Recently, two self-proclaimed jihadists drove from Arizona to Garland, Texas, intent on turning a Mohammed cartoon contest into a Charlie Hebdo event. They jumped from their car wearing body armor and firing assault rifles.
That was a big mistake. The police were waiting for them. Texas Cops 2, Jihadists 0.
In the aftermath of the attack, the organizer of the event, a political blogger named Pamela Geller, came under attack from both the left and the right for insulting all Muslims — not just jihadists who believe Allah commands them to kill in the name of their religion.
But Geller has her defenders. They compare her to Rosa Parks, the African-American woman who defied segregation laws by refusing to yield her seat on a Montgomery, Ala., bus, thus fueling the civil rights movement. Geller, they claim, was just standing up for free speech, and they accuse those who criticize her of kowtowing to Muslims.
As Geller puts it, “We have to have more of these conferences [the cartoon contest] because the media self-enforces the sharia.”
But free speech is not the issue here. No one is saying Geller did not have the right to put on her Mohammed cartoon contest. Freedom of expression protects actions some may find offensive and seek to censor. But one can defend that right without condoning the offensive action it shields.
In 1977, the American Nazi Party announced its intention to stage a march, complete with Nazi regalia and swastikas, in Skokie, Ill., a community where one in six residents was a Holocaust survivor. The Supreme Court ruled the march was protected speech. While I agreed with that legal decision, I strongly condemned the actions of the Nazis.
In 1987, artist Andres Serrano photographed a plastic crucifix he had submerged in a glass of his own urine. He received funding from the National Endowment of the Arts for this project. The photograph was displayed at the Stux Gallery in New York. As a Christian, I found this “art” extremely offensive, and I considered Serrano and the members of the board of directors of the Stux Gallery to be idiots. But idiocy is protected under freedom of expression.
In 2012, a series of protests erupted in the Muslim world over a trailer for a proposed film called the Innocence of Muslims that Nakoula Basseley Nakoula produced and posted on YouTube. This short video was condemned by the Obama administration and falsely blamed for the attack on the American consulate in Bengazi. Eyebrows were raised when Nakoula was quickly arrested for parole violations and held without bail. But his right to produce the video was never in question.
More recently, we saw students at Valdosta University in Georgia stomping on the American flag to protest “white supremacy” in America. Michelle Manhart, an Air Force veteran, was detained by university police when she tried to rescue the flag by snatching it from the protestors. The protestors had the right to do what they were doing no matter how offensive it was to some. Sometimes civil disobedience such as Manhart’s may be justified. (I would have probably done the same thing and accepted the consequences).
My issue with Pamela Geller and her cartoon contest has nothing to do with free speech; nor do I think she incited the jihadists to attack her event. Once these two men, recent converts to Islam, became radicalized, they were searching for a target to attack. No incitement was needed; if it was not the cartoon contest, it would have been something else. In fact, Geller may have saved lives by drawing these two jihadists to Garland, Texas, where the police can shoot straight, and ended their fantasies of slaughtering people to avenge the prophet.
I agree with Rev. Franklin Graham, the son of evangelist Billy Graham, who said on Fox News’ Fox and Friends that while he supports Americans’ right to free speech, the attendees at the Mohammad cartoon contest near Dallas were wrong to mock Muslims. “As a Christian, I don’t like it when people mock my Lord and savior, Jesus Christ. And what this event in Garland, Texas, was doing was mocking the Muslims. And I disagree with Islam; I don’t believe in Islam; but I’m not going to mock them and make fun of them.”
Moreover, Gellers’ event was counter-productive in our war against radical Islam. There are an estimated 1.6 billion Muslims in the world, and 2.6 million live in the United States. The vast majority practice their religion in peace. It is primarily in the Middle East and parts of Africa where Wahabism and Salafism have taken hold that we see violence and atrocities being committed in the name of Allah and the prophet Mohammed.
We are not going to bomb or drone these people out of existence. Unless we are willing to re-commit U.S. ground forces to that region of the world, we need the moderate Muslims of the world to stand up and fight to take back their religion from the radicals. Disrespecting and insulting all Muslims is not the way to win friends and allies in the Muslim world.
Geller may have had the right to hold her cartoon contest, just as the American Nazis had the right to march in Skokie, Ill. But I reject her contention that showing common decency and respect to Muslims is somehow self-imposing sharia law in America.
As Christians, we are taught to follow the Golden Rule: “do unto others as we would have others do unto us.” If we do not like seeing photographs of the crucified Christ emerged in urine or a painting of the Virgin Mary surrounded by elephant dung and pornographic images, then we should show the same respect to other religions that we want shown to our own. Geller may not have violated any civil law, but she violated common decency and respect, and for that she does not deserve respect and praise.
Comments are closed.