I have long been a fan of South Park. I love the fact that they are absolutely brutal satirists, but balanced in their presentations. As I was watching this weeks' episode, there were several bleeps in the show. The very mention of the name Muhammad was bleeped off the episode and any image of Muhammad was censored with a large black bar labeled "censored". At first like the previous weeks' 200th episode, I thought this was Matt Stone and Trey Parker's efforts to make a point about free speech. After all the episode also suggests Jesus is downloading internet porn and shows Buddha snorting cocaine. Clearly the censored image and mention of the name Muhammad was an artistic license in demonstrating hypocrisy.
I was wrong, as it turns out. Moreover the roughly 35 seconds that was bleeped at the end of the episode was not the mere mention of the name Muhammad, but bleeped out dialogue talking about how we can't allow ourselves to be intimidated into silence. Honest to God.
All of this began in the wake of last week's episode. A Muslim grouped based in New York called "Revolution Muslim" warned that Stone and Parker would suffer the same fate as Dutch film maker Theo Van Gogh, who was brutally murdered in the streets of Amsterdam after producing a film about how Muslim women are treated in Muslim nations. This may be shocking, but not as shocking that the Department of Homeland Security seems to have ignored the tacit threat of violence.
We, as Americans are indeed fortunate to live in a free nation, one that provides for individual worship without persecution or fear of diminishment in its free exercise. Obviously, as a product of our natural rights of speech and expression, our faith may be equally subject to ridicule and satire. Of course, we are free not to associate with those with whom we find offense. It's not just the American Way, it's an inherent function of our humanity.
Why in recent years have we applied such a brazen double standard regarding the sensitivities of Muslims while tolerating satiric jabs at every other faith? Why is an image or the mention of Muhammad censorable, but not a scene of Buddha snorting coke? Violence, the real and perceived threat of force has resulted in a willing,voluntary abridgement of free speech.
Why should we censor ourselves out of fear? Why does Islam get a pass? Muslims, like all of us can choose with whom they associate, so if offended the options are identical. It means changing the channel. All it takes is a universal remote control for your television.
Islam, as a faith has existed for fourteen hundred years. How is it possible for one episode of an adult cartoon to be perceived as a threat to fourteen centuries of faith?
This may seem like a trivial matter, but it's not. It's an issue that strikes at our historic foundations as a free nation and a violation of our most fundamental of all natural rights, the right to free speech. Free speech is a natural right because speech is a basic function of humanity, both biologically and in turn socially.
In recent decades, western nations have trumpeted tolerance for all peoples and traditions, but in so doing have incrementally conceded our natural rights and traditions for fear of offending those whose history is seemingly contrary to ours. Tolerance is a noble concept among nations,faiths and cultures if there is mutual respect. Tolerance is fatal however if one side concedes its historic values to the whims or demands of another.
Today, a Danish cartoonist is hiding in fear for his life. Salman Rushdie is still in hiding. What has been our response? Almost universally, it is the cartoonist or the film maker that has been criticized for being provocative. We used to be a society that cherished dissent no matter how offensive because we understood that our fallible nature may not objectively establish a criteria for acceptable expression.
Where is the outrage from prominent journalists and media outlets? There are a handful of reports but no editorializing. Freedom is not exclusively defended by soldiers on the battlefield. If the pen is mightier than the sword, then surely we can deprive our posterity of needless bloodletting by wielding this great weapon in the defense of the principles and values established boldly by our forefathers.
This nation was not forged into a great republic with a minds' eye towards the reductions of our natural and enumerated rights for fear of terror. Free Speech. Free Expression.Free Association.Free Press.Free Worship and many more. We have a duty to preserve for future generations the unfettered freedoms that every generation prior has secured for us in the present. When our natural rights are threatened or intimated by those with a subjective definition of blasphemy, it is our moral obligation to stand fast in defense. We must risk being labeled intolerant in our unwillingness to restrain ourselves and others in exercising our right to free speech. If the forces of hate and intolerance can intimidate a major corporate entity like Viacom to edit a cartoon, it becomes easier to intimate the individual.
This isn't just about South Park or whether you enjoy the show as I do or are offended as many have expressed over the years. They have made an effort to expose hypocrisy in the exercise of those rights we all enjoy. Matt Stone and Trey Parker have exhibited true courage in a world that cares more about avoiding conflict than defending right. The response from the fourth estate, the "guardians" of the public good? If you listen carefully you can hear a pin drop. Sad but true.
No comments:
Post a Comment