In a democracy, everyone gets to state their piece. Everyone gets to toss in their two cents…whether it’s necessary and/or appropriate is another thing altogether. Such is the case with Bill Donohue of the Catholic League, who felt it necessary to weigh in on yesterday’s massacre at the offices of Charlie Hebdo in Paris. Rather than offer condolences and leave the judgment for later, Donohue- never one to default to kindness and decency, even when called for- took the opportunity to essentially spit on the corpses of those murdered by jihadis. His statement was as disgustingly self-serving and judgmental as it was insincere. Rather than print part of it, I’m going to start by printing it here in its entirety:
Killing in response to insult, no matter how gross, must be unequivocally condemned. That is why what happened in Paris cannot be tolerated. But neither should we tolerate the kind of intolerance that provoked this violent reaction.
Those who work at this newspaper have a long and disgusting record of going way beyond the mere lampooning of public figures, and this is especially true of their depictions of religious figures. For example, they have shown nuns masturbating and popes wearing condoms. They have also shown Muhammad in pornographic poses.
While some Muslims today object to any depiction of the Prophet, others do not. Moreover, visual representations of him are not proscribed by the Koran. What unites Muslims in their anger against Charlie Hebdo is the vulgar manner in which Muhammad has been portrayed. What they object to is being intentionally insulted over the course of many years. On this aspect, I am in total agreement with them.
Stephane Charbonnier, the paper’s publisher, was killed today in the slaughter. It is too bad that he didn’t understand the role he played in his tragic death. In 2012, when asked why he insults Muslims, he said, “Muhammad isn’t sacred to me.” Had he not been so narcissistic, he may still be alive. Muhammad isn’t sacred to me, either, but it would never occur to me to deliberately insult Muslims by trashing him.
Anti-Catholic artists in this country have provoked me to hold many demonstrations, but never have I counseled violence. This, however, does not empty the issue. Madison was right when he said, “Liberty may be endangered by the abuses of liberty as well as the abuses of power.”
After the title (MUSLIMS ARE RIGHT TO BE ANGRY), which was the only kind, nonjudgmental part of Donohue’s statement, he defaults to his normal ugliness, which seems to be his default mode regardless of the circumstances.
"You can't kill satire. You can only prove its point." — @LOLGOP #CharlieHebdo #JeSuisCharlie pic.twitter.com/T5APwBfX6m
— The Daily Edge (@TheDailyEdge) January 7, 2015
He’s right: “Killing in response to insult, no matter how gross, must be unequivocally condemned.” If he’d left it at that, I would have applauded his kindness and sincerity. Unfortunately, this is Bill Donohue we’re talking about, who probably hasn’t known a moment’s joy in his life, and for whom ugliness and self-righteous rage is the norm. He begins by blaming the victims who in his mind provoked “the kind of intolerance that provoked this violent reaction.” To Donohue’s way of thinking, then, then staff at Charlie Hebdo got what they deserved.
Classy.
The staff at Charlie Hebdo ran a satire magazine. Among other targets, Charlie Hebdo lampooned and ridiculed both the religious and the non-religious. Writers and cartoonists ridiculed those whom they felt were being ridiculous- Muslims, Christians, Jews, even atheists. Such was their right in a free society. They committed no crime, and while they no doubt offended more than a few people along the way, they were equal opportunity offenders. Free expression allows one to tred upon sacred cows without sanction. Free speech and expression can be and very often is objectionable and offensive, but that’s what happens in a free society. Bill Donohue doesn’t get to blame the victims for exercising their rights.
They didn’t “provoke” a “violent reaction” through their “intolerance.” Muslims may object to being repeatedly and intentionally insulted over the years, which is their right…though Charlie Hebdo committed no crime. If you take yourself so seriously that satire offends you, it’s time you took stock. If your cartoon is enough to threaten your faith, you HAVE no faith. It’s time to understand that no one is responsible for respecting (or required to respect) your religion. If you believe that you have the right to destroy those who you feel insult you, I’d submit that you have an anger management problem, not a religious faith.
Has religion in general and Christianity in particular degenerated to the level that it has become little more than a veil under which anger can be legitimatized?
- Bishop Shelby Spong
Perhaps most offensive is Donohue’s lamenting that Charlie Hebdo publisher Stephane Charbonnier “didn’t understand the role he played in his tragic death.” Charbonnier in no way played a role in his murder. He’d committed no crime, except to those who consider satire directed at their beliefs to be criminal. Charbonnier had every right to state that Muhammad wasn’t sacred to him. No matter how low Donohue is willing to sink, he had no right to opine that “Had [Charbonnier] not been so narcissistic, he may still be alive.
Unless he wants to out himself as an insincere, judgmental asshole, of course.
The people who committed this atrocity are cowards, as is Donohue for implicitly condoning their cowardice. By condemning the victims (after the pro forma empty condemnation of the killers), Donohue has in effect allied himself with the cowards. Decent human beings, especially those who call themselves Christians, should be offended that Donohue (or anyone else) would think it appropriate to figuratively spit on the corpses of those who were mere exercising their rights in a free society.
If your faith would lead you to believe that people deserve to die for their ideas and/or their expression of them, you have no faith. You’re a coward who camouflages their hatred behind a doctrine you clearly don’t understand.
If Bill Donohue is a Christian, I’m Lady Gaga.
