Those Cartoons of Muhammad: Liberal Media Double Standard

From the The Volokh Conspiracy, a comparison of how the Boston Globe reacted to the publication of the satirical cartoons of Muhammad, and how they reacted to works of “art” offensive to Christians.

First, what they recently said about the cartoons:

Just as the demand from Muslim countries for European governments to punish papers that printed the cartoons shows a misunderstanding of free societies, publishing the cartoons reflects an obtuse refusal to accept the profound meaning for a billion Muslims of Islam’s prohibition against any pictorial representation of the prophet. Depicting Mohammed wearing a turban in the form of a bomb with a sputtering fuse is no less hurtful to most Muslims than Nazi caricatures of Jews or Ku Klux Klan caricatures of blacks are to those victims of intolerance. .

This is quite a defensible position to take.

But what about a “work of art” called Piss Christ, which was a crucifix immersed in a jar of urine? Or what about a statue of the Virgin Mary covered with feces?

The Boston Globe has a long history of supporting such displays, and indeed demanding that they be given government funding.

As we have repeatedly said: secular liberals are willing to be tolerant of minority or exotic religions. It’s Christianity they don’t much like.