Why It Is a Mistake To Apologize for "The Innocence of Muslims"
When one apologizes, one is implicitly or explictly stating three things. The first is that the act for which one apologizes is morally wrong. The second is that one could have prevented this act. The third is that one will try to prevent recurrences of this act in the future.
Not one of these conditions applies to The Innocence of Muslims. It is not morally wrong to make and distribute a movie, even a movie which offends people. The US Government could not under our OWN rule of law have prevented the making and distribution of this movie. And the US Government will not be able to under our own rule of law be able to prevent the making and distribution of similar such movies in the future.
Thus the apology is dishonest or worse. It amounts to an admission that it is morally wrong to engage in open speech against Islam. It involves Obama giving the false impression that he could legally have prevented the film-makers from doing so. And it involves a false implicit promise that we will prevent such anti-Muslim speech in the future. The apology is an act of verbal submission which will -- when the next major anti-Muslim speech from America is revealed -- result in contemptuous anger from the Islamic world, for they will see that we have not kept our implicit promise.
The darker possibility is that Obama believes that he can stop anti-Muslim speech in the future, and intends to act to do so. If that is the case, then everyone's freedom of speech is threatened: for if the government can stifle political and religious criticism regarding one issue, then it can do so regarding all issues.
It would have been far better if Obama had said: "I'm sorry you're offended, but in America we have the right to speak freely; we did nothing wrong by speaking freely; and we will say things like this many times again in the future: grow thicker skins."
Let's hope that President Romney does better than did Obama.
Not one of these conditions applies to The Innocence of Muslims. It is not morally wrong to make and distribute a movie, even a movie which offends people. The US Government could not under our OWN rule of law have prevented the making and distribution of this movie. And the US Government will not be able to under our own rule of law be able to prevent the making and distribution of similar such movies in the future.
Thus the apology is dishonest or worse. It amounts to an admission that it is morally wrong to engage in open speech against Islam. It involves Obama giving the false impression that he could legally have prevented the film-makers from doing so. And it involves a false implicit promise that we will prevent such anti-Muslim speech in the future. The apology is an act of verbal submission which will -- when the next major anti-Muslim speech from America is revealed -- result in contemptuous anger from the Islamic world, for they will see that we have not kept our implicit promise.
The darker possibility is that Obama believes that he can stop anti-Muslim speech in the future, and intends to act to do so. If that is the case, then everyone's freedom of speech is threatened: for if the government can stifle political and religious criticism regarding one issue, then it can do so regarding all issues.
It would have been far better if Obama had said: "I'm sorry you're offended, but in America we have the right to speak freely; we did nothing wrong by speaking freely; and we will say things like this many times again in the future: grow thicker skins."
Let's hope that President Romney does better than did Obama.