag burning should be tolerated. [AE: gosh that language sounds familiar!]

    “Hate speech”–for example, shouting racial slurs, positing theories of racial supremacy or denying the Holocaust–is illegal in Canada and many European countries. In the U.S. it is protected by the First Amendment–but it has been known to provoke a violent reaction. Last week we noted that left-wing counterprotesters beat up members of a white-supremacist group who were holding a rally in Los Angeles. The Associated Press reports from Pearl, Miss., that “a white supremacist lawyer was stabbed and beaten to death by a black neighbor who had done yard work for him, police said Friday.”

    It’s not clear if the motive for the Mississippi killing was political, but surely everyone can agree that battery and murder are not appropriate responses to the expression of invidious views. This column is also of the opinion that hate-speech laws are pernicious and that the First Amendment does and should protect the expression of even ugly and false ideas. But we would not endorse or participate in an “Everybody Shout a Racial Slur Day” or an “Everybody Deny the Holocaust Day” to make the point.

    Why is “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” different? Because the taboo against depictions of Muhammad is not a part of America’s common culture. The taboos against flag burning, racial slurs and Holocaust denial are. The problem with the “in-your-face message” of “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” is not just that it is inconsiderate of the sensibilities of others, but that it defines those others–Muslims–as being outside of our culture, unworthy of the courtesy we readily accord to insiders. It is an unwise message to send, assuming that one does not wish to make an enemy of the entire Muslim world. [read the whole thing]

    I’d also point out that Taranto said,

    Our reflexive response to “Everybody Draw Mohammad Day”–which we too thought was serious, not having seen Norris’s cartoon or her disclaimer–was sympathetic.

    But part of being a conservative is NOT being reflexive, but actually thinking things through. If you want to be a knee-jerk lemming, be a regressive. That’s where emotional, reflexive, hysterical reaction has its home.

    I would also point out that the artist who STARTED the whole thing has since changed her mind and withdrawn her support of the event.

    Comment by American Elephant — April 27, 2010 @ 1:14 am - April 27, 2010

  28. […] think it appropriate for him to use this blog promote Draw Mohammed Day.  In the comment thread I agreed with Banzel: Not a good idea to gratuitously offend tens of millions of people (think depictions of […]

    Pingback by GayPatriot » Of group blogs & gratuitously offending — April 27, 2010 @ 2:59 am - April 27, 2010

  29. […] Norris, the cartoonist whose poster promoting “Everybody Draw Muhammed Day” on May 20th caused such a stir, has called it […]

    Pingback by GayPatriot » Molly Caves — April 27, 2010 @ 11:44 am - April 27, 2010

  30. we think holding an “Everybody Burn the Flag Day” would be stupid, obnoxious and counterproductive if one seeks to persuade others that flag burning should be tolerated.

    Taranto can think that, but I don’t.

    So yes, I think he’s being stupid here, same as you.

    Comment by Classical Liberal Dave — April 28, 2010 @ 4:40 am - April 28, 2010

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.