tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post2773557538946454375..comments2024-03-29T04:31:15.219-05:00Comments on Pastoral Meanderings: Freedom's shame. . . Pastor Petershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10653554256101480140noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-35621420842747504422015-01-13T14:08:25.173-06:002015-01-13T14:08:25.173-06:00There is no issue here about satire against Christ...There is no issue here about satire against Christ or his Body (the Church); it is blasphemy. The issue in the referenced quote is whether satire (either written or in cartoons or images) used against a secular or spiritual enemy dishonors or fails to honor the sacrifice of those who defended our country's freedom of expresson. <br /><br />It is NOT a "waste of precious freedom" NOR "demeans freedom" to employ satire at an appropriate target, any more than it is a "waste of precious freedom" or "demeans freedom" to attack the same target with reasoned words or ideas. <br /><br />Lutherans recognize no proscription in Scripture against satire itself under the Eighth Commandment. Indeed in his Large Catechism explanation Luther employs both reason and satire in some descriptions of those who do break the commandment. And of course, Luther included abundant satire in his writings along with the woodcuts about the pope and others attacking Christians and Christian doctrine. (There is also the example from our Lord's words in the Mt. 23 and elsewhere.)<br /><br />When satire is wrong in its attack of a target it is for the same violation that alleged "reasoned words or ideas" would be wrong in their attack against that same target. <br /><br />If the satire attacks a public target, actions, or behavior which are recognized as being at least "crude and rude" or "vulgar" if not more so, then the labeling of satire as "crude and rude" or "vulgar" is little more than a description based on one's personal disposition, like the freedom to choose which socks to wear.Carl Vehsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00348831096001668813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-48378019292627186332015-01-13T08:24:11.919-06:002015-01-13T08:24:11.919-06:00Honestly, Dr. Strickert, what ever satisfies you. ...Honestly, Dr. Strickert, what ever satisfies you. I was no more defending Islam than the man in the moon but I was suggesting that our precious freedom is wasted upon cartoons which are crude and rude -- as if this is best we can do in response to the many whose blood has been shed to protect freedom of expression! In case you did not know this, Islam is neither the first nor the exclusive domain of Charlie Hebdo's vulgar satire. Christians are first and foremost among their targets. To suggest that such demeans freedom of expression is NOT to defend Islam from such vulgarity. It is to suggest that too often those who have nothing to contribute to a debate, make up for the lack of reasoned words or ideas with just that -- crude (meaning vulgar) satire. What a waste of precious freedom. I will defend the right of someone to say it but I do not have to condone what is said. Pastor Petershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10653554256101480140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-62155158614780141112015-01-12T21:12:19.324-06:002015-01-12T21:12:19.324-06:00"Pastor Peter did not even mention Islam"...<i>"Pastor Peter did not even mention Islam"</i><br /><br />Actually he did. And besides, is anyone claiming that the assassinations of the people at Charlie Hebdo were because of what they had published about Christians, or the Amish, or the Tea Party?<br /><br /><i>"How is what Pastor Peter wrote anywhere close to what Pres Obama said?"</i> <br /><br />Just as Traitorobama opposes those who criticize Mohammad and Islam, Rev. Peters' statement opposes people publishing cartoons against Mohammad and Islam (which he refers to as "crude" and Obama refers to as "slander"), like the ones from Charlie Hebdo.<br /><br />One claims the future does not belong to such people; the other claims such people are not honoring those who have died defending our freedom of speech unless they don't publish such cartoons against Islam.<br /><br />That is why those two statements appear to be getting very close.<br /><br />The quote in the earlier link is from Obama's remarks to the UN General Assembly on September 25, 2012.Carl Vehsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00348831096001668813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-2968589458806832522015-01-12T16:23:47.962-06:002015-01-12T16:23:47.962-06:00Dr. Strickert, could you kindly give us some docum...Dr. Strickert, could you kindly give us some documentation on this quote you claim is President Obama's ?tubbshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07272003035464034763noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-40964565816248887062015-01-12T16:11:29.568-06:002015-01-12T16:11:29.568-06:00Mr. Vehse,
How is what Pastor Peter wrote anywher...Mr. Vehse,<br /><br />How is what Pastor Peter wrote anywhere close to what Pres Obama said? Pastor Peter did not even mention Islam but he did point out that the bulk of Charlie Hebdo's cartoons are aimed at Christians and Jews. You really seem to be pushing another agenda here.Lutheran Lurkernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-23874959902027244352015-01-12T08:22:38.105-06:002015-01-12T08:22:38.105-06:00"Yet we would do better to honor the sacrific...<i>"Yet we would do better to honor the sacrifice of those who have bequeathed to us this privilege by using the power of our arguments better than the crude cartoons Charlie Hebdo is known for."</i> <br /><br />This is getting very close to a paraphrase of <a href="http://beforeitsnews.com/contributor/upload/104385/images/future-must-not-belong-to-those-who-slander-prophet-islam-mohammad-barack-hussein-obama-muslim.jpg" rel="nofollow">this statement</a>.Carl Vehsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00348831096001668813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-58224057589432015322015-01-12T06:03:20.943-06:002015-01-12T06:03:20.943-06:00Very well-said.Very well-said.Rich Kauzlarichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04435925743346936088noreply@blogger.com