Comments on: Potentially Violent Religious Nuts 1, Yale 0

By: Jim

Jim — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 10:18:44 +0000

There now seems to be a tint of religion-bashing here. Why not address the one topic at hand: Islam. The original cartoon was a critique against Islam and its violent tendencies going back to its founder. The critique is not against “religion”. One person commented that religious people always tend toward being “potentially violent”. Anybody who holds a strong view on something has a potential to become violent about it. Name the topic strongly held, and you’ll see fanatics. The more subtle debate, and the one I hope more than a few xcould grasp here, is which religions teach violence as a tenent, and which don’t, and which do sometimes and don’t sometimes. They’re not all the same, nor equally true. As for Yale, they’re being PC cowards. The question is how much they are willing to tow the PC lines. All the way to violence?

By: Eyeball rollin' librarian

Eyeball rollin' librarian — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 16:26:00 +0000

“I agree this is standard stupidly from the leftist academia” – word.

By: AngelaB

AngelaB — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 12:21:37 +0000

I’m glad I didn’t waste my college money on Yale.

By: Auntie Nanuuq

Auntie Nanuuq — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:27:50 +0000

“Nothing is worse than Active Ignorance”–Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749-1832)

By: Robin

Robin — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 12:45:54 +0000

Don’t buy the book. Don’t let your institution buy the book.

By: Post Postmodern Librarian

Post Postmodern Librarian — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 12:19:48 +0000

I agree this is standard stupidly from the leftist academia, but I think something should be said in the author’s defense. This decision to remove the cartoons was probably done after she signed her contract as an editor decision. Writing contracts are getting very controlling. I just signed one were I had to agree not to talk about the articles details or the contract (I wonder if I violated it just now) Second as an editorial decision she protested but lost. In the end she was also forced to keep her mouth shut on the whole decision making process. While the blood may never be on Yale’s hands the academic fall out will be. Its all ready very hard to study any controversial subject now it will ten times harder. So much for academic freedom!

By: I Like Books

I Like Books — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 11:54:08 +0000

I remember reading about those cartoons in the newspaper. It said a number of caricatures of Mohammed were published, including one where he had a bomb for a turban. And that Palestinian gunmen immediately started searching hotels for foreigners. I suspect the irony was lost on them. But if you see rampaging Muslim gunmen often enough, you can’t help but associate Islam with rampaging gunmen.

South Park was going to do an episode on Mohammed, but Comedy Central told them no, we don’t want to get blown up. The creators said they respected the administration for not pulling out “sensitivity” or “multiculturalism”. They didn’t want to get blown up, and that’s what they said.

By: h3bn8

h3bn8 — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 11:20:07 +0000

As a private institution and publisher, Yale can do whatever they want, even if they want to be lily livered pc pantywaists. They have every right to do it.

And get hammered for doing it too.

By: another f-ing librarian

another f-ing librarian — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 11:18:55 +0000

i could rant and rant about this, but i won’t. i’ll just say:

without the images under discussion, the book is not useful. i shall therefore discourage my institution from going to the bother of acquiring a copy.

By: Alex

Alex — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 10:25:19 +0000

Well, Fat and Grumpy, would you buy a book dedicated to discussions of the Mona Lisa if it never once reproduced an image of it? In many cases pictures plus 1,000 words equal far more than just 2,000 words.