Stirring the Pudding of Free Speech

The heading of this blog alludes to the impossibility of going back again and recent events highlighting comments by the Pope and other national leaders point to the speed with which the pudding is now stirred in this internet age. There is no acceptable apology possible for any remark since the ubiquitous offense has girdled the world three times before the speaker has put a period on the sentence. Any attempt to respond or explain is buried beneath the raging reaction of the offended party.

A number of columnists have taken up the "free speech conundrum" in the wreckage of the Pope's citation of a 14th century Byzantine who believed that Islam was spread by violence. Anne Applelbaum, in the Washington Post, rues that all subtle distinctions seem to be lost on fanatics, whose narrow claim to the title admit no variance or mitigation of the goal. One perceptive observation she makes is that most, ". . . fanatics attacking the pope already limit the right to free speech among their own followers. I don't see why we should allow them to limit our right to free speech, too." Read the whole article. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/18/AR2006091800992.html


Charles Krauthammer, who is normally a shade too conservative for me, also has some keen comments in his recent column. He says, "Religious fanatics, regardless of what name they give their jealous god, invariably have one thing in common: no sense of humor. Particularly about themselves." That got me to thinking that perhaps that's why all those religious jokes seem to start out with "There were three clerics out in a boat fishing--a Protestant, a Catholic, and a Jew rather than A priest, a rabbi, and an Imam were stranded on a desert island." Score one for Krauthammer.

Not only do today's Islamists seem unable to stomach any kind of joke about anything, Krauthammer goes on, but today's Islamists also have a tough time perceiving irony. The pope makes his reference to the 14th-century Byzantine emperor and to protest the linkage of Islam and violence we see Christian churches attacked, a nun killed, and Christians, including the Pope, condemned to death. This, says Krauthammer is certainly a fine way to refute the charge that Islam is a violent religion. That is spelled I-R-O-N-Y just in case you need to refer to a dictionary. Read the whole article. piece at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/21/AR2006092101513.html?nav=hcmodule

You cannot unstir a pudding, but you also cannot get two disparate elements to mix if you refuse to consider trying to put them together.