Posted on 02/20/2006 4:26:03 PM PST by NYer
By John-Henry Westen
TORONTO, February 20, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The University of Toronto's Victoria College student newspaper The Strand, has used the controversy surrounding the cartoons ridiculing Islam to bash Christianity and Islam simultaneously. Accompanying an article on the cartoon controversy, the paper published a cartoon of its own depicting Jesus smooching with Mohammed in the "Tolerance Tunnel".
"The cartoon is a sort of Canadian statement on religious tolerance," Nick Ragaz, managing editor of The Strand, the student newspaper of Victoria University at U of T told the Toronto Star. "This is not an act of hate," he said. "It's controversial, yes, but it's no attack," said Ragaz.
The University is backing the controversial piece. Paul Gooch, president of Victoria University said "The editorial in this issue of The Strand provokes and invites discussion, not intolerance." The Strand editorial cartoon, "however offensive to some members of our community, could not be characterized as a violation of the Human Rights Code, the Criminal Code, or the applicable University policies at Vic or U of T," the Star reports Gooch having wriiten.
However, the University of Toronto tends to be selective when it comes to freedom of speech.
In 2004, a pro-life club at the university wanted to present a pictorial display which graphically compared abortion to historically recognized genocides. The University of Toronto obstructed the free speech rights of its pro-life students. The university insisted that the display be erected in an open-sided tent with most of the posters facing inwards, making it virtually impossible for the signs to be seen from outside the tent. (see coverage: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/mar/04032405.html )
The University seems to be particularly sensitive when it comes to homosexuality. When internationally renowned Catholic philosopher Peter Kreeft delivered a talk at the university in 2003 which expounded Catholic teaching on homosexuality, the Student administrative council passed a resolution to declare the talk as hate and demanded an official hate-speech investigation. (coverage: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2003/feb/030214a.html )
Finally, the university has been openly discriminating in hiring practices against those not sharing its left-leaning ideology. In 1999, an ad for a tenure-track professorship at the University of Toronto appeared in the August bulletin of the Canadian Association of University Teachers saying that only candidates with a "feminist and anti-racist perspective" need apply. At the time, University of Toronto Professor Thomas Pangle, said that the ad "makes explicit what I had thought was usually only implicit, namely, that ideological conformity was the chief prerequisite for such a position at our university." (coverage: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/1999/oct/99102205.html )
"Let's be brave and controversial, but don't show Mohammeds face. My head is FABULOUS and I'd like to keep it!"
The University of Toronto is as left-wing as it gets...
Mo's got a hairy back.
Completely gutless and cowardly. In true form, courtesy of the University of Toronto's finest.
Nah, did you notice the cartoonist made sure not to depict Mohammed's face as is the Islamic tradition, and the one who is doing the gay kissing is Jesus? So it's more attuned to ridiculing Christians than Muslims. Such a liberal university has no qualms violating the limits of free speech when it comes to making a mockery of Christianity.
Thanks for posting the graphic, lunarbicep.
Someone post that horrible photo of the imam french kissing the young boy.
They haven't grown up.
They're mental midgets, lol.
I guess it's 'ok', tolerant, to show Jesus kissing another man. But the cowardly cartoonist concealed Mohammed's face. If it is indeed Mohammed, who could be sure? He's left himself an out. Ok to offend Muslims and Christians, but if the Muslims complain too loudly, just back away from the identity of the man in Arab dress.
I agree.
Check out the tattoos!
Certainly showing the Islam sign. I just think the whole thing is absurd.
It still drives me nuts with the use of the word tolerance. In the words of Archbishop Sheen, nothing good comes from the word tolerance. It only perpetuates an evil:
Toleratio est permissio negativa mali.
Translated to being: Tolerance is a negative permission of evil.
There's no substantive discussion to be had...Just a display of religious intolerance by the newspapers themselves. "We're printing this, because we can"
No kidding, and people resent you for it, "because we can"
Currently, (as of 2/21/2006 at the time of this post), 50% were offended by the cartoon and another 18% were opposed to the idea of printing the cartoon (not offended but opposed to the idea of printing the cartoon).
Only 28% viewed a favorable opinion of printing the cartoon and that was broken down into a 12% category and an 18% category.
Another 4% did not understand the cartoon. I will try to post a link to the article to this Freeper thread, so other people can view the poll.
We're coming over there and we're gonna draw cartoons about ya'!
Take that.
The Title of the ARTICLE is: TO PRINT OR NOT PRINT. Link is below.
REMEMBER - THIS IS NOT A FREEREPUBLIC LINK BUT A LINK TO THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE ABOUT THE CONTROVERSY...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.