There is no risk in mocking politicians, now matter how intensively the abuse is served. There is no risk in mocking any establishments of American or Western culture- no harm will ensue. ... Every artist alive today now knows the limits: you can do this, which is as brave as taunting a stuffed teddy bear, or you can do that, which amounts to taunting a very hungry very uncaged bear. Bravery, to an artist, is now an all or nothing thing. Leave the repressive regimes alone, and all your efforts, no matter how avante garde, provocative, or just plain offensive your work is, and you are just pretending at courage. Cross the line and say something about Islam, and your life is one the line.
Quite so, but there is a problem: Muslims keep redefining what is objectionable. They "dumb down" offensiveness. Such as Valentine Cards: A radical Kashmiri Islamic group, Dukhtaran-e-Millat, sent nearly two dozen black-veiled Muslim women to burn Valentine's Day cards and posters showing couples together in the main city of India's Kashmir. They women protested that the day imposes Western values on Muslim youth.
"We will not let anyone sell these cards or celebrate Valentine's Day," said Asiya Andrabi, the group's leader, as she held a burning poster in her hand. "These Western gimmicks are corrupting our kids and taking them away from their roots." She said that the raids were carried out "not to harm anyone but to make them realize that this is against Islam's teachings."
Now, just who's imposing whose values?
I don't find it surprising that some Muslims are objecting to Valentine's Day again (they've done it before) because the day is, after all, a Christian celebration (Saint Valentine's Day, ya know). It is a day set aside to commemorate wholesome love, intended in its pre-secular form to call celebrants to remember and emulate the love of Christ for humankind.
But love does not figure in Islamic theology much, if at all. The Muslim author of a now defunct but still online blog pointed out a couple of years ago in an essay called, "The Distance of Allah from His Creatures:"Allah seems more distant in Islam than in Judaism and Christianity; there is more of an emphasis on His might and His power, His inapproachability, the fact that He has no need of His creation and says, "I have only created Jinns and men, that they may serve Me." (51:56) Note the word serve, not love. In Islam one submits to Allah; in Judaism (repeated in Christianity) the Shema says, "And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might," a concept totally lacking in Islamic prayers. Men and women are slaves of Allah in Islam; in Christianity they are children of God. Children are a source of love and worry for their parents; slaves exist merely to serve. Allah lets it be known in the Qur'an that if a people or nation rejects His message, He will simply wipe them out and put another people in their place who will serve Him better. Islam means submission; this does not leave much in the way of personal interaction. Allah orders, you obey. No debating or bargaining, like when Abraham got God down from fifty to ten righteous people to save Sodom and Gomorrah from destruction. Moses speaks directly with God; Allah communicates with Muhammad via the angel Gabriel, since "it is not fitting for a man that Allah should speak to him except by inspiration, or from behind a veil, or by the sending of a messenger to reveal, with Allah's permission, what Allah wills: for He is Most High, Most Wise." (42:51)
So Does Saint Valentine's Day "impose Western values on Muslim youth," as the two dozen protesting women claimed? Well, I devoutly hope so. Is observing the day really "against Islam's teachings?" I don't know and I'm not persuaded that the protester really knows, either. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Either way, I don't care.
Cross-posted at DonaldSensing.com