Washington Post

I know this is old, but the more I think about the cartoon from the Washington Post, the more aggrivated I get. Here is the post's response to many complaints about the cartoon

“Pat Oliphant is a syndicated editorial cartoonist carried on news sites across the country. It is the nature of an editorial cartoonist to be provocative and offer up unique — and often controversial — viewpoints on the issues of the day. I have always opted for the approach that we should not limit the cartoonist’s freedom of speech. We prefer to present the cartoon and allow you, the reader, to make the choice on whether to read it or not, and to express your own freedom of speech if you’re bothered or offended by it.”

My problem is this, would they publish a cartoon that was sexist, racist, and homophobic, or is just "controversial" to make fun of christians. We can all remember the cartoon that was publish in Europe mocking Muhammed. The Islamic religion threatned vilonce. The double standerd in the media is unberable. It is said, that Patrick Henry said this in 1776 “It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great Nation was founded not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religious, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For that reason alone, people of other faiths have been afforded freedom of worship here.” Now in 2008 the Washington Post published this


How far have we slipped.