Well, that's one way to spend a Friday/Saturday

I just spent *literally* five hours reading about the Muhammad cartoons and reactions across the world. I'd probably be reading more if I wasn't so tired that I need to sleep, but I looked at the time and *realized* that I just spent five hours reading about this, and felt I should mention it. Perhaps because I am too burned out to say anything eloquent about it now. Not that much needs be said; I'm sure you can guess my opinions on the matter. If you don't know what I'm talking about, just google "Muhammad cartoon" -- you'll probably find more up to date info by the time you're reading this than I could link to now.

EDIT: Okay, it's the next day. I just woke up, so I'm not so coherent, but at least enough to realize saying "There's an issue I won't summarize and you can guess what I think" isn't too useful.

So here's ( a summary of the issue. )

What do I think? I think that no religious group has the right to foist their rules off on societies where free speech is (for now) a right. Sure, you expect people will be mad if you're Serrano making Piss Christ and it's largely for shock value, which I'd still say needs to be allowed. But the published cartoons are ostensibly being attacked not over the shock but because they violate an Islamic law about depicting the prophet. There have been many depictions of the prophet in the past, and (especially thanks to this) there will be many in the future. The world cannot be expected to follow each religion's religious laws. Some people find writing "god" offensive, and think it should only be writ "g-d". They are of course welcome to follow this law, and to ask their followers to follow this law.

But there is no right for a religion to impose religious laws on non-believers.

So that's my opinion on the depiction half of this controversy. And as for whether a publication should be allowed to make satirical commentary (be it in cartoon form or otherwise) about a touchy issue, that's the question about which I said you can probably guess my views.

Addendum to previous post

I've added a bit to my previous post about the Muhammad cartoon controversy. And I even managed to stay mostly to the crux issues, and not mention the blatant hypocrisies ranging from attacking cartoons much tamer than those you've published against your enemies, to killing those who imply you're violent. (How's that for praeteritio, eeblet?)

And I'll also say here that I'm somewhat disappointed in our government for not backing free speech and standing up for the papers and cartoonists, since free speech is one of those democratic values we pretend we're fighting to bring to other countries, but I suppose it's at least consistent given what we've seen of how much George W. Bush values free speech when it disagrees with him or his attempts to make our own country more theocratic.

(Funny, I was just talking with a co-worker yesterday about how close Islam really is to Judeo-Christianity.)