Freedome of Expression has always has double standards.
Let us take the simplest example. Every liberal I know argued that MF Husain had the right to paint a naked Saraswati or a nude Bharat Mata. Yet, hardly any liberal of my acquaintance extended the same principle to the Danish cartoons. The liberal position was that Hindus should be tolerant of the manner in which their gods and goddesses were portrayed but that Muslims were right to complain about any visual representation of the Prophet Mohammed.
It is not necessary to be a fully paid-up member of the RSS to recognise that there is a huge logical contradiction here. The Muslim objections to the Danish cartoons were not based on the Muslims-are-terrorists subtext of the content. Muslims argued that even if the content had been laudatory, even if the Prophet had been portrayed as the saviour of the modern world, it would still have been deeply offensive to have seen a visual representation of the Prophet Mohammed.
So why is it okay to show Hindu goddesses in the nude and not okay to show the founder of Islam in any form at all, flattering or otherwise?
The Muslim contention is that Islam forbids its followers from visually representing the Prophet. This is fair enough and Muslims are entitled to regard this stipulation as binding.
But what about the rest of us? We don%u2019t necessarily believe in Islam. Why should we be subject to Quranic injunctions? Why are liberals, who claim to value freedom of expression,
RE:RE:FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION - double Standards.
by Rehan on Jun 11, 2007 01:23 PM Permalink
Kinda confused... can you please elaborate on Islamic front?
RE:RE:RE:FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION - double Standards.
by Tinda on Jun 11, 2007 01:30 PM Permalink
Were you asleep when Muslims in India were attacking Hindu shops protesting Danish cartoons?
RE:FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION - double Standards.
by adfasd asdasd on Jun 11, 2007 01:31 PM Permalink
Totally agree with you....
I think nobody should have the right to display any religious symbols in a manner that may denigrate its sacredness, be it of any religion.
However we also should not tone our opinions as of us and them, we should stand united against all sorts the MF Hussains and the Danish cartoonists together.
If at all you are defending the RSS or want to argue on the us and them formula, let me ask you this, how many liberal non-muslims stood up against the Danish Cartoonists???
RE:FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION - double Standards.
by Rahul Menon on Jun 11, 2007 01:22 PM Permalink
We don't have any stipulation with regard to showing our Gods and godesses in the nude. I have been to many temples and have come across nude and semi nude dieties in various positions so i guess no Hindu should take offence to that.
RE:RE:FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION - double Standards.
by Upadrasta PardhaSaradhi on Jun 11, 2007 01:34 PM Permalink
Mr, Anything & everything in this world has its limits. 'Freedom' has its limits and 'tolerance' too.
Whatever you have seen in the Temples are one way of promoting the kamasuthra in a nicer way. Place is important. You do all sort of things with your wife in your bedroom secretely and personally. Why dont you do it publicly infront of everybody? Moral of the story is there is a limit for everything and place for everything. You can not take bath in Dining room and cook in the bath room.
RE:FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION - double Standards.
by Tinda on Jun 11, 2007 01:31 PM Permalink
Menon Sahib: MF Hussain has been showing Hindu goddesses having sex with dogs.
RE:FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION - double Standards.
by Utkal Mohanty on Jun 11, 2007 01:31 PM Permalink
Don't you see the difference? There is an injuction gainst depiction of Allah or the Prophet as an image. There is no injuction against depiction of Hindu Gods and goddesses or Bharat Mata, in the nude or otherwise. Depiction in nude by itself does not make an image deragatory. Kali is routinely depicted in the nude. So are many avtars of Parvati / Shakti. There are passgaes of explicit lovemaking betwen Shiva nad Parvati in Kalidasa's Kumarasamhava. So it is a part of the Hindu tradition. But you are right about non-muslims not having to follow that diktat. Many liberals have supported Danish governments stand on that. Salman Rushdie's Writing on Mohammaed wasn't to Many muslim's liking. The liberal media supported him. So don't pick on the liberals. It is we in India who have to develop a more tolerant attitude and learn to have intellectual discourses rather than street fights.
RE:RE:FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION - double Standards.
by Tinda on Jun 11, 2007 01:35 PM Permalink
Abye oriya king mohanty
MF Hussain has been making "derogatory? images of Hindu goddesses like Durga having sex with a dog and Sita having sex with Hanuman. It is idiot hindus like you who are the root cause of trouble.
"There is an injuction gainst depiction of Allah or the Prophet as an image."
Fine. But there is injunction in showing Prophet's wives as an image. So why not a nude picture of Mo's wife Aisha? MF Hussain is clearly doing "painting jihad" and is careful to avoid Muslim themes. He quickly withdrew his latest movie on a complaint from some muslims that it hurt their sentiments. The liberals did not utter a word.
