Pope Benedict’s speech on relations among religions has created an (unfortunately literal) firestorm. There has been much toing and froing in the press about what he said, what he meant, was it a bad thing to say, etc. The response from Muslims has been immediate and predictable, burning churches, (apparently) shooting a nun, threatening violence, etc. Thankfully, Anne Applebaum posted a piece on Slate yesterday (Sept 18) that reminds us of our commitment to the defense of freedom of speech. She reminds us that
â€â€¦ nothing the pope has ever said comes even close to matching the vitriol, extremism, and hatred that pours out of the mouths of radical imams and fanatical clerics every day of the week all across Europe and the Muslim world, almost none of which ever provokes any Western response at all. And maybe it’s time that it should: When Saudi Arabia publishes textbooks commanding good Wahhabi Muslims to “hate” Christians, Jews, and non-Wahhabi Muslims, for example, why shouldn’t the Vatican, the Southern Baptists, Britain’s chief rabbi, and the Council on American-Islamic Relations all condemn them—simultaneously. Equally, I see no reason why Swedish social democrats, British conservatives, and Dutch liberals couldn’t occasionally forget their admittedly deep differences and agree unanimously that the practices of female circumcision and forced child marriage are totally unacceptable, whether in Somalia or Stockholm. Surely on this issue they all agree….â€
The response of Christopher Hitchens (also posted on Slate on the 18th) to the event is puzzling. Hitchens was an active defender of the right of a Danish newspaper to publish cartoons seen as offensive by Muslims, and rightfully so. In this instance he has taken the opportunity to beat up on Cardinal Ratzinger and the Catholic Church without defending their right to the same freedom of speech.