The Times has previously run anti-Semitic cartoons when they are in the news, Piss Christ, pictures of a painting of the Virgin Mary smeared with dung, and pictures of Westboro Baptist protesters in vivid anti-gay shirts. Is it the Times position that those decisions can be reconciled with this one, or is this a change in policy? If it is a change in policy, is it intended as an institutional one, or one that just remains during the tenure of a particular editor? . . . There are, as you know, different groups within Islam. What if a reform group began encouraging depictions of Muhammad as a signifier of reform, asserting that the contrary interpretation is false, and that those who attack depictions are wrong about Islam? How would you decide which faction to avoid offending? https://popehat/2015/01/13/a-few-questions-for-the-new-york-times-about-depictions-of-muhammad/
Posted on: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 02:06:34 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015