Yesterday I heard a Muslim spokesperson defend the notion of justifiable offence caused by images of the prophet. His argument was that the video footage of the Paris killing of the police officer was censored to avoid offence to the family so why shouldn’t images of the prophet be censored to avoid offence to Muslims. The point he made supports what ADNE Tweeted to me ‘ Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?’ Perhaps I trust the liberal media intelligentsia to impose censorship but not ordinary people of a faith I happen to find hard to take seriously
Is this a fair point? – (yes I had to Google it as well) – ‘who guards the guardians?’ I suppose the conclusion for an atheist like me is that blasphemy is not a worthy enough outrage for society (whoever that is) to be allowed to impose censorship. The individual sensibilities of the police officers family should be protected. I am not sure I am happy with that conclusion and wonder what others think? I think I may be setting myself and my views above those of others like some sort of atheist missionary out to convert people. How unpleasant.