Pieter Dorsman reasons by analogy between Andres Serrano’s infamous “Piss Christ” and the recent controversy over the caricatures of Muhammad that appeared in a Danish newspaper and are now spreading across Europe’s media outlets.
Pieter Dorsman reasons by analogy between Andres Serrano’s infamous “Piss Christ” and the recent controversy over the caricatures of Muhammad that appeared in a Danish newspaper and are now spreading across Europe’s media outlets.
Like what you’re reading?
To view other posts at Signifying Nothing, please visit the BlogFront.
Chris was also formerly a contributor to Outside The Beltway.
Signifying Nothing formerly featured the stylings of Brock Sides, a left-leaning philosopher turned network administrator currently residing in Memphis, Tennessee who now blogs at Battlepanda, and Robert Prather, a libertarian-leaning conservative economist and occasional contributor at OTB.
Copyright © 2002–14 Chris Lawrence, Brock Sides, and Robert Prather.
The contents of this weblog are licensed under a
Creative Commons License.
3 comments:
One major difference: “Piss Christ” had government funding. He would have been free to urinate on as many crucifixes as he wanted on his own nickel. The primary objection, from a policy standpoint, was that it had government funding.
The cartoons have now been reprinted in newspapers in about a dozen European countries. This fact lends credence to the “clash of civilizations” argument – freedom of speech is not just a Danish thing, and other European newspapers want to let it be known.
My thoughts were the same as Robert’s. I’m a Christian, but I’ve never thought we ought to censor any commercial ventures that bash Christianity or any other religion.
Besides the “Piss Christ” analogy, I’m wondering if half as many liberals will criticize the Islamic reaction to these cartoons as accused Rudy Giuliani of crypto-fascism for disapproving of a Virgin Mary likeness created from dung.
I won’t hold my breath as I wait.