ONE DOESN'T generally consider the pope an offensive fellow. In recent memory, the papacy has projected an image of quiet dignity and patient resolve to uphold seemingly anachronistic ideas in a world gone awry. Recently, however, Pope Benedict XVI's remarks caused a worldwide uproar. The contextualized use of a Byzantine emperor'sremark in an academic speech about logic and understanding the nature of God has plunged the pope into a firestorm of criticism from Muslims around the world. Whether or not the remarks were valid in any way, shape or form is irrelevant. Much more troubling is the double standard by which world leaders are judged regarding what they are "allowed" to say. Both the citizens of Western nations and the international community hold the leaders of these nations to a higher standard and expect them to be more restrained. While it is reasonable that they be held accountable for their words by their own citizens, the international community should apply the same standards to public statements from all its leaders.
The problem lies in the fact that international opinion has come to expect that leaders from the United States and Europe will do their best not to step on the toes of other nations, that they will be docile and level-headed at all times and that they will stand aloof from petty comments and inflammatory statements. This in and of itself is not wrong; there is nothing wrong with not making incendiary remarks about other nations or groups.
The problem arises when the international community no longer tolerates statements by some nations or leaders but allows those of others to pass unnoticed. The pope's recent comments, in which he quoted a 14th century document that claimed that some of Muhammad's teachings were "evil and inhuman" especially "his command to spread by the sword the faith that he preached," have spawned a flurry of criticism and a violent reaction within the Muslim communities of the world.
The great irony lies in the fact that the pope's speech deplored using violence to promulgate religion and instead called for the use of reason and logic in discerning religion. However, the limited attention the world pays to the comments of other leaders makes response to the pope's comments unfair. In response to the pope's comments, an Iranian cleric accused him, along with President Bush, of trying to "repeat the crusades," a reactionary statement which, if uttered by a Western leader, would have elicited an outpouring of angry sentiments.
Other leaders took a more relaxed approach and called for merely an apology. But where were the calls for apology when leaders of other countries call for the destruction of Israel? Iran's Ayatollah Khamenei described the country as the "hated and repugnant Zionist face" and lauded "the power of faith and holy war," (exactly what the pope's text decried). And yet, we do not see nations attacking Iranians in the streets or bombing mosques. We do not see national assemblies passing legislation condemning the speaker or even calling for an internationally recognized apology. One wonders why this is the case.
The international community has become accustomed to diatribes like this from certain countries over the years and now does not even bat an eye they issue such words. The world has learned largely to ignore the frequent issuance of Al-Qaeda tapes and their messages of pure spite. But when the pope, an old man who stands for peace and understanding, references an arcane document recording a conversation that took place over 600 years ago in a speech that only briefly centers on Islam before moving on to a discussion of Hellenism, he draws the ire of nations spanning the globe from Egypt to Indonesia.
It is unfair to say that one religious leader may not speak critically of another while allowing others to make extremist statements on a regular basis without so much as flinching.
As a nation that cherishes and protects the freedom of speech and promotes it and others around the world, we ought to be outraged at the condemnation that rains down on those who express views that are out of line with more vocal viewpoints. More than anything else, we should be filled with indignation at the double standard that pervades international communications, allowing some total freedom and repressing others.
Robby Colby is a Cavalier Daily Viewpoint writer.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | YesterdayLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 4 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
