Eighty years after the theory of relativity, 170 years after Darwin and 300 years after the Enlightenment we should not be catering to religious crazies nor pandering to the governments and groups so adeptly using them . But in the Danish cartoon controversy American and British media refuse to print the cartoons and heads of state (the latest being Chirac of France) lecture us about our responsibilities in using our innate freedoms. The piles of hypocrisy that media organizations such as CNN and the New York Times have used to build their defense of not printing the cartoons are higher than any man-built temple. They will print images that offend other religions but not those that offend Islam. Meanwhile, the BBC, funded by the taxpayers of Britain, takes favorites in religion.

There are differing opinions about whether it is blasphemy to depict Mohammed. But, even if every Muslim in the world believed it was blasphemous they would still be wrong to force everyone else to follow this belief. I have argued in this space that it is not permissible to root ones arguments in religion when debating an issue. For example, someone can say they are against gay marriage because they think it will weaken the institution of marriage between a man and woman or because they are worried it will lead to polygamy. I will disagree with them and point out where they are wrong in their logic. However, if they are argue that they are against gay marriage because the bible says it is bad then one merely laughs at them and replies that an argument must be based on fact and logic, not faith--not Christian faith, not Islamic belief, not Jewish tenets, not Hindu scripture, not Buddhist metaphysics, not Wiccan conviction or any other belief system. If I draw Mohammed feel free to complain all you want but you cannot tell me I can't draw him or publish him or make fun of him.

It would be interesting to take a poll of Muslins done in a way that they felt comfortable they were truly responding anonymously to find out just how many really feel the same as those advocating death to the cartoonists, editors and governments. My guess is a majority don't. But, if we found otherwise, this would be good information to have. Either way it is foolish to appease those making outlandish arguments about murdering cartoonists. If there are lots of Muslims disagreeing with those burning down the streets we need to let them know we are with them. If the majority of Muslims agrees with killing cartoonists and restricting free speech we need to let them know we will not give in to their beliefs. Appeasement has never worked and only emboldens the outlandish. Like the death sentence Iran placed on Salmon Rushdie, like the destruction of the Buddhist temples by the Taliban, the drummed up hysteria over the Danish cartoons is a clear signpost of pending terror. We ignore and appease it at our peril.