“Draw Muhammad” contest winner isn’t backing down (and neither should you)
Never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever stop speaking freely
Controversial cartoonist Bosch Fawstin has received more than a dozen death threats since he took the top prize at the now-famous “draw Muhammad” free speech rally in Garland, Texas last month. The event descended into chaos after two armed terrorists attempted to storm the venue.
Fawstin appeared on last night’s (technically this morning’s) episode of Fox News’ Red Eye, and had great things to say about the threats against his life, the work he does, and the importance of boldly insisting on free speech.
As Americans, when we’re told not to do something, we tend to do it.
I love this. It applies across the board, to every issue currently dominating the 24 hour news cycle.
Last week was a bad week for the spirit of the First Amendment. We all know that, when it comes to black letter law, “Congress shall make no law” has its limits. It can prevent the government from shutting down speech, but it can’t do much about the people in my Facebook timeline who waste their precious days telling me how I can and cannot feel about the Confederate Flag, Obamacare, or gay marriage. In the words of marriage equality activists, “love won,” but dissenters lost more than just a court case.
The push we’re seeing isn’t a push for more expression, but for less expression. Dissent isn’t patriotic anymore—it’s hate. Be careful when you question the mob, lest the mob feel uncomfortable with being questioned. In 2015, government censorship is still a concern, but it can’t compare to the swiftness and voracity of the civilian mob.
Just as a matter of preference, subversive speech isn’t my ideal method of protest. I’ve never been one to wave a sign, draw a cartoon, or stand with a bullhorn and demand action on the steps of the capitol. I sometimes have knee-jerk reactions to these types of things (which, whatever my reaction, proves that the protesters are doing their jobs well. I noticed.) That being said, I find myself reminding friends and colleagues that, when it comes to the spirit of the First Amendment, it doesn’t matter how I feel about it. It doesn’t matter if it’s a bad idea, or unpopular, or abrasive, or mean, or edgy.
What matters is that it is. Fawstin’s position on free speech is 100% correct—we have a right to speak, we will speak, and we will participate in this discussion whether you like it or not. I think we should take this spirit to the debate over Obamacare, gay marriage, abortion, the EPA, and anything else the social justice warriors try to throw at us in the run up to the 2016 elections.
If their tactics keep working, leftists won’t even have to come up with progressive policy solutions to radicalize their flock; all they’ll have to do is whip their base into a frenzy over the fact that a debate is even happening over abortions/gay weddings/entitlements/guns.
That fact is scary; the reality that it could work is terrifying—and the only way to fight it is to embrace the debate, and never, ever, ever stop speaking freely.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Those Pu@#### at the NYT ran a picture of the Pope made out of condomes -but wont run Charlie Hebdo comics.
The NYT is run by Queens of the double standard.
I came here to say the NY Times isn’t backing down …
… and then say what you said.
You beat me to it.
Don’t any of the layers and layers and layers of fact-checkers and editors, at least for c.y.b.a.** purposes, stop and think about yet again publishing a picture of an arguably anti-Christian “work of art”?
** cover your biased arse
…layers and layers and layers…
It appears as if you’ve run out of ‘W’s
The highest American medal to honor a non-military citizen should be given to this brave artist, Bosch Fawstin.
And Pamela Geller.
marriage equality activists, “love won,”
It was never about marriage equality. It was about selective exclusion. Love lost and now the liberals are scrambling to rationalize denying equal rights to others. For some reason, they cannot simply apply the pro-choice doctrine to rationalize selective exclusion. If only for the reason that they do not want to form negative associations between abortion and trans behaviors.
To be fair, love lost with the gender equivalence movement, and specifically the sexual revolution (e.g. progressive morality). Removing women from the “kitchen” to serve as womb banks and men as sperm depositors in order to force normalization of trans orientations and behaviors (e.g. homosexual), and dysfunctional heterosexuals, only amplified the loss.
How about draw a “progressive liberal”?
Wow, so does this mean we can all go back to drawing the Second Confederate Navy Jack without being hated on by the libs?
Hateful bigoted putzes should be required to prominently display “Piss Christ” with their so-called “cartoon” hate speech.
I await you putting that before your Congressional representatives to see how well that does in the legislature.
Whadda moron…
This is why, a couple of weeks ago, I suggested that another planned “draw Muhammad” contest (in NH) be open to drawings of all religious leaders, and restricted to depictions that are flattering. Such an event would take the teeth out of attitudes such as that displayed above, while still revealing Islam’s fundamental incompatibility with free expression because Muslims would still react violently. They don’t want respect for their religion or Muhammad, they want everyone to behave according to the dictates of Islam – creating de facto Muslims of us all.
All this fuss over “Draw Obama Day.”
er…. Muslim Muhammad…….