Very thoughtful

and "Call the wahmbulance!"

Thanks, bigtree.

but the penultimate panel is not a cartoon or satirical image, it is of a photo of something that actually happened and outraged most of the world, including us.
There is nothing in common with this image and satirical cartoons.

sorting out how we fit in each other's world."



Excellent words. Excellent cartoon.

and you have to post yet another "it's horrible, but" post. Sometimes this place is truly obtuse.

praise the Lord, or as you choose.

Cartoonishly clear how hate begets hate begets hate and now is the time to reflect on that and not repeat the criminal reaction of Bush and company.

...not only those opinions which seek to moderate hateful expressions, but also those who have expressed an intention to double down on similar satire as a protest against the killings.

It's the latter which I believe has prompted many to have this discussion now; perhaps with an eye toward limiting imprudent and provocative expressions which could exacerbate and inflame passions in retaliation or support.

Can't you see where "prudent" and "proactive" might go?

"Crime! You are spreading hate against Mexicans!"

"Crime! You are spreading hate against Indians!"

And on and on.

I don't think that's something we should shy away from out of some fear that some other speech may be stifled or limited. On the issues you describe, it's perfectly fair to make those judgments and you're certainly allowed to disagree.

it doesn't carry the force of law.

The drawings here are racist depictions. Drawing Muhammad is a victimless act that doesn't stereotype or hurt anyone. Bashing religion doesn't hurt anyone either.

Being racist is not the same thing as attacking / laughing at religion, or doing something that fundamentalists don't want you to do because their religion forbids it.

which I personally find offensive in the same way I find other anti-Semitic cartoons offensive.

Cartoonists should be able to draw whatever they like and challenge everything, but doesn't mean that everyone has to like them.

won't be murdering cartoonists anytime soon.

They'll be civilized like normal human beings and work through organizations like the ADL.

as fine examples of freedom of speech do we?

I don't celebrate any cartoons that broadbrush a whole group of people. Cartoons have been used in the past to denigrate and instigate violence against black people and jewish people. There is a documented history of that. (I wouldn't reproduce those cartoons here to make my point because I think they're offensive).That's nothing to celebrate but at the same time we can't hold the cartoonists responsible for other people's actions.

You want to limit speech? Are you willing to start with ending the railing of clergy who constantly speak trash about LGBT in this country? There are stories about that almost everyday on DU. Where are you in those threads?

...you must be joking. There are countless threads which denigrate into nonsense here where I'm not the least interested in jumping in, nor am I convinced in the least that my voice would make a dime of difference in many of them. That standard you're expressing isn't even one that you, yourself uphold. Is there really a need to weigh in on every argument here on speech, just to post an opinion panel by a satirist on the limits of his trade?

To answer your one question, no, I don't want to 'limit' speech, but I do understand the reactions of those who are wary of a motivation to accelerate hateful expressions as a way of protesting this particular violence. To use opinion (speech) to influence folks away from those hateful, offending expressions is, I think, what 'free speech' is all about. I think that's a worthy pursuit, given the potentially dangerous nature of the incidents.

It's a pretty far-fetched assumption that I wouldn't be as adamant (or haven't been already) about other speech associated with violence or bigotry.

but the final panel is gold...

is that they don't get to enforce their religious beliefs about depicting Mohammed on the rest of us.

Same reason we don't make fucking excuses for Christians who bomb abortion clinics.

...that's the essence of advocacy.

I don't think most advocates of limiting hateful or offending expressions (especially in dangerous or volatile atmospheres) are talking about 'enforcement.'

There is a huge difference here.

TRANSLATION:



Fuck that noise.

Right.