Intellectual Consistency 

About that champion of free speech...

The lawsuit against Mr. Wilders has been hailed in the Netherlands as a good thing for democracy. I am not so sure. It makes him look more important than he should be. In fact, the response of Dutch Muslims to his film last year was exemplary: most said nothing at all. And when a small Dutch Muslim TV station offered to broadcast the film, after all other stations had refused, the grand champion of free speech resolutely turned the offer down.

via The Watchers of Mr. Aaronovitch

Druid in a dress, or, why hippies should not be appointed to the See of Canterbury

[Disclaimer/rant: I wanted Sentamu. Like almost all the other 77 million Christians who are members of the Anglican communion, my opinion was neither sought nor required: the winnowing was done by the Crown Appointments Committee, the final choice made by Tony Blair, and the whole thing rubber stamped by Her Maj. Given we're bringing democracy to Iraq, would it be too much to bring it to the C of E? The larger churches elect their churchwardens and PCCs as it is - it wouldn't require too much paperwork to elect vicars, bishops and archbishops. While we're at it, we could directly elect the House of Laity to the General Synod.]

Dr Williams, the Bearded Wonder, has been making speeches again. This is his right. But it a right he wants to deny to others:

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has called for new laws to protect religious sensibilities that would punish “thoughtless and cruel” styles of speaking.

Yes, we should make hurt feelings against the law, that's an appropriate restriction

...[T]he current blasphemy law was “unworkable” and he had no objection to its repeal.But whatever replaces it should “send a signal” about what was acceptable.

Signals should be sent by post, text or email, not legislation.

This should be done by “stigmatising and punishing extreme behaviours” that have the effect of silencing argument.

By cutting out the middle man and silencing arguments directly, via legislative fiat.

I summed up my views on the silliness of laws against offense, specifically blasphemy in the comments over at PJ's place.

Legislate at haste, repeal at leisure

The Devil's Kitchen has a robust take on the matter (NB: language a trifle direct)

Why I am not a Leftist

From the "Letters Page" of the Guardian:

It's right that we reflect on the appalling human-rights record of Sudan. But is not the bear which was to go home with the children not also an opportunity to see ourselves as others do? Our encouragement to our children to anthropomorphise wild animals is a baffling feature of our culture. The children's sections of bookshops offer little more than a choice between stories of white children or talking animals. Where does it all lead? Urban pets, Animal Liberation and more spending on pet food than the world's poor have to feed themselves. Many Muslims find our relationships with dogs particularly distasteful, not least in loving them for their companionship. I suppose we must have been doing it since we started breeding them in our post-glacial caves. No wonder we are muddled enough to think calling a stuffed bear Muhammad is OK on the grounds that so many Muslims name their sons after him.
Tom Snow
London

I hope this is a parody. I fear it is not.