Is this not the most blasphemous cartoon yet?
Nothing is sacred anymore!!
The May 2010 Euthanasia Prevention Coalition Newsletter can now be found at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/Newsletters/Newsletter108(May2010)(RGB).pdf Bill C-384 was soundly defeated by a vote of 228 to 59. Check how the Members of Parliament voted at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/HowTheyVoted.pdf On June 5, 2010, we are co-hosting the US/Canda Push-Back Seminar at the Radisson Gateway Hotel at the Seattle/Tacoma Airport. The overwhelming defeat of Bill C-384 proved that we can Push-Back the euthanasia lobby in the US and Canada and convince people that euthanasia and assisted suicide are a dangerous public policy. Register for the Seminar at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/2010SeminarFlyer(RGB)(LetterFormat).pdf The Schindler family are being attacked by a Florida television station and Michael Schiavo. The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is standing in solidarity with the Schindler family. My blog comments: http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2010/05/att...
Hi Tim,
ReplyDeleteEditorial cartoons are intended to provoke thought and discussion. In this case, it is a critique of the media, rather than a critique of christianity.
I may be the wrong person to ask, but I do not see any blasphemy here.
In the context of christianity, is it blasphemous to show cartoon images representative of Christ?
Cheers...Martin
"Blasphemy" no longer exists in the western world.
ReplyDeleteSome people may be offended by this cartoon, but that is the very nature of political cartooning -- to offend some and entertain others. And while I'm not offended by this cartoon, I'm not entertained by it, either.
As for what is and is not "sacred" -- it's up to every individual to decide for himself, I'm afraid. Apparently, the cartoonist has different standards for "sacred" than those who are offended.
I think Martin may be right. This may be intended more as a critique of the media. Still, there is nothing to laugh at here at all. It is a rather sad situation.
ReplyDeleteCA
I did not find it particularly humourous, (ok I did not find it humourous at all), but I did find it thought provoking.
ReplyDeleteI actually used a similar concept in my own posting today, for a possibly similar purpose.
Certainly if the cartoon was one of the Mohamed cartoons, there would have been a great hue and cry, and as those of us who tread the free speech blogs know, there have been a few human rights cases about them in the past few years. Though the particular cases were not successful, the thinness of the skin of our Muslim brethren was shown.
I am afraid that I agree with our friend Lady Janus (because I think she is right, not that I am actually afraid to agree with her), that blasphemy has disappeared from the lexicon of western society, (or lack thereof).
I agree that it is a commentary on the sad state of the media.
I think I need to correct an impression I gave, Michael.
ReplyDeleteIt's not the word itself that has disappeared, but its ability to send chills down the spine of the so-called "blasphemers."
It used to be a serious offense, even in civil law. It is no longer anything of the kind. If anything, most people regard it as a joke, if they pay any attention to it to begin with.
That was a good article you wrote.
Blasphemy was perhaps not the correct word for me to use to describe the cartoon. When I read it, I interpreted it as an insult against Christ. Now that my blood pressure is lower, I can see that it was intended as a slight against the media.
ReplyDeleteStill don't like it. Still think it is inappropriate. But as we say in Quebec, 'chacun a son gout'.
Fr. Tim
.. Jesus did have something to say about child abuse though ... and those who facilitate the abuse ... Jesus talks of millstones and oceans ! Perhaps the media should consult the Good Book ... pity is the Church seemed to have ignored what Jesus said on the issue themselves.
ReplyDelete