At NRO, Nina Shea has a great post about free speech, our State Department, and religious sensitivities, points that all desperately need making in light of today’s outrageous attack on the U.S. Embassy in Egypt (and the State Department’s pathetic response to it). As Shea notes:
The embassy asserts that to “hurt the religious beliefs of others” is to “abuse the universal right of free speech.” Of course, the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment protects even insulting and offensive speech…
You know what? While I do not think all Muslims are evil, or that Islam itself is necessarily evil, I think it has been used for evil purposes by evil men far more often than most religions have. I do not care if saying so happens to hurt the feelings of some Muslims. And I think Muslims are way over-sensitive about criticism. There is no excuse to attack an embassy because of rumors of what might be in a film with which the embassy or its government have nothing to do. No excuse at all. The State Department should not issue such a mealy-mouthed statement; instead, Muslims should suck it up: Step forward to defend their faith in the realm of ideas, not through vindictive, ill-aimed destructiveness. That’s what civilized people would do. That’s what decent Muslims will do. And when they do, their contributions will be welcomed. The thugs in Cairo, meanwhile, deserve only contempt.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?