Crumb said, "“I don’t have the courage to make an insulting cartoon of Muhammed.”
That's the way I felt. I wonder how I would feel if I was in my twenties though? It weird. I haven't taken Gods name in vane since I had a bar of Ivory soap shoved in my mouth. (yes--it used to be that way.) I still don't go to church, but I respect the God I was thought to fear, and love. I can't comment on other people's religion. I just know that
until I started to think for myself their was not much of a line between religion/reality. I feel uncomfortable writing this post. I guess because I'm scared of another attack?
I totally appreciate freedom of speech; but do find it tasteless and tactless to behave heedlessly to demonstrate this gift of civilized nations, in the wake of such a tragedy and in light of the multitude of faiths that lost their lives during the last few days.
I highly recommend Scott Long's piece
http://mondoweiss.net/2015/01/why-i-am-not-charlie
(extra points for reading it all), regarding the incident and it's aftermath; and implore us all to reexamine reflexive Acts of Solidarity and the Right of Free Speech in a pluralistic civilized society
You missed the part where reading the article would help inform you of the long storied tradition in France of this kind of purposefully highly offensive, highly satirical speech. It's like a French version of "truth to power". Their intent is offense, because no one should be immune to feeling offended, the powerful, hateful, etc. most of all.
Scott Long says, "There’s a perfectly good reason not to republish the cartoons that has nothing to do with cowardice or caution. I refuse to post them because I think they’re racist and offensive." I hear a loud whooshing sound as I read that. He completely misses both the tradition and purpose with which the cartoons were published, as well as the entire point of republishing them after the fact.
