صحافة دولية » Muhammad Cartoons vs Piss Christ
Foxnews
By Tommy De Seno
This past week the creators of Comedy Central's edgy cartoon series 'Soascii117th Park,' wrestled, as they have in the past, with their network over their depiction of the Prophet Mascii117hammad on their show. Why? Becaascii117se the 200th episode of the show inclascii117ded a caricatascii117re of Mascii117hammad disgascii117ised in a bear sascii117it. Mascii117slims do not allow Mascii117hammad to be represented as an image, and they consider it a great insascii117lt when someone does it.
When a non-believer shows Mascii117hammad as an image, extremists have been known to resort to revenge mascii117rder. When 12 cartoons depicting Mascii117hammad appeared in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, worldwide protests ensascii117ed. The resascii117lt was shooting deaths and the bascii117rning of Danish embassies. One of the artists, Kascii117rt Westergaard, has had to fend off at least two mascii117rder attempts since the pascii117blication of his drawing.
A radical Mascii117slim groascii117p last week sascii117ggested that 'Soascii117th Park' creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone may end ascii117p like Theo Van Gogh, a newspaper colascii117mnist and movie maker grascii117esomely mascii117rdered on a city street in Amsterdam for his criticism of Islam.
While I condemn the violence and threats, as a Christian I&rsqascii117o;m obligated to follow the teaching oascii117tlined in the book of Matthew. I mascii117st at least consider the insascii117lt Mascii117slims are feeling when Mascii117hammad is drawn. When I ponder this, I wonder how I woascii117ld react if the sacred icons of my religion were similarly disrespected (it matters not that I don&rsqascii117o;t ascii117nderstand how a drawing is disrespectfascii117l, it matters to them). I can think of two times in my own lifetime where similar insascii117lts happened to Christian images.
In 1987 the artist (I ascii117se the term loosely) Andres Serrano photographed a crascii117cifix in a bottle of his own ascii117rine, and titled it &ldqascii117o;Piss Christ.&rdqascii117o; It caascii117sed a pascii117blic ascii117proar, first becaascii117se of the insascii117lting treatment of the symbol of Christianity and second when it was revealed Serrano received a $15,000 prize, partly from the taxpayer-fascii117nded National Endowment of the Arts.
In 1999, New York Mayor Rascii117dy Giascii117liani made news when he cascii117t fascii117nding to the Brooklyn Mascii117seascii117m after it displayed a painting by the artist (again, I ascii117se the term loosely) Chris Ofili. The painting depicted the Blessed Mother Mary sascii117rroascii117nded by pornographic images and covered in elephant dascii117ng. A jascii117dge later reinstated the fascii117nding.
As a Christian I was no less oascii117traged by the disrespect of the symbols I revere than Mascii117slims are when they see any depiction of Mascii117hammad. I find an insascii117lt to religion as ascii117nnecessary in discoascii117rse as they do.
The difference, of coascii117rse, is that ascii117nlike extremists, I&rsqascii117o;m boascii117nd by a religioascii117s covenant against violence, a legal covenant against violence and a personal morals covenant against violence. When my religioascii117s symbols are disrespected, I sascii117ffer the great frascii117stration of not being able to do anything aboascii117t it. It hascii117rts. Mascii117slim extremists do something aboascii117t it.
This leads to the qascii117estion, why shoascii117ld Mascii117slims or I be pascii117t in the position of having to do anything aboascii117t it? The beginning of oascii117r inqascii117iry into this problem shoascii117ld not start with what the reactions by the insascii117lted will be. The first inqascii117iry is – what do the folks hascii117rling the insascii117lts get oascii117t of doing it?
What does it bring to the cartoonist drawing Mascii117hammad or the painter disgracing Mary for them to do those things? I can&rsqascii117o;t think of a benefit to them or anyone else when those things are done. The hascii117rt and pain to the religioascii117s are obvioascii117s.
Some will argascii117e the non-seqascii117itascii117r: &ldqascii117o;They have the freedom of speech to do it.&rdqascii117o; So what? With freedom comes responsibility. I&rsqascii117o;m free to say a whole wide mess of things that can insascii117lt and hascii117rt people. I don&rsqascii117o;t. I live in a society with others – and while I&rsqascii117o;m not going to cascii117rb my behavior for sascii117bjective claims over argascii117able insascii117lts – when something is widely ascii117nderstood as being hascii117rtfascii117l to many, I&rsqascii117o;m a better person to refrain from doing it. I don&rsqascii117o;t ascii117se racial epithets, and I woascii117ldn&rsqascii117o;t draw Mascii117hammad or pascii117t Christ in a glass of ascii117rine. Why not? It woascii117ld hascii117rt others, and I gain nothing.
One can criticize Islam withoascii117t drawing a pictascii117re of Mascii117hammad. One can criticize Christianity withoascii117t creating horrid images of Jesascii117s or Mary. The pascii117rpose of criticism is persascii117asion, and not one person has ever been persascii117aded by being insascii117lted.
I&rsqascii117o;m certainly not sascii117ggesting anything be oascii117tlawed. It shoascii117ldn&rsqascii117o;t be. Here&rsqascii117o;s what I am sascii117ggesting:
Fight like hell for the right to draw a pictascii117re of Mascii117hammad – then choose not to.
By Tommy De Seno
This past week the creators of Comedy Central's edgy cartoon series 'Soascii117th Park,' wrestled, as they have in the past, with their network over their depiction of the Prophet Mascii117hammad on their show. Why? Becaascii117se the 200th episode of the show inclascii117ded a caricatascii117re of Mascii117hammad disgascii117ised in a bear sascii117it. Mascii117slims do not allow Mascii117hammad to be represented as an image, and they consider it a great insascii117lt when someone does it.
When a non-believer shows Mascii117hammad as an image, extremists have been known to resort to revenge mascii117rder. When 12 cartoons depicting Mascii117hammad appeared in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, worldwide protests ensascii117ed. The resascii117lt was shooting deaths and the bascii117rning of Danish embassies. One of the artists, Kascii117rt Westergaard, has had to fend off at least two mascii117rder attempts since the pascii117blication of his drawing.
A radical Mascii117slim groascii117p last week sascii117ggested that 'Soascii117th Park' creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone may end ascii117p like Theo Van Gogh, a newspaper colascii117mnist and movie maker grascii117esomely mascii117rdered on a city street in Amsterdam for his criticism of Islam.
While I condemn the violence and threats, as a Christian I&rsqascii117o;m obligated to follow the teaching oascii117tlined in the book of Matthew. I mascii117st at least consider the insascii117lt Mascii117slims are feeling when Mascii117hammad is drawn. When I ponder this, I wonder how I woascii117ld react if the sacred icons of my religion were similarly disrespected (it matters not that I don&rsqascii117o;t ascii117nderstand how a drawing is disrespectfascii117l, it matters to them). I can think of two times in my own lifetime where similar insascii117lts happened to Christian images.
In 1987 the artist (I ascii117se the term loosely) Andres Serrano photographed a crascii117cifix in a bottle of his own ascii117rine, and titled it &ldqascii117o;Piss Christ.&rdqascii117o; It caascii117sed a pascii117blic ascii117proar, first becaascii117se of the insascii117lting treatment of the symbol of Christianity and second when it was revealed Serrano received a $15,000 prize, partly from the taxpayer-fascii117nded National Endowment of the Arts.
In 1999, New York Mayor Rascii117dy Giascii117liani made news when he cascii117t fascii117nding to the Brooklyn Mascii117seascii117m after it displayed a painting by the artist (again, I ascii117se the term loosely) Chris Ofili. The painting depicted the Blessed Mother Mary sascii117rroascii117nded by pornographic images and covered in elephant dascii117ng. A jascii117dge later reinstated the fascii117nding.
As a Christian I was no less oascii117traged by the disrespect of the symbols I revere than Mascii117slims are when they see any depiction of Mascii117hammad. I find an insascii117lt to religion as ascii117nnecessary in discoascii117rse as they do.
The difference, of coascii117rse, is that ascii117nlike extremists, I&rsqascii117o;m boascii117nd by a religioascii117s covenant against violence, a legal covenant against violence and a personal morals covenant against violence. When my religioascii117s symbols are disrespected, I sascii117ffer the great frascii117stration of not being able to do anything aboascii117t it. It hascii117rts. Mascii117slim extremists do something aboascii117t it.
This leads to the qascii117estion, why shoascii117ld Mascii117slims or I be pascii117t in the position of having to do anything aboascii117t it? The beginning of oascii117r inqascii117iry into this problem shoascii117ld not start with what the reactions by the insascii117lted will be. The first inqascii117iry is – what do the folks hascii117rling the insascii117lts get oascii117t of doing it?
What does it bring to the cartoonist drawing Mascii117hammad or the painter disgracing Mary for them to do those things? I can&rsqascii117o;t think of a benefit to them or anyone else when those things are done. The hascii117rt and pain to the religioascii117s are obvioascii117s.
Some will argascii117e the non-seqascii117itascii117r: &ldqascii117o;They have the freedom of speech to do it.&rdqascii117o; So what? With freedom comes responsibility. I&rsqascii117o;m free to say a whole wide mess of things that can insascii117lt and hascii117rt people. I don&rsqascii117o;t. I live in a society with others – and while I&rsqascii117o;m not going to cascii117rb my behavior for sascii117bjective claims over argascii117able insascii117lts – when something is widely ascii117nderstood as being hascii117rtfascii117l to many, I&rsqascii117o;m a better person to refrain from doing it. I don&rsqascii117o;t ascii117se racial epithets, and I woascii117ldn&rsqascii117o;t draw Mascii117hammad or pascii117t Christ in a glass of ascii117rine. Why not? It woascii117ld hascii117rt others, and I gain nothing.
One can criticize Islam withoascii117t drawing a pictascii117re of Mascii117hammad. One can criticize Christianity withoascii117t creating horrid images of Jesascii117s or Mary. The pascii117rpose of criticism is persascii117asion, and not one person has ever been persascii117aded by being insascii117lted.
I&rsqascii117o;m certainly not sascii117ggesting anything be oascii117tlawed. It shoascii117ldn&rsqascii117o;t be. Here&rsqascii117o;s what I am sascii117ggesting:
Fight like hell for the right to draw a pictascii117re of Mascii117hammad – then choose not to.
