Why It Is a Mistake To Apologize for "The Innocence of Muslims"

Sep 14, 2012 15:40

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 ( Read more... )

mitt romney, diplomacy, legal, constitutional, islam, barack obama, moral

Leave a comment

Comments 5

skarman September 15 2012, 09:07:00 UTC
His actions and by extension, Hillary's, echo those of the Dutch government, when MP Wilders produced his movie Fitna.

They sent out diplomatic envoys to the islamic nations, apologizing for that pesky little thing called 'free speech' that allowed that dastardly man to make that movie. They actually gave it MORE airtime then if they'd just shut their mouths. What happened was massive protests against the man, death threats etc. just like now.

Reply


avon_deer September 15 2012, 11:12:34 UTC
It is rare that I find myself agreeing with something you say, but in this case you're 100% right. Freedom of expression is a right that was fought hard for and took many centuries of spilled blood to achieve. We cannot, and we must not allow the forces of superstition to use the threat of violence to dictate to us what we can or cannot say in our own countries. Behaviour like this needs to be stopped. Now you and I may disagree on the point of what methods are best used to achieve this. But at least CAN agree on the importance of achieving it.

Reply


expanding_x_man September 15 2012, 23:18:10 UTC
Yes, apologizing is just the wrong tactic. It gives the impression of weakness as well and weakness is not treated mercifully, but with savage violence. We are NOT dealing with rational or reasonable people; that memo has not gotten to Obama or - to Hillary.

Reply

jordan179 September 15 2012, 23:40:24 UTC
It's weak and mendacious, unless Obama really does mean to stop future "insults to Islam" (and if he does, that would be in blatant violation of the First Amendment). Assuming he's not willing to go that far, then what happens the next time Islam decides to be insulted by our free expression of ideas?

Reply


irked_indeed September 17 2012, 16:10:12 UTC
I really like this explanation of apology and why some things shouldn't be apologized for.

I've found myself arguing of late against the entire idea of "national apologies." One should free to apologize for what one views as one's own particular mistakes and misdeeds - but don't incorporate everyone else in the country into them.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up