Not so funny

By the light of the arsons set after the publication in Europe of editorial cartoons considered by many Muslims to be blasphemous, the world has read newspaper articles about the two issues in conflict: freedom of the press and respect for religious differences.

Anyone who is not a Muslim faces the difficult task of understanding what the fuss is about. Catholics are accustomed to their religion being satirized, ridiculed and even slandered in movies and on television. The uproar in 1999 over a painting of the Blessed Mother that was speckled with dung is a prime example; the feelings of Catholics on that occasion can be recalled to slip into the shoes of those Muslims who want Mohammed to be left alone by smart-aleck cartoonists.

That being said, angry Catholics did not set fire to embassies or tear down storefronts to indicate their rage. They protested peacefully, boycotted the museum showing the "art," reclaimed their own appreciation for Mary and explained to others why the painting was deeply offensive.

The violence perpetrated by some Muslims in reaction to the cartoons is certainly disturbing and wildly disproportionate. On the other hand, coming up with proper adjectives to describe the reaction of the Vatican is not as easy (see page 7). Even allowing for its commitment to interfaith sensitivity, we find it troubling that the Vatican would declare that "the right to freedom of thought and expression...cannot imply the right to offend the religious sentiments of believers."

On the contrary: The right to freedom of thought and expression must encompass the right to offend people, politically, ethnically, nationally, religiously and in many other ways.

That does not mean the news media or an author should be offensive, only that he or she is free to be. The freedom to insult lies alongside the freedom to express loftier thoughts, including religious thoughts.

Those who endorse taking away the one freedom may find that others tumble after.

(2/9/06) [[In-content Ad]]