The same magazine got into big hot water by republishing the Danish Mohammed cartoons a few years ago -- so this will probably be treated as an insult too. But it is more a compliment as far as I can see. The magazine is a generally Leftist one but with anarchist tendencies too
A French satirical weekly says it has named the Prophet Mohammed as "editor-in-chief" for its next issue to celebrate the election win of Tunisia's Islamist party.
The publication Charlie Hedbo also said the issue that comes out on Wednesday will be re-named "Sharia Hedbo" after senior transitional Libyan leader Mustafa Abdel Jalil said that Islamic sharia law will be the basis of legislation under the country's new regime.
"To fittingly celebrate the victory of the Islamist Ennahda party in Tunisia ... Charlie Hedbo has asked Mohammed to be the special editor-in-chief of its next issue", the magazine said in a statement.
"The prophet of Islam didn't have to be asked twice and we thank him for it," the statement said.
The publication's editor in chief and cartoonist Charb told AFP that "We don't feel like causing further provocation. We simply feel like doing our job as usual. The only difference this week is that Mohammed is on the cover and it's pretty rare to put him on the cover."
Source
UPDATE: As I expected, the magazine's premises have now been attacked
14 comments:
Please forgive me for using this commment field to make a general comment instead of commenting on the specific item to which this comment should belong.
Some recent contributions, including my own, have lamented the extent to which free speech issues on the TT forum seem to be taking a back seat to issues of "left" and "right". To a large extent, this is the fault of the contributors but I think that Jon may be inviting such responses by his choice of topics.
I have to ask myself why the topic:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/10/31/georgia-university-forces-employees-to-sign-statement-rejecting-homosexuality/?test=latestnews
did not make it onto TT this morning.
Do they also feature all the children Mohamhead raped?
Will they dare show those muhamed cartoons?
camping in city parks is not speech.
oops, wrong thread. sorry
How about what the muslims did to the christians they captured during the crusades
What, if anything, does this have to do with the objectives of TongueTied?
The protests (which I am sure will follow) might well be relevant - but this isn't.
John Paladin
Jonathan
Most of what I put up here comes from alerts I get from readers and conservative sites
I had simply not seen the article you refer to
The right of a Christian organization to insist on Christian behavior among its employees has been contested but at least in the USA it has generally survived challenge
It looks like their offices got firebombed already.
Jon, the principal reason why I believe that the article on Shorter "University" (as they call themselves) should appear in TT is that they went beyond the mere requirement that faculty should abstain from sexual practices deemed undesirable by those in charge. They require a signed statement. Thus, they require an affirmative statement of opinion that agrees with their views.
Until this item broke, I had no idea that they were a Christian group. They advertise extensively on TV and never mention a word about any religious affiliation. The advertisements promise early graduation and employability. I find it repugnant that they should require a particular expression of opinion on the part of their employees.
Jon, would you consider adding a general discussion forum to TT?
Jonathan
I think the point of the statement they require of their staff is much more than an expression of opinion. I think the idea is that they undertake to LIVE by Christian rules
Monasteries have always done that sort of thing so it is just one part of the Christian tradition that people can choose to be part of or not
I gather that nothing similar is required of students
For centuries monks too taught the people without requiring the people to adopt monkish rules
Jonathan: Is this any different than a school kicking out a graduate student out because she is a Christian who wont give up her beliefs that homosexuality is wrong? How is it wrong for a private Christian college require an affirmative statement of opinion that agrees with their views from their PAID employees, yet right for a public institution to kick out a paying student unless she signs an affirmative statement of opinion that agrees with their views.
No matter what you jerks say, things will always be the same. Give up.
Sorry, but giving up is the last thing we should do. I will fight to the death to uphold the liberties and freedoms we enjoy in the United States. If you are not willing to do so, then go find another country to live in.
Post a Comment