I know I’m not the first to say it: your “right” not to be offended does not trump my free speech rights. Despite the talking heads saying otherwise, saying or doing something that is offensive to someone’s religious beliefs, even “hate speech” (whatever that may be at the moment) is not unconstitutional.
Here’s another little tidbit for everyone to chew on: all those threats that the Muslims were throwing at Pamela Geller over her Mohammed event? THAT is not protected speech. Threats and doing things like yelling “FIRE” in a crowded theater are not protected speech. Yet not one peep from the MSM over their unconstitutional speech.
Speaking of Pamela Geller and her event, Breitbart interviewed her and asked two really good questions.
First: Many in the mainstream media have alleged that you crossed the line when it comes to free speech, and that you are responsible for inciting the terror attacks against your “Draw Muhammad” event. How do you respond to these criticisms?
Geller’s answer: We incited no one. We didn’t call for violence, justify violence, or approve of violence. The people who were inciting were the ones saying that we should be killed for exhibiting Muhammad cartoons. There is no automatic or unavoidable response to being insulted. No one is forced to kill for being insulted. Those who choose to do so are responsible for their actions. No one else is.
Next: What in Islam makes it so controversial when one draws Muhammad?
Geller’s answer: Islam forbids representation of the human form as idolatry, and particularly of Muhammad, who is considered to be the perfect man. Supposedly if Muhammad were represented, Muslims (and others) would be tempted to worship him. This argument is absurd, of course, for if it were true that seeing Muhammad would tempt one to worship, the early Muslims would have all become idolaters when they saw Muhammad. In any case, the representation of Muhammad carries the death penalty in Islamic law.
For more of the interview with Geller, go here.
Geller has been under constant threat, and refuses to let terrorists dictate her actions or words. ISIS posted a statement online that threatened her and the U.S.: “Our aim was the khanzeer [“swine“] Pamela Geller and to show her that we don’t care what land she hides in or what sky shields her; we will send all our Lions to achieve her slaughter,” it then went on to claim responsibility for the attached and said that “the next month will be interesting” and that “everyone who houses her events, gives her a platform to spill her filth are legitimate targets.”
Makes me wish I had artistic talent. You see, ISIS and all other terrorists who think you can infringe on our rights, there is this thing called the Second Amendment and allows me to protect myself against your threats against my First Amendment rights.
Geller responded as well. She wrote the following on her website: “This threat illustrates the savagery and barbarism of the Islamic State. They want me dead for violating Sharia blasphemy laws. What remains to be seen is whether the free world will finally wake up and stand for the freedom of speech, or instead kowtow to this evil and continue to denounce me.”
She continued to let the media know what she thought about their wrongheaded ideas as well: “What’s really frightening and astonishing about this threat is that the media in denouncing me is essentially allying with and even cheering on the Islamic State. I expected this from jihadists. I never expected it from my fellow Americans in the mainstream media.”