Religious Respect and the Press

I was reminded yet again today how our mainstream media has differing standards for different cultures, despite all their bleating abiout 'multiculturalism'. The Boston Globe opined against the famous Muhammad cartoons recently published by a Danish newspaper, complaining that,

...publishing the cartoons reflects an obtuse refusal to accept the profound meaning for a billion Muslims of Islam's prohibition against any pictorial representation of the prophet. Depicting Mohammed wearing a turban in the form of a bomb with a sputtering fuse is no less hurtful to most Muslims than Nazi caricatures of Jews or Ku Klux Klan caricatures of blacks are to those victims of intolerance.

Really? Where was all this respect for religion when the Brooklyn Museum decided that covering a depiction of the Virgin Mary with dung passed as 'art'. At the time, the Boston Globe said,

The mayor said: "You don't have a right to a government subsidy to desecrate someone else's religion." It's a passionate argument, but it ignores the facts and the law. None of the $2 million for the "Sensation" exhibit came from New York City. Serious allegations have been raised about the museum's fund-raising for the exhibit, but that is a separate issue.

Note that the paper didn't seem to feel that Christians had any right to be offended, and certainly the paper did not take their feelings about their religion into account. This same double-standard is applied to actually reporting the news. In the United States, the Press does their best to out anything that might be dtrimental to the governemnt- especially when a Republican Administration is in charge. Contrast this with their willingness to self-censor when they are dealing with non-Christian countries, most infamously by Eason Jordan and CNN in their incestuous relationship with Saddam Hussien's Iraq (and more recently, Google's Chinese portal). Maybe that is why the world's media are so against the removal of Hussein's regime- their lovely little insider status, along with who-knows-what other perks, went away with it.

Is it too much to ask that the Press exhibit even-handedness in regards to ALL religions? I can understand why the world's Muslims are so upset. However, in comparison to the attacks that Chrisitians endure on a daily basis from the Press, this was pretty tame. Even the Boston Globe ought to understand that. If not, perhaps they might want to review their own archives.

And if you are not familiar with said cartoons, seeing as how our 'objective' media won't publish them (imagine if they were anti-Christian; I think I can safely guarantee they would be on everyone's front page in that event) you can view them HERE, courtesy of Captain's Quarters. In the meantime, Michelle Malkin has an honor roll of every blog who has so far had the will to publish these. And the Muslims are giving support to the idea that they are a bunch of crazed theocratic maniacs who want to kill or conquer every non-Muslim in the world- just like the cartoons suggested they were. And by the way, for you Press People, when was the last time the much-maligned Christian Right ran around firing off guns, shouting 'God is Great' and threatening to kill/kidnap/destroy those who demean them in print? Just asking....

Hat tips to Glenn Reynolds, Michelle Malkin and The Volokh Conspiracy.