[Don't] Picture This

Some Muslims get bent out of shape over depictions of Mohammed, and non-believers make such images at their own peril. Ditto with some Christians when they think their religion is being ridiculed, such as in this ice cream ad from England (albeit without the death threats). And of course let’s not forget the ever-popular depiction of the Virgin Mary covered with elephant dung. (What, you thought I was going to post cartoons of Mohammed? I’ll risk the papal goon squads instead, thanks.)

Nobody wants to see their beliefs held up to ridicule. When you consider the fracas that results, one would be tempted to include acts of “sacrilege” with knee-jerk advocacy of rights that has no regard for their social impact. People should play nice (as if “should” always prevailed – besides, sez who?). But I think there’s a difference.

Defending the right to bear arms or to publish provocative material against efforts to curtail those rights purports to place the interests of individuals above those of society. Debates over these rights have to do with the regulation of action and the consequences of non-regulation, whether it be nutjobs going postal or kids emulating the violence of video games. It’s up to the people in a democracy to decide which they value more, individual rights or social tranquility.

On the surface, censoring religious (or anti-religious) expression seems to present the same dilemma: defending the right to the action of individual expression vs. promoting social cohesion. The difference is, this issue isn’t really about protecting individual action; it’s about protecting beliefs themselves from disparagement.

Making a declaration of belief or a challenge to that belief is an action that the individual is free to take. But do ideas themselves deserve protection from other ideas? Isn’t what’s going on just a form of natural selection, where only the fittest intellectual constructs survive? It would appear that less fit ideas – religious ones most prominently – are determined to not go down without a fight from their adherents. But do they need to have secular law in their corner, as seems to be the case in Britain? (Ironically, a recent Gallup poll showed that only 27% of Brits say that religion is an important part of their daily lives – as compared to 65% of Americans.)

It’s horrendous that a cartoonist now has to live in fear because she dared to confront an idea – today’s version of bear baiting. One envisions jihadist assassins in hot pursuit, and this scenario is likely to be repeated as long as people cling to beliefs and a rapidly contracting world makes such confrontations unavoidable. But as with the schism within America, never the twain shall meet. And nothing’s going to change until education wipes out ignorance for good.