When Comedy Central decided to edit and subsequently refuse to rerun a two part South Park they created quite a furor. Due in large part to the long term success of the show. Molly Norris on something of a lark as a local Seattle cartoonist was inspired to draw a cartoon that promoted "Everybody Draw Muhammad" Day. That is described in this link: http://blog.seattlepi.com/thebigblog/archives/221489.asp.
Molly was informed that she was on a hit list cobbled together by American in Yemen exile, Anwar-Al-Awlaki, who inspired the Fort Hood Massacre. The FBI advised her to go into hiding. She is not in a witness protection program, but of her own accord has changed her name and is no longer in the area. Will someone explain to me why this is not a HUGE story? An American citizen has taken the extraordinary steps of changing her identity resulting from threats on her life because she has "blasphemed" Islam. Whatever one thinks of her idea, this is still a free country! Why will no one stand up and defend her? Why must she hide for exercising her God given right to speak freely? She is now in hiding not because of the threats on her life, but because NO ONE has defended her.
I continue to hear the drum beat about Islamophobia and how we must respect all religions. Well, what about our values as a people? As a Nation? We are a community bound together by an idea, however varied our interpretation of those ideals. It is a basic function of humanity to seek protection,find comfort and avoid conflict. Sometimes conflict cannot be avoided. It need not be a violent conflict. It is a conflict rooted in defending principles which are new to print and practice in human history but have forever endured in the hearts of men and women.
Free Speech is a natural right! A NATURAL RIGHT! Speech is a basic function of our humanity,our biology and defines us as individuals and binds us as community. If we show the world that we will not stand up to those who label the most fundamental natural right "blasphemy", then why would they desist from further threats? It would be reasonable for them to conclude that we prefer life compromised by terror than the freedoms we express to cherish.
Why is everyone so afraid to define the enemy? Do people really believe that to identify "jihadists" as a threat is to smear all of Islam? Have we grown incapable of clearly delineating those who are peaceful in their faith and those who would exploit it for violent ends? Have we gotten so cozy with our liberty that we are unwilling to engage those who would deprive it? Have we become so gluttoned by benefits derived from the sacrifice of our forefathers that we are no longer capable of identifying those who espouse freedoms' eradication?
I'm not fond of drawing mythical parallels or "what if's", but if this were an evangelical that made the threat, would everyone just lay off the story? In our effort to be tolerant we have become unwilling to confront violent intolerance. We used to believe in this country that to deprive one person's rights was a danger to all of our rights. Recently, the ACLU has sued the State Department to determine what steps we are trying to take to eliminate Mr. Anwar-Al-Awlaki, the new grand wizard of AL-Qaeda, stationed in Yemen. Curiously, in defending Mr Awlaki's civil rights, why have they not reached out to save Molly Norris and defend her?
It's a strange country where we value the civil rights of a terrorist mastermind, but look the other way as a free woman is compelled by that same man to live a lie and change her identity. It seems to me we all have our priorities backwards.
No comments:
Post a Comment