本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛In recent years, some Christians have been deeply offended by modern "art" that pictures Jesus's face on the lid of a "toilet altar." That has a Crucifix immersed in urine or offers a picture of the Virgin Mary smeared with elephant dung. Some see such images as a blasphemous affront to faith and an attack on believers.
最近几年，一些基督徒被现代“艺术”得罪不少。“艺术”作品把他们信奉的耶稣的脸画在马桶盖上，把十字架浸在尿槽里，或者他们的圣母玛利亚像被画在了象粪纸上。在一些信徒看来，这些“艺术”无疑是对宗教信仰的亵渎侮辱，以及是对信徒的挑战。
But the American and British artists who produced these images were free to put them on display, and they have been widely reproduced.
既使这样，美国和英国的这些艺术家仍然可以自由地创作这些作品并公开展示，然后它们又被广为转载。
Freedom of expression in Canada and other democracies is a cherished, fundamental right. And being free, means being free to challenge, provoke and even offend.
在加拿大和其他民主政治国家，言论自由是一项珍贵，基本的权利。要想言论自由，那就意味着我们可以自由向他人挑战、挑衅、甚至得罪别人。
That is the context in which Canadians must consider the fury that has erupted across the Muslim world after the publication of a collection of "blasphemous" caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad in Denmark's Jyllands-Posten newspaper, and reprinted elsewhere. The Qu'ran bans depictions of the Prophet.
加拿大人必须意识到是在哪种背景下发生了一场漫画风波。在丹麦的日德兰邮报（Jyllands-Posten）刊登了几幅“亵渎”伊斯兰教先知穆罕默德的讽刺漫画，其后，这些漫画又被其他报纸转载， 从而引发了整个穆斯林世界的冲天怒火。伊斯兰教的古兰经禁止为先知画像。
These cartoons not only show him, but crudely mock him. One has Muhammad wearing a turban bomb. Another has him wearing the crescent of Islam as devil's horns.
而这些讽刺漫画不仅仅画了先知穆罕默德，而且对他进行嘲笑和讽刺。其中一副是穆罕默德头戴一条状如炸弹的头巾，而另一副将他戴的伊斯兰教新月标志当作恶魔的号角。
The images have sparked one of the ugliest and, possibly, most hypocritical cultural clashes in years.
这些漫画引发的冲突是近年来最丑恶，或许也是最为表里不一的文化冲突之一。
Yesterday Muslims in many countries staged huge protests after Friday prayers, demanding the Danish government punish the newspaper for its "Islamophobic" and "racist" cartoons. Ambassadors have been recalled. There have been bomb threats. Attacks on diplomats. An economic boycott. Death threats.
昨天，许多国家的穆斯林在星期五的祈祷后举行了大规模的抗议活动，他们要求丹麦政府惩罚刊登 “亵渎伊斯兰教”和“种族歧视”漫画的日德兰邮报。他们召回在丹麦的大使。有人发出爆炸威胁；有人袭击外交官；有人要抵制丹麦产品；有人发出死亡威胁。
While many Canadians will sympathize with Muslim dismay at this shabby treatment of the Prophet, this reaction is out of proportion to the offence. Those living in Western, secular, democratic societies have long since moved away from the days when blasphemy invited stoning.
当穆罕默德先知被这样低劣的嘲讽时，许多加拿大人都会对穆斯林信徒表示同情。但是，以暴力和威胁行来对付这样的漫画攻击实在是太过分了。那些长期生活在西方民主社会的人早就秉承了“君子动口不动手”的行为准则了。
That said, the cartoons are problematic for another reason.
换句话说，这些漫画还反映另一层的问题。
They bait Muslims and risk inciting hatred by equating Islam with terror and evil. They would likely withstand a legal challenge here, because the courts wisely give wide latitude to political commentary. Papers are free to air a variety of opinion.
明明知道将伊斯兰教等同于恐怖和邪恶会引起穆斯林的仇恨，但他们还是发表了这些漫画。他们几乎不可能在法庭上败诉，因为法庭会明智地赋予政治评论以很大的自由度。报纸可以自由发表不同的观点。
Even so, some of the cartoons are gratuitously offensive. The Star would not have published them, although we affirm our right to do so.
即使是这样，这些漫画中的几幅实在伤人太深。星报将不会刊登这些漫画，虽然我们完全有权这样去做。
And sadly, there is hypocrisy all around in this melodrama.
令人悲哀的是，这场闹剧中充满了只许州官放火，不许百姓点灯的双重标准。
Many Muslims who are angry come from Arab states where the press routinely prints cartoons linking the Jewish faith to violence. Recent ones have made a Star of David into a terrorist's face, and have shown an orthodox Jew blowing flame from a ram's horn to scorch an Islamic shrine. Where is the outrage at these images by people who are upset by the caricatures of Mohammed?
许多愤怒的穆斯林来自那些阿拉伯国家。在这些国家的报纸上，他们的漫画常常把犹太教与暴力联在一起。最近有些漫画将以色列的国徽画成一个恐怖分子的脸，犹太教教徒用羊角号喷火烧毁一座伊斯兰圣庙。那些被穆罕默德的讽刺漫画激怒的人这时都跑到哪里去了？
By the same token, liberal democrats in Europe and elsewhere who fault the Arab press for invoking religion as a means to make a political point, are poorly placed trying to justify the Danish cartoons, which do the same thing.
正因为如此，欧洲及其他地方的自由民主党人常常指责阿拉伯报纸借用宗教作为一种获取政治得分的手段，而现在他们也在竭力设法以此证明丹麦报纸刊登讽刺漫画是正当做法，因为它只是做了与阿拉伯报纸同样的事情。
Jyllands-Posten had a right to print them. Whether it was wise to exercise that right, is another matter.
无论如何，日德兰邮报有权刊登这些漫画。至于这家报纸使用这样权利是否明智，那又另当别论了！更多精彩文章及讨论，请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
最近几年，一些基督徒被现代“艺术”得罪不少。“艺术”作品把他们信奉的耶稣的脸画在马桶盖上，把十字架浸在尿槽里，或者他们的圣母玛利亚像被画在了象粪纸上。在一些信徒看来，这些“艺术”无疑是对宗教信仰的亵渎侮辱，以及是对信徒的挑战。
But the American and British artists who produced these images were free to put them on display, and they have been widely reproduced.
既使这样，美国和英国的这些艺术家仍然可以自由地创作这些作品并公开展示，然后它们又被广为转载。
Freedom of expression in Canada and other democracies is a cherished, fundamental right. And being free, means being free to challenge, provoke and even offend.
在加拿大和其他民主政治国家，言论自由是一项珍贵，基本的权利。要想言论自由，那就意味着我们可以自由向他人挑战、挑衅、甚至得罪别人。
That is the context in which Canadians must consider the fury that has erupted across the Muslim world after the publication of a collection of "blasphemous" caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad in Denmark's Jyllands-Posten newspaper, and reprinted elsewhere. The Qu'ran bans depictions of the Prophet.
加拿大人必须意识到是在哪种背景下发生了一场漫画风波。在丹麦的日德兰邮报（Jyllands-Posten）刊登了几幅“亵渎”伊斯兰教先知穆罕默德的讽刺漫画，其后，这些漫画又被其他报纸转载， 从而引发了整个穆斯林世界的冲天怒火。伊斯兰教的古兰经禁止为先知画像。
These cartoons not only show him, but crudely mock him. One has Muhammad wearing a turban bomb. Another has him wearing the crescent of Islam as devil's horns.
而这些讽刺漫画不仅仅画了先知穆罕默德，而且对他进行嘲笑和讽刺。其中一副是穆罕默德头戴一条状如炸弹的头巾，而另一副将他戴的伊斯兰教新月标志当作恶魔的号角。
The images have sparked one of the ugliest and, possibly, most hypocritical cultural clashes in years.
这些漫画引发的冲突是近年来最丑恶，或许也是最为表里不一的文化冲突之一。
Yesterday Muslims in many countries staged huge protests after Friday prayers, demanding the Danish government punish the newspaper for its "Islamophobic" and "racist" cartoons. Ambassadors have been recalled. There have been bomb threats. Attacks on diplomats. An economic boycott. Death threats.
昨天，许多国家的穆斯林在星期五的祈祷后举行了大规模的抗议活动，他们要求丹麦政府惩罚刊登 “亵渎伊斯兰教”和“种族歧视”漫画的日德兰邮报。他们召回在丹麦的大使。有人发出爆炸威胁；有人袭击外交官；有人要抵制丹麦产品；有人发出死亡威胁。
While many Canadians will sympathize with Muslim dismay at this shabby treatment of the Prophet, this reaction is out of proportion to the offence. Those living in Western, secular, democratic societies have long since moved away from the days when blasphemy invited stoning.
当穆罕默德先知被这样低劣的嘲讽时，许多加拿大人都会对穆斯林信徒表示同情。但是，以暴力和威胁行来对付这样的漫画攻击实在是太过分了。那些长期生活在西方民主社会的人早就秉承了“君子动口不动手”的行为准则了。
That said, the cartoons are problematic for another reason.
换句话说，这些漫画还反映另一层的问题。
They bait Muslims and risk inciting hatred by equating Islam with terror and evil. They would likely withstand a legal challenge here, because the courts wisely give wide latitude to political commentary. Papers are free to air a variety of opinion.
明明知道将伊斯兰教等同于恐怖和邪恶会引起穆斯林的仇恨，但他们还是发表了这些漫画。他们几乎不可能在法庭上败诉，因为法庭会明智地赋予政治评论以很大的自由度。报纸可以自由发表不同的观点。
Even so, some of the cartoons are gratuitously offensive. The Star would not have published them, although we affirm our right to do so.
即使是这样，这些漫画中的几幅实在伤人太深。星报将不会刊登这些漫画，虽然我们完全有权这样去做。
And sadly, there is hypocrisy all around in this melodrama.
令人悲哀的是，这场闹剧中充满了只许州官放火，不许百姓点灯的双重标准。
Many Muslims who are angry come from Arab states where the press routinely prints cartoons linking the Jewish faith to violence. Recent ones have made a Star of David into a terrorist's face, and have shown an orthodox Jew blowing flame from a ram's horn to scorch an Islamic shrine. Where is the outrage at these images by people who are upset by the caricatures of Mohammed?
许多愤怒的穆斯林来自那些阿拉伯国家。在这些国家的报纸上，他们的漫画常常把犹太教与暴力联在一起。最近有些漫画将以色列的国徽画成一个恐怖分子的脸，犹太教教徒用羊角号喷火烧毁一座伊斯兰圣庙。那些被穆罕默德的讽刺漫画激怒的人这时都跑到哪里去了？
By the same token, liberal democrats in Europe and elsewhere who fault the Arab press for invoking religion as a means to make a political point, are poorly placed trying to justify the Danish cartoons, which do the same thing.
正因为如此，欧洲及其他地方的自由民主党人常常指责阿拉伯报纸借用宗教作为一种获取政治得分的手段，而现在他们也在竭力设法以此证明丹麦报纸刊登讽刺漫画是正当做法，因为它只是做了与阿拉伯报纸同样的事情。
Jyllands-Posten had a right to print them. Whether it was wise to exercise that right, is another matter.
无论如何，日德兰邮报有权刊登这些漫画。至于这家报纸使用这样权利是否明智，那又另当别论了！更多精彩文章及讨论，请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net