Offendamused

Brian Hokanson has called me a racist idiot because I advocated publishing and re-publishing controversial Danish cartoons in yesterday's post. I have to confess some surprise. At the risk of leading with my chin: I have never been called either an idiot or a racist in my entire life. I never knew it was possible to be simultaneously offended and amused.

But let's talk a little civics; let's talk logic, too. Heck, let's talk both.

First civics: My position is informed by The Bill of Rights. Shortly stated, I believe in it to the bottom of my American soul. In this particular case, I believe the Danish Newspaper has the right to publish the cartoons. I do not believe any person or government has the right to threaten or carry out violence against the artists and editors for doing so. Believing that, Brian, does not make me racist.

The ACLU certainly doesn't think so. Of course, using your tortured logic, the ACLU would be the most racist organization in the world. Afterall, they regularly defend racists' right to say what they need to say. They defend racists, therefore they must be racists. An attorney defends a serial killer, therefore he must be a serial killer. Oh I don't know, You decide, Brian, is that logical or not?

Please, I urge you to read Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on why the ACLU defends free speech for racists and totalitarians. In particular, "But isn't a demonstration in an intensely hostile area the same as falsely shouting "fire" in a crowded theater?" and, "Hasn't the Supreme Court said that certain kinds of communication – like hurling epithets at another person – are so likely to lead to fighting that the speaker, and not the audience, is responsible? Isn't the display of a swastika or the burning of a cross the same as such "fighting words?" Read this Brian. Pay your membership dues. Develop an understanding of why free means free.

The truth is, the civics of the matter support my position. Nobody on earth has the right to restrict my speech with a threat of bodily harm. If you don't believe that, I guess we can agree to disagree, but believing that does not make me a racist or an idiot.

Finally, Brian, I find it extremely interesting that you seem to say one thing with your words while doing quite another with your actions. You contend the following:

I have to wonder if the many people on both the left and right who want to see these cartoons published again and again have actually seen them. Evidently Chris has, because he links to them here. They are extremely offensive and extremely bigoted - even beyond the fact that simply depicting Mohammed in any way is offensive to Muslims, these are drawn in the same way I imagine cartoons of African Americans were drawn in the 1940's and 50's. One shows Mohammed in a police lineup; one saying, "Stop, we ran out of virgins," one with a bomb on his head, one with his tongue hanging out. They have no artistic merit whatsoever and make no point.

How did you arrive at those conclusions, Brian? Did you perhaps look at the cartoons? Did you avail yourself of a free press and evaluate them for yourself? I most gratefully did. By the way you don't have to imagine how black people were depicted in the 40's and 50's. Unless the thought police on the left and right finally get their way, we continue to live in a free society. You you have access to fountains of information. There is no need to remain ignorant.

Finally, and perhaps most tellingly, if you are so opposed to publishing the cartoons, why did you publish them? You link to them in your post. Do you think you should have your head cut off for doing so?

I thought not.