Archive: May 2, 2010 - May 8, 2010
Of all the attributes that define human beings, our need to form strong emotional attachments to each other may be the most profound. And of these attachments, the bond between a mother and her infant is the most fundamental.
By Deepak Chopra | May 7, 2010; 9:29 PM ET | Comments (0)
We have constantly expanded the tent of America, but it may be time to consider if the tent has become so broad that the cloth is stretched too thin.
By John Mark Reynolds | May 7, 2010; 3:21 PM ET | Comments (2)
Unless and until the government can assure artists or speakers that they will be safe, I cannot fault them for tempering their words and images (though I wish they did not have to do so.)
By Ronald Rychlak | May 7, 2010; 11:31 AM ET | Comments (0)
Those who restrict the freedom of expression are not supporting democracy, they are diminishing it. A nanny state is not a free one. Violence and intolerance are pathologies that cannot be cured by fear any more than AIDS or cancer can be cured by fear.
By Ramdas Lamb | May 6, 2010; 2:42 PM ET | Comments (2)
Many times we avoid the truth. Our prophets beg us not to fool ourselves. Only by facing up to truth can we manage sticky realities and improve them.
By Erica Brown | May 6, 2010; 1:55 PM ET | Comments (0)
I can only imagine how I would feel as a Christian woman if I were told that I couldn't wear a necklace with a cross, or if, as a minister, I were forbidden to wear the clerical collar of my office. While I don't claim to speak for Muslim women, here is how I imagine I would feel if similar restrictions were put on my relationship with God:
By Janet Edwards | May 6, 2010; 12:47 PM ET | Comments (0)
How possibly can the dogmatically assertive force of extremist Islamist justice possibly square with the overt expressionism and ebullient spirit of an irreverent America? One is synonymous with irrational terror and the other with an irrational optimism.
By Aseem Shukla | May 6, 2010; 12:56 AM ET | Comments (9)
Freedom of expression doesn't mean very much if it doesn't include the right to offend. In a free society, blasphemy, however outrageous, is protected speech - and no violation of religious freedom.
By Charles C. Haynes | May 5, 2010; 7:04 PM ET | Comments (23)
Western democratic governments suffer from a double handicap when they encounter extreme behavior from other cultures. In a contemporary context, these behaviors are often connected with some expressions of Islam.
By Adin Steinsaltz | May 5, 2010; 10:00 AM ET | Comments (5)
Can we be upset in these times of heightened national security that the Belgians and French want to know who is walking around on their streets? And in these times when sensitivity about religion and respect are at a boil, cannot the arbiters of Western media show a little restraint?
By Feisal Abdul Rauf | May 5, 2010; 9:48 AM ET | Comments (26)
Free societies ought to have the social and cultural space for diverse religious expressions or no religious expressions at all. They ought to go beyond tolerance to hospitality to the Other. However, violence and the threat of violence have no place in a free society, and we all ought to say so.
By Valerie Elverton Dixon | May 4, 2010; 4:19 PM ET | Comments (9)
Banning burqas doesn't do anything to foster a more open society. It just inflicts a secularist ideology (which is just as much closed-minded as any other fundamentalism) on unwilling citizens.
By Nicholas T. Wright | May 4, 2010; 1:18 PM ET | Comments (2)
The verbal assault on Islam can be seen as an extension of the military assault that is waged everyday in Afghanistan and Palestine, and the legal assault that deprives Muslims of the right to free expression. Words and cartoons can be hate crimes too.
By Muqtedar Khan | May 4, 2010; 12:52 PM ET | Comments (43)
I would hope that the appropriate authorities are taking all necessary steps to investigate the bastards that are threatening violence against the creators and producers of South Park. We can only be free to exercise good judgment if we're also free to exercise bad judgment.
By Jason Poling | May 4, 2010; 8:39 AM ET | Comments (1)
The point is, the clothing one wears is often an outward and visible expression of an inward and invisible commitment. Governments begin meddling in such expression at extreme risk to the very "open society" they hope to promulgate.
By Max Carter | May 4, 2010; 6:46 AM ET | Comments (6)
Europe needs to separate the issues of dress and security, since connecting them invites the worst kind of profiling. If the burqa goes simply for being a burqa, so might the yarmulka. Perhaps even then, the Papal Zucchetto?
By Shmully Hecht | May 3, 2010; 11:18 PM ET | Comments (9)
Violent interpretations of Islam can't gain any traction unless they provoke extreme responses that in turn are used to justify violence. Enemies create enemies, and soon the "descending spiral" of which Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke so eloquently, is well on its way down into the darkness.
By Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite | May 3, 2010; 7:18 PM ET | Comments (7)
Freedom of expression means that I can object to your characterization of my religion; I can dispute it; I can be furious over it. But I may not threaten you because of it. Religious conviction exempts no one from human kindness. Properly understood, it should reinforce it.
By David Wolpe | May 3, 2010; 6:36 PM ET | Comments (11)
Whether this succeeds or not, and I have no personal interest in drawing Muhammad, I support the concept. We must join together to stop injustice.
By Herb Silverman | May 3, 2010; 3:44 PM ET | Comments (21)
At over 2.2 million, Hindus in America now form the fifth largest religious group, after Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Buddhism. However Hindus are often mischaracterized in textbooks and academia and are not well understood by the majority.
By Anju Bhargava | May 2, 2010; 11:23 PM ET | Comments (1)