Thursday, May 20, 2010

RE: Everybody Draw Muhammad Day

Blogger ReeBz said...
According to the dictionary of "Oxford University Press"- "Oxford guide to British and American culture", Freedom of speech is :"The right to express any opinions in public. This right became part of American law under the "First Amendment". If the opinions expressed are false or damage a person's reputation,however that person can take legal action under US law. In Britain people are free to express most opinions,but it is against the law to express some ideas,e.g ideas that aim to cause RACIAL hatred."

All those who are defending the "draw Muhammad day" because of freedom of speech then they must learn that freedom of speech has certain limits too. it doesn't mean that you start jumping on others necks or you start humiliating them.

If the cartoon is just cartoon for you, then wait let me draw a very offensive and humiliating cartoon of yours,when you will be sparked with anger I will slap hard on your face and say "hey dude, do not be angry. Its freedom of speech." Same is the case now, first Molly Norris drew images for south park, when she was threatened by the Muslims which was of course natural and reasonable, followers of Molly Norris started a terrible contest on the name of freedom of speech. Shame on All! If hurting some ones sentiments is freedom of speech then m sure no one will mind if we draw same dirty, offensive images of yours.

OK, TOR here. As you might imagine I have a response to this. First I am pretty amazed that somebody from Pakistan read my blog. Seriously it is a small world these days. Anyway it is interesting that I wrote a whole post to go with the advertisement for draw Muhammad day. I decided not to publish it to keep things civil and avoid argument and such. Looks like that is out the window.

Not going to lie I read this in the morning and am replying later on my lunch hour. Sometimes it is better to cool down and write with a clear head. I will try hard to avoid personal attacks or attacks on religion.

Here is the American First Amendment- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. It is a  very complex amendment but among other things it says you can pray however you want, whenever you want and to whomever you want and I can say what I want. The concept in Britain that some speech should be banned or censured because people don't like it does not apply in America. We are different countries. In fact America fought a war with them in order to be able to make our own laws. Also I would point out that Muslims are not a race.

As to our First Amendment there is an interesting court case you should read called Hustler Magazine vs. Falwell.

The whole point of FREEDOM OF SPEECH is precisely that it does not have limits. Of course you can't slander people or yell fire in a crowded theater but other than that go for it. I can say whatever I want and so can you. In America I have to put up with the stupid opinions of all sorts of idiots saying ridiculous things. Some of their opinions anger and offend me. However everybody else has to put up with the stupid stuff that comes out of my mouth too. That is called freedom.

It is just fine to me if you do not want to draw Muhammad or not drink alcohol or eat bacon or whatever. I do not seek to impose my beliefs on you through force or any other way. Heck I won't even try through the free exchange of ideas. However I will be damned if I will let you force your opinions on me. As long as I follow the laws of my country (or wherever I happen to be) and don't harm anyone I will do exactly what I want, including drawing Muhammad.

You said "If the cartoon is just cartoon for you, then wait let me draw a very offensive and humiliating cartoon of yours,when you will be sparked with anger I will slap hard on your face and say "hey dude, donot be angry. its freedom of speech" " I am just fine with you drawing a picture of me or Christ or whomever you please. First I am fine with it because I believe in free speech. Secondly I have a sense of perspective and don't get my panties in a bunch every time somebody says or does a thing I do not like. Lastly I am fine with it because I just don't care at all about you or anything you do. You can die tomorrow or live forever, I am ambivalent. As a great quote said more or less "my freedom to swing my arm around ends when it hits someones nose."

"Same is the case now, first Molly Norris drew images for South Park, when she was threatened by the Muslims which was of course natural and reasonable" Here is where you really loose me. Your desire to force your views on others through the implicit threat of violence is not so cool. Do you think it is acceptable for everybody to do that or just Muslims, or just you? What if 10 men with guns came to your home and said if you continue to practice Islam they will do horrible things to you and kill your family? Would that be natural and reasonable?

There is no shame on all. SHAME ON YOU! Also shame on all those who try to force their views, religious or otherwise, onto other people through the threat of violence. 

Draw whatever you like and I will darn sure do the same.

Have a good day


Please note I would never want my readers share whatever views they have on this comment to its authors email ( or at its authors blog.


Anonymous said...


Excellent restraint! The bacon thing got me though. I'm inclined to tell Mr. Pakistan to go ahead and try to smack my face. We would then see how he likes to have one arm!

Finally, I'm not sure if it's cool or spooky that a whacky Pakistani is reading your blog given your profession. Just sayin'.

The Urban Survivalist said...

You pretty much summed up what I think is the opinion of most Americans. What does freedom of speech have to do with stepping on someone's neck or slapping someone in the face? I'm getting really sick of all of these red herring arguments that people try to throw into debates these days. Why do they do it? Because if they stick to realistic facts they don't have a leg to stand on or they don't think that they can make you understand their point of view. Back in the day it used to be called lying and cheating to get your way. It used to be unacceptable. It may be OK right now but people are opening their eyes enough to recognize it and we're getting serious enough about it to start calling bullshit.

Jennie said...

:-P I tried to submit a comment to him, but his blog comments are moderated. He might not post it.

I've got a beautiful picture I drew myself up today. I enjoy art. So glad I got the opportunity to draw today. :-P

Patriot said...


Chief Instructor said...

ReeBz - Our American freedoms allow me to not have to look at the "art" of Piss Christ, or listen to the racist rantings of the NAACP, La Raza or The Aryan Nation.

All of this may offend me, but it doesn't harm me. None of my rights to live freely have been infringed by their hateful words.

But, when you try to tell me what I have to look at, or what I have to believe, or how I have to act, then you're going to be in for a world of hurt.

Scott said...

I did want to point out one item that had mentioned regarding yelling fire in a theater. You can yell fire in a theater if it is on fire. Just thought I would add my 2 cents, now back to my crayons.

Michael said...

"no one will mind if we draw same dirty, offensive images of yours."

You, sir, are correct.

Joseph said...

Guys don't waste your breath, ReeBz clearly states on one of the blogs they run a few choice posts but my favorite comes from a pic on their site.

Freedom of Expression is Western Terrorism

Interesting ReeBz, blogger allows blogs like this to exists...why not ban them like Facebook? This type of hypocrisy reminds me of the liberal profs who complain about the rich while enjoying the perks their jobs provide due to the generous gifts and enrollment of wealthy families.

ReeBz said...

I donot want to reply anyone here, as I'm sick of you people. I have replied everyone individually at my own blog. Jennie there are many comments waiting for you, and yes an American also left a comment for you.

My blog doesn't contain any hate speech for anyone, nor does it include abuses for any religion.I'm amazed what gave you the shock there.
If you are annoyed by just a single picture, then tell me where is my right of freedom to speech?do all rights are for the West OnlY?

Plus,You like threatening others? who was offended by the Muslims when you drew images fort he south park?Then are you doing anything different here?Threatening me that i can lose my arm?
If so. then save yourself!Allah knows better who is going to lose who!!

I have found many many blogs who are nothing but sheer hatred and disrespect to Islam and the Muslims!!

theotherryan said...

ReeBZ, Your blog doesn't contain "hate speech" but it sure seems to condone threatening people with physical violence for saying things you do not like. In my book that is far worse.

Of course we get annoyed by things. However we don't just go around threatening people because they draw a picture we do not like. As for that "threat" against you I would say telling someone if they hurt you that you will hurt them worse is more of a warning of a good defense against YOUR AGGRESSION in slapping hard their face.

I have known, protected and worked to help many Islamic people in my life. This has nothing to do with Islam, just some fools who practice it.

You are missing the point. I do not hate Islam but I also don't practice it and thus I am not going to follow its rules. Darn sure nobody is going to make me follow its rules in a free country like America. If I went on a trip to Pakistan it would be another discussion.

Page said...

I know Molly Norris, both as a friend and as my former college student. I also live in Seattle, WA, ground-zero for the ‘Everybody Draw Mohammed’ cartoon she created.

I believe this issue has morphed into something more than The First Amendment Right: it is about Political-correctness, which has now reached a critical mass.

Although I can’t read a cartoonist’s mind (yet), but after reading over 2,000 blogs on the subject, I believe that neither Molly Norris nor anybody else could have predicted the firestorm of vituperative commentary and protests---for and against how our ‘First Amendment’ Rights should be expressed and against whom. I am certain that Molly Norris did not intend to offend Muslims and has apologized profusely for having done so, believing naively perhaps, that this is our primo American Right.

However, This is not the first time (or the last) our freedom of expression has become incendiary, either (when the Ku Klux Klan expressed their “right” to march in the Jewish suburb of Skokie, IL; Rodney King and LA riots, for eg.).

Political-correctness, however, is the bigger issue, I believe. As a practice, post-seventies, this is nothing less than propaganda in action. Political correctness aims to censor us all: to say what sounds right, instead of what is right; to say that all opinions are diverse and equal, rather than some opinions have been earned through educating ourselves first.

Just because everybody CAN say whatever they wish, without the responsibility of using their real names, or the chance to respond in a reasoned dialogue, doesn’t mean that they should, as Molly Norris, in fact, did.

I know I sound like a Luddite here, but the internet network of blogs, Face Book, and the like have taken political-correctness to new heights, without all the original fuss-and-muss of speaking to each other in person, and owning what we say.

Page Faulkner Mordecai, The Front Porch Talker

Page said...

AN ESSAY: (this is satire!)
Everybody Draw Mohammed Day : Why Political- Correctness is the ‘New-and improved’ First-Amendment!

-Having read over two-thousand blogs about my friend and former student, Molly Norris, and her ‘misadventures’ with satire (see “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day”), I see the bigger picture now of what Molly Norris was trying to say to the world.

I’ll tell you the truth: I feel qualified to judge her intentions as a cartoonist and, well, a good person. After all, I do fancy myself a ‘critic’ of sorts, now-a-days.

A writer-in-residence, literally, as it were now that, after seventeen years as an underpaid professor at Cornish College of the Arts (where I met my brilliant student, Molly Norris), I was forced-out of my job by a liberal at a Liberal Arts College, because I would not dumb-down my college courses.

And what cracks-me-up even more, being a gourmet irony lover, is this: guess who pressured me out of my job? Our college Provost at Cornish—and get this—she herself was a politically-correct provost who hailed, formerly, as a professor herself from a politically-correct college whose name I dare not mention. Hint: it was one of those ‘diverse,’ anybody-can-get-a-degree (for the right price).

Did I mention that our provost, and my fellow politically-correct professors from my department, HUMANITIES (and Sciences) all kowtowed with the provost. Yep: they were all feminists (even the men) AND ‘progressives. It seems: we didn’t need a REAL writing program or REAL thinking courses like my own: Special Topics in Literature. (by ‘Special’ I don’t mean SPECIAL, as in ‘SPECIAL CLASSES’).

Page said...


I disagreed. Well, this brings me back to the subject of Molly Norris, one of my most brilliant students who’d endured my ‘hard courses.’

Now, I find that she is famous! Or rather, she is infamous because of a ‘stand-alone’ cartoon that was manipulated by the Politically-correct faction in Seattle.

That would be Dan Savage, the sex advice columnist for ‘The Stranger,’ our ‘alternative weekly in Seattle. You may remember him by his antics—and one in particular stands-out to me now.
He had boasted publicly about purposely ‘infecting the doorknobs of a hateful Republican’ so that said-Republican would catch Savage’s flu.

It really reminds me of my own situation, but I digress here. It seemed that Molly had asked Savage to withdraw her cartoon, after realizing that she’d over-reached and had offended people. But Savage, (not unlike my former College Provost and my fellow professors at Cornish College of the Arts), being Savage, ran with her cartoon.
You know the rest of the story.

Funny how you don’t hear much about Dan Savage, but Molly Norris instead. I guess being politically-correct involves a few things that Molly did not have, but which Savage aced, he: had his own agenda! Never mind that he never took any responsibility for what happened, or bragged about infected doorknobs this time!

Anywho, you know the rest of the story, as they say. But now, after having read over 2,000 blogs about this res ipsa loquitur! (Latin really does sound fancy), not to mention that same cartoon of hers, I saw something new. It was there all along in her cartoon: subtle, and obviously missed by all but the most astute observers, as I am, of the cartoon genre--does that sound disrespectful to the ‘FUNNY COMMUNITY?’ –would FUNNY FARM OF PEOPLE SOUND BETTER? -- I have to be careful about what I say these days.

Anyway, it was there all along in her cartoon, and with my astute observations I got it: Molly Norris’ cartoon is REALLY about POLITICAL CORRECTNESS, NOT THE FIRST AMENDMENT. You have to read between the thimble and the coffee cup to see it.

Thus, as I fancy myself a ‘critic’ of sorts (as well as an underpaid professor without a REAL office), I will attempt to give you an honest metaphor, because that’s my job as a writer AND as a professor—to make a damned point!

Okay, so you know when you stare at a Rothko painting for too long, as I am doing now in my ‘HOME OFFICE’ (NOW THAT I DON’T HAVE AN OFFICE CUBICLE), you can see the deeper meaning of life? Sure, they’re just deep, deep colors: orange squares with a brown background that just happen to ALSO go with my couch colors.

It’s a lot like that. Molly Norris was making a point about political-correctness, but she just didn’t know it yet. Now she does. We had a long face-to-face coffee jag about this very subject, and it seems I am right: as usual!

So, what now? How will the world view this now? Molly and I plan to write more about this in the MOST POSITIVE AND ALL-INCLUSIVE WAY POSSIBLE, OFFENDING NOBODY WHILE ENTERTAINING EVERYBODY!
Stay tuned!

And, don’t worry! I promise that, between the two of us, we’ll turn this whole misunderstanding around and put the responsibility where it belongs. BTW, do you know of a good lawyer who might help?

Page Faulkner Mordecai , The Front Porch Talker

Page said...


It was daunting, really. I mean, you devote your entire life, or at least seventeen years of it, to teaching college and writing, and then one day you get sent out through the back-door: disability!

I’d been in a car accident and had had some severe issues with PTSD, due to a little crime perpetrated against me for five years, and there you have it: the stamp of shame: DISABILITY.

I don’t mean REAL disability, the kind that really means disability. It seems that the word, DISABILITY: is a EUPHEMISM for ‘your-courses-are-too-hard!’

In a college, like Cornish, where it is fully tuition-driven (READ: 15K/year to attend), our provost thought that our curriculum should be, well, more ‘student-friendly’ for ‘artists who can’t compete as college students.’

theotherryan said...

Page, That was a lot to try and digest. The whole point of free speech (which it absolutely opposed to "political correctness") is that you can say whatever you want no matter if somebody else doesn't like it.

Think I've read a column or two by him in The Stranger. Sorry to hear things didn't go well for you at work.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Popular Posts