Yttrandefrihet. Kurt Westergaard tecknar inte längre för Jyllands-Posten. Muhammedtecknaren är numera skickad på en långvarig semester och hans framtid på tidningen är oviss.

16 november 2009 Uwe Max Jensen

Tecknaren Kurt Westergaard har under flera år dagligen illustrerat Morgenavisen Jyllands-Postens krönika. Men de sista veckorna har läsarna tittat förgäves efter Westergaards streck i tidningen. Kurt Westergaards frånvaro från spalterna sammanfaller tidsmässigt med att man anhöll de två förmodade terroristerna i USA, de som uppgetts vara igång med en terrorattack på Jyllands-Postens redaktioner i Köpenhamn eller Viby eller angrepp på tidningens kulturredaktör Flemming Rose eller Kurt Westergaard

Enligt Jyllands-Postens ansvarige chefredaktör, Jørn Mikkelsen, så är Kurt Westergaard på en längre semester.

“Kurt Westergaard är på semester de närmaste månaderna. Det är tal om en en lång tid sparad semester,” säger Jørn Mikkelsen till Sappho.

Hör semestern ihop med avslöjandet av terrorplanerna i USA?

“Det finns ett sammanhang.Det tar på en man att vara under den sortens press,” siger Jørn Mikkelsen.

Är det tal om en frivillig semester?

“Semester är semester.”

Kommer Kurt Westergaard tillbaka till Jyllands-Posten, när han har avslutat sin semester?

“Det enda jag vill säga, är att han är på semester,” säger Jørn Mikkelsen.

Rose är inte semesterdrabbad

Under tiden som Kurt Westergaard är skickad på semester, och tecknarens möjliga framtid på Jyllands-Posten är ouppklarad, så arbetar sakens andra huvudperson – Jyllands-Postens kulturredaktör Flemming Rose – enligt sitt eget uttalande precis som normalt..

“Det har inte varit på tal om att jag ska på semester,” säger Flemming Rose till Sappho.

Flemming Rose var på en längre semester i USA i samband med den första Muhammed-krisen i början av 2006, men återvände sedan till Jyllands-Posten.

Läs också Kurt Westergaards kommentarer till de senaste hoten och Sappho’s artiklar om Berlingske Tidendes och Ekstra Bladets förhållande yttrandfriheten

Artikeln på Sappho

Denna översättning får och BÖR spridas så mycket som möjligt. Ta då hela artikeln rakt av och glöm inte att LÄNKA!

/Fröken Sverige

Her til aften har jeg set et videoklip på Jyllands-Postens website omhandlende tyveri af benzin.

Ifølge indslaget bliver der stjålet benzin hvert femte minut fra danske tankstationer, svarende til over 100.000 gange om året.

Ganske vist er benzinpriserne steget til et meget højt niveau over de seneste år, men hvad er det lige der sker der med folk, når de gør sig til tyve for en tankfuld benzin?

Politiken och Jyllands Posten berättar i dag om vaccintillverkarna  GlaxoSmithKline gav Danmark 3 dagar på sig att skriva under ett avtal om ansvarsfrihet för vaccinet mot H1N1

Jag har känt till att vaccintillverkarna GlaxoSmithKline har begärt ansvarsfrihet för sitt vaccin mot H1N1 i USA efter tidigare vaccinskandaler. Men jag visste inte att de hade gjort det och fått igenom i nordiska länder.

De danska tidningarna berättar också att Danmark får betala 10 miljoner om året bara för att få stå i KÖ till vaccinet. Fatta vad grymma pengar Glaxo m.fl. får in på detta vaccin. Givetvis är de måna om att alla skall vara så rädda som möjligt för denna influensa där alltså färre väntas dö än en vanlig årlig influensa.

Enligt Expressen är uppgifterna om huruvida GlaxoSmithKlien fått ansvarsfrihet i Sverige sekretessbelagda. Men man behöver ju knappast vara ett geni för att inse att de har precis samma avtal i Sverige som Danmark.

GlaxoSmithKliens informationschef Jonas Vikman fick fråga om varför företaget inte skulle vilja ta ansvar för sina egna produkter och fick inget svar.

- Som sagt, jag kommenterar inte delar av ett sekretessbelagt avtal.

Av vilken anledning är avtalet sekretessbelagt i Sverige och inte i Danmark? Dessutom undrar jag ju om man kan lita på ett företag som inte ens vill svara på varför man inte litar på sina egna tillverkade produkter?

Relevanta länkar: Expressen, Politiken, Jyllands Posten

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om Vaccin, Ansvarsfrihet, Politiken, Jyllands Posten, Rädsla, Sekretess, H1N1

On the BBC’s website is a little story about a plan to make a biopic about the life of Muhammad. For myself, I think this is a great idea! He’s an interesting person that people outside Islam generally know nothing about. We’ve had movies about Jesus and movies about Moses, but only two so far about Muhammad and it’d be nice to see that change, especially if it’s, you know, a good movie.

Of course one of the slight snags to this plan is that Islam prohibits depections of Muhammad. That’s something of a problem if you want to make a movie about the man, though it’s a problem one of the two movies about him managed to overcome.

Of course like all Muslim laws, this one only applies to people who are, you know, Muslim. Folks like me who aren’t don’t have to follow them, and especially those of us who live in a democracy that has free speech and the like don’t have to follow them and can, if we wish, go out of our way to be obnoxious about Islam and Muhammad. Hell, I think that just to be obnoxious right now, I’ll throw up the Jyllands-Posten cartoons onto here.

Nothing like a little obnixiousness!

Anyhow, I hope the project goes forward. I’d rather like to see a good movie about Muhammad, especially if they do it without the childish pandering of not actually showing him or hearing his voice. That’s just stupid.

Also stupid is expecting other people to obey your religious beliefs. If you’re going to do that, why not get angry over the fact that non-Muslims eat pork? Or drink alcohol? Or have sex outside marriage? Or don’t use your calendar? Or that we don’t fast during Ramadan? Or any of the number of your rules we break because we aren’t Muslim?

Basically the message here is this: Muslims, you aren’t anything special in a free society. We have the right to mock anyone and any religion we please and we certainly have right to not follow your religious rules and you don’t have the right to try and force us to.

Get over yourselves.

 … men der sendes helt sikkert også for få. I Erhvervsbladet i fredags sagde erhvervsredaktør på Jyllands-Posten Steen Rosenbak:

Det, der irriterer mig mest ved pressemeddelelser, er, at der er alt for mange. Overflowet betyder, at man på forhånd er negativt indstillet. Det er svært at lave om, fordi det er en stor industri, der lever af at lave pressemeddelelser, mener Steen Rosenbak, hvis råd til virksomhederne er, at de kun skal sende en meddelelse ud, når de har en meget vigtig historie.

Jeg er enig med Steen Rosenbak. Der sendes helt sikkert mange pressemeddelelser, som ikke burde sendes. Det er typisk pressemeddelelser uden en historie, eller som er helt irrelevante for mediet.

Men der sendes også for få pressemeddelelser. Der ligger uhyre mange historier ude i virksomhederne – især de små og mellemstore – som aldrig bliver fortalt. Historier som fortjener at blive fortalt. Jeg ved det, fordi jeg taler med mange af den slags virksomheder.

Hvis alle de små virksomheder lader sig skræmme af, at der er mange, der henvender sig til medierne, så overlader de mediebilledet til de store virksomheder. De overlader mediebilledet til dem, der har råd til at ansætte folk, som er dygtige til at kreere historier til medierne – og det er synd.

Derfor skal journalisterne blive dygtigere til at se historier, som ikke lige er tygget 100 % for dem med skarp vinkel, datamateriale og gode citater.

Og omvendt skal virksomhederne lige tænke sig om en ekstra gang, før de sender materiale til medierne. Tænk: ”Ville jeg gide læse det her, hvis det ikke handlede om mig selv.”

COPENHAGEN–Kurt Westergaard, kartunis Denmark yang menggambarkan Nabi Muhammad meletakkan bom di sorbannya terpaksa kembali menyembunyikan diri setelah muncul berita adanya rencana untuk membunuh dia dan redaktur budaya surat kabarnya.

Dua orang dari Chicago yang pernah ikut pelatihan militer di Pakistan menghadapi dakwaan terorisme di Amerika terkait operasi yang mereka sebut sebagai Proyek Mickey Mouse, untuk menyerang gedung surat kabar Denmark yang menerbitkan 12 karikatur Nabi Muhammad.

Kurt Westergaard adalah seorang laki-laki yang menolak berkompromi mengenai hal yang dia anggap sebagai nilai budaya barat sangat penting, yaitu kebebasan berekspresi.

Konsekuensi sikap ini adalah, hilangnya kebebasan Westergaard sendiri dan 11 kartunis lainnya, yang pernah menyumbang karya mereka dalam seri kontroversial karikatur Nabi Muhammad yang diterbitkan oleh surat kabar Jyllands-Posten.

Selama 3 tahun dia dilindungi selama 24 jam oleh anggota polisi dan agen-agen rahasia. Tetapi di awal tahun ini Westergaard memutuskan, dia lelah hidup seperti seorang tahanan penjara dan memberhentikan pengawalnya, walaupun rumahnya masih seperti benteng.

Dia mengatakan, usianya membantu dia tidak lagi takut dan bahwa dia memiliki keyakinan tinggi terhadap PET, agen rahasia Denmark.

Para agen rahasia Amerika yang menyelidiki kasus yang diberi nama Mickey Mouse Project menemukan bahwa salah satu tersangka, David Headley, yang mengubah namanya dari Daood Gilani, di tahun 2006 mengunjungi gedung harian Jyllands-Posten sebagai bagian dari persiapan pemantauan bagi operasi itu.

Tidak Menyesal

Sekarang, Westergaard kembali menulis pesan di situs surat kabarnya yang mengatakan bahwa dia terpaksa dikawal ketat kembali. Ketika BBC mewawancarainya, dia masih tidak menyesal membuat karikatur yang menimbulkan kemarahan besar masyarakat Muslim di seluruh dunia.

”Dalam berbagai dialog yang saya lakukan dengan masyarakat Muslim, saya selalu mencoba dengan sangat penuh kesabaran untuk menjelaskan situasi ini”, kata Kurt.

Kurt mengatakan, ‘’saya membuat karikatur yang menggambarkan, ada orang-orang yang terinspirasi oleh sebagian ajaran Islam untuk membunuh dan melakukan aksi teror. Saya membuat karikatur itu, dan dengan sangat menyesal saya mengatakan, ternyata saya benar. Mereka sekarang mengancam akan membunuh saya”.

Setelah Westergaard dan para kartunis lain kembali bersembunyi, rencana teror itu dikecam oleh Majelis Muslim Denmark yang mengatakan, aksi terorisme berlawanan dengan ajaran, nilai-nilai dan prinsip dasar Islam.

Sebuah serangan terhadap sasaran apapun sama saja dengan serangan terhadap seluruh masyarakat. Karena itu kami lega bahwa sebuah serangan teroris tampaknya bisa dihindarkan, kata dewan itu dalam sebuah pernyataan. [ahi]

Sumber: Republika Online

In the comments section of a post earlier today about the jihadist plot to murder a cartoonist and a journalist for daring to exercise their rights of free speech, reader velvethammer reminded me of an article by one of the intended victims. In it, Jyllands-Posten editor Fleming Rose explained why he published the Muhammad cartoons:

Has Jyllands-Posten insulted and disrespected Islam? It certainly didn’t intend to. But what does respect mean? When I visit a mosque, I show my respect by taking off my shoes. I follow the customs, just as I do in a church, synagogue or other holy place. But if a believer demands that I, as a nonbeliever, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect, but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy.

Exactly.

Idag kom det frem, at amerikansk politi tidligere på måneden anholdt to mænd for terrorplaner mod Danmark bl.a. Jyllands-Posten. Det fik her til aften Aftenshowet til via SMS at spørge sine seere, om de tror, der vil komme terror i Danmark. Hvorfor spørger jeg bare?

For mig at se tjener det intet formål. Måske har redaktionen bare set for meget TV2, der jo har for vane at inddrage “danskerne” i de fleste af deres indslag, uanset hvor ligegyldigt det end måtte være.

Er udemærket klar over, at Aftenshowet er DR´s svar på Go´Aften Danmark og, at den redaktionelle linje er derefter. Men for mig at se kunne man lige så godt have spurgt, om folk synes Peter Aalbæk (som også var i studiet) er en flink fyr.

Det oplyser det amerikanske udenrigsministerium i en pressemeddelelse.” 

“Ifølge PET har en af de anholdte været på besøg i Danmark to gange i år for at rekognoscere og udpege terrormål – senest i juli i år, hvor den anholdte har videofilmet flere steder i København.

Ifølge PET har de anholdte i forbindelse med planlægningen været i tæt kontakt med personer fra de militante terrornetværk Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), al-Qaeda og Harakat-ul-Jihad Islami (Huji).”

“Der er en række beviser mod to mistænkte for terrorplaner i Danmark, skriver anklagemyndigheden i USA.

Det drejer sig om to mænd på 49 åg 48 år, og de er anklaget for at planlægge terror, der blandt andet skulle ramme bygninger og ansatte ved Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten.

LÆS ARTIKEL USA anholder mænd for terrorplaner mod Jyllands-Posten”

Politiken ,

VG,  TV2.no , Ekstra Bladet ,

Riks24

Jyllands-Posten

PET fastholder trusselsniveau mod Danmark 27. okt 16.44

USA anholder mænd for terrorplaner mod Jyllands-Posten
/Fröken Sverige

I dag er to mænd fra Chicago blevet anholdt for terrorplaner mod Jyllands-Posten. Det i sig selv er jo foruroligende – altså ikke at de er blevet anholdt, men at nogen stadig gider gå op i de ældgamle tegninger – men endnu mere foruroligende er det dog, at terroristerne åbenbart havde planlagt et terrorangreb mod ganske uskyldige mennesker. TV2.dk skriver:

“Ved anholdelsen af den ene mand fandt FBI en USB-nøgle med ti forskellige vi­deoer af København, herunder en video af Jyllands-Postens hovedsæde på Kong­ens Nytorv. Der var også optagelser af militære barakker i nærheden og optag­elser af Køben­havns hovedbanegård.

Samtidig havde den ene anholdte en bil­let til et fly fra Atlanta til København den 29. oktober – om to dage.”

Forestil dig en nedtur af rang det må være for en terrorist at komme herover med den hensigt at lave rav i den og være super-bomben blot for at opdage, at Jyllands-Posten er flyttet hen på Rådhuspladsen og terrormålet nu beboes af et eller andet stakkels PR-firma…

Men okay, terrorangrebet har som PET skriver ikke været “nært forestående,” så måske manden med flybilletten ville opdage det ved sit næste besøg.

Jesus lord almighty… (for nu at bruge en ytring, der sikkert vil pisse ikke-kristne terrorister endnu mere af)

P.S. En ganske personlig sidebemærkning skal lige lyde  herfra:

I skal for syv sytten ikke komme og terrorisere os!!! Gå nu hjem og lad os være! Som om de ikke er bange nok i forvejen for at bo sammen med os nede på Politiken, nu bliver det da slet ikke til at være nogen steder… de bor immervæk på første sal, så ved et angreb fra jorden er det kulturtosserne på Pol, der ryger først. Ved et eventuelt luftangreb er det på den anden side Ekstra Bladet, det går ud over. Hvilket bringer mig til den logiske konklusion, at terrorister: You can’t win!

Ah … I do miss the National Post.  Today’s front page contains a large photo of Kurt Westergaard, “The Most Hated Man in Mecca“, and inside is the cause of this hatred:

That’s right.  A cartoon.  For drawing this cartoon, Mr. Westergaard now lives in a fortified home with constant security.  Men have been arrested for plotting to kill him.  He drew the image as part of the Jyllands-Posten commentary on illustrators refusing to illustrate a book about Mohammed.

“I attempted to show that terrorists get their spiritual ammunition from parts of Islam and with this spiritual ammunition, and with dynamite and other explosives, they kill people. I showed this in a cartoon and what happened? They want to kill me, so I think I was right.”

When — in early September 2005 — I got a brief request from my editor at the Danish daily Jyllands-Posten to draw my impression of the prophet Muhammad, I had little idea of what I was getting myself into. To me it was just another day at the office. So I tried to do the best job I could, and I drew up a picture of the prophet with a bomb in his turban. I further inserted the quotation: “There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet.” More here…

In honor of Blasphemy Day, Dyran over at Sentient Puddle has reposted the Muslim cartoons published in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten four years ago today.

If you’ve never seen the cartoons before — and, if you live in the US, you probably haven’t — it’s worth checking out just how mild these things are. And even if you have, give Dyran a click in solidarity with free speech and the right to subject anything to scrutiny and criticism.

Its International Blasphemy Day in honour of freedom of speech!

GO GET STONED!

Why Sept. 30?

Because that’s when the first of the now famous Muhammad cartoons were published in the Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten. The resulting uproar resulted in estimates of the average I.Q. on this planet to be significantly lowered.

There’s no point in going into the details, but since many Muslims took this so seriously and sometimes so violently, there has been a degree of self censorship of critiques of Islam that is simply appalling.

Even Yale University Press forbade reproduction of the images in a new book on the controversy.  A number of Islamic nations tried to get a binding anti-blasphemy resolution passed in the United Nations. They didn’t get the support to make it binding, so that’s a good thing.

The Thinking Shop has always operated under the motto “Fuck ‘em if they can’t take a cartoon”, so the deference of academic publishers, newspapers and so forth really grates on yours truly’s nerves.

What counts as blasphemy anyway? Certainly the content of some scriptures blasphemes the deities of other religions. Religious leaders often preach against the teachings of other religions as being silly, inspired by ignorance or the Devil or whatever. Why not protect the same rights to non-religious speech that is highly critical of religion and their assorted deities?

Its not as if there will be any kind of divine retribution. Blasphemy is, after all, a victimless crime. There is no god to fuck us up – - – OR IS THERE?

In many ways Christianity and its symbols takes a lot of abuse that wouldn’t be hurled at Islam. That’s not fair.

Sent to me by Dan  just as I was writing this post.

There should be an equal lack of restrictions on blaspheming any deity or satirizing, spoofing or generally insulting any religious (and non-religious) idea, symbol or object.

http://loltheist.com

But what the hell? Let’s have some music!

Of course, there might be some who don’t really think this song is serious… alas.

http://loltheist.com

Well, I should get back to marking papers. Your preferred diety damn it, I hate marking!

Jumpin’ Jupiter on a Thorsicle, I really really really marking papers.

AND ITS DAN’S BIRTHDAY! Everyone add a blasphemously happy birthday comment for dear old Dan!

loltheist

            Before I begin this week’s strident indictment of whatever and stuff, I think I should establish my expertise in the general subject matter, which is art.  I’m not one of those Philistines who says, “I don’t know much about art, but I know what I like.”  The arts are my consuming passion, and I spend every free moment immersed in the classics. My obsessive love for the works of C.M. Coolidge, for example, has become my raison d’être; I can name – from memory – every breed of dog that sits at that poker table.  And after years of scouring every tent-canopy sale in every Shopko parking lot within 500 miles, my personal art collection now boasts the most extensive assemblage of American Indian wolf tapestries, Robert Kinkaid knock-offs, and framed Dale Earnhardt memorial lithographs anywhere. 
            I think I’ve made my point. 
            While I, like you, had my life changed forever when Christo wrapped Berlin’s Reichstag building in polypropylene fabric, I find that most modern art is not nearly that lucid and relevant.  Case in point:  An exhibit opening Wednesday in Washington D.C.; it is part of something called “International Blasphemy Day.”  The idea is that artists and so-called “free-speech advocates” around the globe will stage exhibitions that mock and criticize all things religious.  The goal is to somehow promote freedom of expression through all the condemnation and ridicule.
            The work of painter Dana Ellyn will be featured at the D.C. observance.  In a Religion News Service article about Blasphemy Day, Ellyn told reporter Leanne Larmondin, “My point is not to offend, but I realize it can offend, because religion is such a polarizing topic.”  That’s an interesting statement, especially when we consider some of her work.
            I give you Dana Ellyn’s “Silly Rabbit, Myths Are for Kids.”  Jesus Christ, God the Son, is pictured dressed in an Easter Bunny costume with an egg beneath his chair.  A small girl is laughing at him. 
            “Bottled at the Source” is evidently supposed to mimic a booze label.  “Divine Wine” is the name of the product, and the Savior of all mankind is shown on the cross; angels float nearby, holding out empty bottles to be filled by the streams of blood that are spouting from His pierced side and hand. 
            In “Jesus Performs at Young Darwin’s Birthday Party,” the Lord of the Universe is in a clown suit levitating a few inches off the floor, dancing on a cloud for the young evolutionist’s amusement. 
            But Ellyn’s magnum opus is “Jesus Does His Nails.” Christ is seated, with His crucifixion spikes still protruding.  He is dabbing nail polish on the head of the nail that has been driven through His left hand. 
            I emailed some questions and observations to Dana Ellyn, but she didn’t respond.  I understand, of course.  If anyone knows how time-consuming it is to conceive predictable, hackneyed, sophomoric puns, it’s me.  And I only have to type mine; she, on the other hand, has got to get one of those palette thingies, cover it with color puddles, put on a smock and beret, and then paint hers.  So, I’ll just include a few of those questions here:

(See update after the column.  Dana stated she emailed a response promising to answer my questions once she received my email.  Though I didn’t receive it before posting the article, I have no reason to disbelieve her. A more charitable and gracious characterization would have been, “Dana Ellyn has yet to respond to my questions.” - Ed.)

 
            1. The article states, “Artist Dana Ellyn says her ‘Blasphemy’ paintings are a tongue-in-cheek expression of her lack of belief in God and religion.”  Isn’t your artwork actually an expression of your hostility toward religion rather than your lack of religious belief?
            2. The date of Blasphemy Day was specifically chosen to commemorate a Danish newspaper’s publication in 2005 of cartoons that were unfavorable toward Islam and Muhammad.  Muslims around the world rioted.  Yet I notice that you, like virtually all atheist artists I have encountered, express your disdain for religion by blaspheming Jesus almost exclusively.  I’ve looked at all your paintings, but nothing in your work is aimed at Islam.  Why do you and so many of your anti-religion colleagues give Islam a “free pass” but roast Christ mercilessly?  You’re afraid of Muslim reprisals, of course, and that’s just good sense.  But clearly you’re holding yourself out as an iconoclast, and your bold iconoclastic principles evaporate before you cross the threshold of the Mosque.
            3. Artists want to be seen as edgy rebels who do provocative work.  Yet the cost for that kind of street cred is public outrage, and you all invariably protest when subjected to such backlash.  Conversely, without the public outrage and backlash, you’ll never be seen as an edgy rebel who does provocative work.  Aren’t you caught in a vicious cycle?
            Anyhoo, friends, I think I’ll pass on International Blasphemy Day and just spend September 30th loving the Lord Jesus instead.  I pray you’ll join me.  To be honest, I’m really not much of an art connoisseur.  The way I see it, art died with Bob Ross anyway.  But as far as Jesus is concerned, “I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth.”

UPDATE:  Dana Ellyn responds (sort of):

Thank you for your posting. I did receive your email yesterday with all of your questions. And I did respond with the following email 10 minutes after I received your note (I initially requested the interview mid-afternoon on September 27.  I received this response from Dana almost a full day after sending my initial inquiry to her. Newspaper columnists have deadlines, Ma’am.  I’ll amend the post to reflect accordingly, however.  - Ed.) :
_________
Dear Jim,
Thank you very much for your email. I can not tell you how much I appreciate your taking the time to write – and for the thoughtful nature of your questions. I welcome the opportunity to answer every question you have posed. As of yet, I haven’t responded to any of the 100 or so comments that are posted to the original article on the Religion News Service site. So thank you for compiling all of the issues/questions that have been raised and giving me a forum to answer.

I will sit down tonight and/or tomorrow and respond. I just wanted to get back to you quickly to let you know that I will be responding since it will take me a bit of time to answer your questions thoroughly.

My best,
Dana Ellyn
__________

I spent several hours last night and this morning writing up very in depth answers to your questions – because I was so pleased at your willingness to discuss and have an open and honest dialogue. I am sorry to see that you already posted this article and didn’t wait for my response – nor did you acknowledge my honest intentions to respond. In fact, you say that I didn’t respond and go on with your continued assumptions and accusations claiming to know who I am and all that I stand for. (Again, at post time on Monday, I had waited what in journalism circles is considered a generous amount of time for a response.  When I didn’t receive one, I gave a truthful, accurate account of the situation as it stood.  You very well may have sent me a response “within 10 minutes,” but I didn’t receive it.  While I won’t apologize for the nature of the bid’ness, I do acknowledge that a more charitable and gracious characterization would have been, “Dana Ellyn has yet to respond to my questions.” - Ed.)

In brief, to treat this very serious topic of religion via a few short quotes from me and a handful of paintings I have created that are a very small subset of my entire body of work does not do either side of the conversation justice.  (I maintain that the “handful of paintings” I cited are thematically consistent with all your other works which address the same subject matter.  If you’ve done some other paintings which portray Jesus Christ in anything other than an insulting and, in my view, blasphemous manner, I’d love to see them.  Once I do, I will cheerfully withdraw my critical comments. - Ed.)

And as I responded to each and every one of your questions last night, I realized that if I was too brief it left much of my message up for too much potential misinterpretation.   (Hmmm.  Well, I encourage you to go ahead and send your responses to me anyway.  I won’t misinterpret them.  I have an Adderall prescription.  Logically speaking, it seems that the potential for misinterpretation is heighted, rather than mitigated, by withholding the clarifying responses you wrote.  I’m just sayin’… -Ed.)  To go to the necessary depth would mean me spending the majority of my time focusing on this topic and this topic alone. My atheist/agnostic views are not what define me or my art on the whole.  (Agreed, and I didn’t state otherwise.  The column, however, is devoted to your involvement in International Blasphemy Day, so naturally, my questions and my column will focus on that. – Ed.)

Now I see from your posting here that you are not as open to discussion as I had hoped from your email.  (Ahem.  Talk about “assumptions and accusations claiming to know who I am and all that I stand for”!   I’m as open as you please, but do as you see fit.  – Ed.)

I do not ‘disdain’ religion (as you suggested in your email question). (Uh, come on, Dana.  I mean, seriously.  That’s an almost laughably disingenuous statement.  -Ed.) I think religion has played a vital role in the course of human history. I do not practice any religion or believe in any god and I don’t have anything against those who do. To each his own. I would never tell someone “you are wrong to believe in god” or “you should not believe in god” or “you should stop believing in god”. But those questions are always directed to me in the reverse. (Always?  By whom?  - Ed.)  I do have the right to say “I disagree with you” and you can tell me the same in return.  (You certainly do, Dana.  Every right.  Nothing I have written to you or about this matter conflicts with that.  But the original concern remains unanswered by you:   My perception is that you, like the overwhelming majority of atheist artists, musicians, commentators, and writers I encounter, focus inordinately on mocking Christ, yet seemingly leave Islam and Muhammad alone for the most part.  I again encourage you to email the responses you wrote and set me straight.  – Ed.)

I wish you all well.
My best,
Dana