The Paris Olympics Opening Ceremony was inspirational to some people, in a Charlie Hebdo sort of way

 

The price of calling Muhammad a pedophile in Europe is $547

Sex, the sixth pillar of Islam

Telling the truth is now defamation in Europe, unless you're Charlie Hebdo apparently.

Defaming Muhammad does not fall under purview of free speech, European court rules:

The court’s decision comes after it rejected an Austrian woman’s claim that her previous conviction for calling Muhammad a pedophile, due to his marriage to a 6-year-old girl, violated her freedom of speech. ... A Vienna court convicted her in 2011 of disparaging religious doctrines, ordering her to pay a $547 fine, plus legal costs. The ruling was later upheld by an Austrian appeals court.

The answer is: Either Florida, or to write for Charlie Hebdo

Catholic George Weigel says Charlie Hebdo is as corrosive of decency as the jihadists are destructive of order

The Holy Trinity by Charlie Hebdo's Luz

Quoted here:

Issue after issue, Charlie Hebdo mocks, not vice and folly (which are fair game), but many people’s most deeply held and cherished beliefs, including their religious convictions. I won’t describe its cover cartoon lampooning the doctrine of the Trinity after the Catholic bishops of France had opposed so-called “gay marriage;” if that cover was not pornographic, than the word “pornographic” has no meaning.

In the world of Charlie Hebdo, sadly, all religious convictions (indeed all serious convictions about moral truth) are, by definition, fanaticism—and thus susceptible to the mockery of the “enlightened.” But that crude caricature of religious belief and moral conviction is false; it’s adolescent, if not downright childish; it inevitably lends itself to the kind of vulgarity that intends to wound, not amuse; and over the long haul, it’s as corrosive of the foundations of a decent society as the demented rage of the jihadists who murdered members of Charlie Hebdo’s staff.

Mollie Hemingway is trying to serve two masters: God and journalism

I understand she's a Lutheran, Missouri Synod. It used to be a very conservative denomination. Predictably one of their members would be upset by the lengths to which liberals will go to outrage the sensibilities of scrupulous religious believers, such as Lutherans. And I think she is one of those.

But what she's calling for here in The Federalist is The New York Times to outrage the sensibilities of Muslims like it does every other scrupulous religious sect. How dare they, The New York Times, stick it to Orthodox Jews but shrink from offending Muslims!

OK, The New York Times is hypocritical, along with a bunch of other news outlets. That's supposed to be news?

In picking this fight Mollie Hemingway has chosen journalism over God. Her journalistic sensibilities are more outraged than are her religious sensibilities.

Religious people should be upset about deliberate attempts by the press to offend all religious people, not just some. This includes Muslims. But so far I don't hear anyone saying this except for Pope Francis, and Bill Donohue of the Catholic League.

All I'm hearing from so-called conservatives in America is the call to jump on the pig pile supporting Charlie Hebdo, the now defacto organ of the secularist dogma in the West.

How come? Have you all lost your minds?

The Book of Proverbs counsels self-censorship

"A fool vents all his feelings, But a wise man holds them back." 

-- Proverbs 29:11