Cartoonist Seeing Red After 'Muhammad' Cartoon Yanked
An award-winning cartoonist is seeing red after editors at The Washington Post and other newspapers pulled a "very tame" cartoon that alluded to the Prophet Muhammad.
Wiley Miller, whose "Non Sequitur" comic strip has won several national awards and appears daily in roughly 800 newspapers, said he was not surprised by the decision to yank the single-panel, "Where's Muhammad?" cartoon because even the word itself is such a "dicey thing" nowadays.
"That's all they saw," Miller told FoxNews.com of the word Muhammad. "[Editors] didn't see the satire was on them, of being petrified to run anything related to him. But this whole thing has just gotten so silly over the years. It's something I can't lay off. It's my job as a satirist to point out the stupidity in the world. And the editors fell right in line with proving how stupid it is."...
Jessica Dawson wrote: I am sorry friend, but it really looks like you are debasing me and exalting yourself.
Friend, that is a heart judgment and you don't know my heart anymore than I know yours. It was not my known intent to debase your opinion or to exalt my own. If I did so, it was not my intent. My intent was for me in my opinions to keep first table commandments and honor God's opinion above yours or mine. I have tried to regulate what I do accordingly, yet not perfectly. I myself left a very lucrative job for conscience sake and it was a battle until it was resolved. The job was not sinful in itself, but the apostasy made it offensive to my conscience, and my conscience is not yours.
Hope wrote: Personally, I would not encourage the use of cartoons for serious and weighty subjects, nor could I be an editor at this time in history with a conscience void of offense to God and man. Maybe someday but not now.
I have been trying to give my opinions on this board. Why do you seem to keep attacking my posts? Why do you seem to also malign my practices as an editor, when I haven't even shared them with the board? Why do you seem to indicate your godliness and my alleged unrighteousness?
I am sorry friend, but it really looks like you are debasing me and exalting yourself. May God bless you and teach you His way.
Matthew 23:12 And whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.
Personally, I would not encourage the use of cartoons for serious and weighty subjects, nor could I be an editor at this time in history with a conscience void of offense to God and man. Maybe someday but not now.
Every editor is going to have to deal with someone who is irate, because their submission wasn't accepted.[/QUOTE]I agree, but it is not whether they please themselves or the owner of the paper but whether they please God. That was my original point that I did not make clear. I'm sorry. We each one must give an account to God. Christians will have a greater responsibility for as you pointed out they are entrusted with truth and virtue. But all men will reckon to God for their conscience and this nation that has had the less clear light of truth, as a nation, since its constitution. It will not be as accountable as some nations. I believe this a true and honest statement, therefore consistent with Phil.4:8
Philippians 4:8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.
It is easy to lose sight that we are supposed to think about, such as: "whatsoever things are of good report." Our minds are supposed to dwell on what is virtuous, things worthy of praise.
Every editor is going to have to deal with someone who is irate, because their submission wasn't accepted.
Ephesians 5:18-20 And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit; Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ;
We would do well to be thinking about the things, that God prescribes in His Word that we should think about. Yes, that is myself included! Having schizophrenia, head injuries and a crippling disease: God's message in His Word, has had to be a staple for my mind's diet. God bless!
Cbcpreacher, I've gone off topic that was relative to an editor's civil responsibility. I believe that was where you entered the dialog.
I don't believe God sees France and England from the same perspective but more like Israel and Judah. Both nations had a suffering remnant, but only one was a Christian nation in constitution. Our nation is deist in constitution, with a suffering remnant of true Christians, similar to France historically.
Though only the Father knows, I don't believe Christ's return is eminent because there is unfulfilled prophecy. He is not done with Israel, as a nation though in the days to come it may appear that He is. see Hosea 2 and Romans 11. I believe in separation of Church & State because their jobs are different, and that no nation has ever been a Christian nation unless Jesus Christ is declared to be Lord in their constitution. See Daniel 4:34-37 for a heathen king that understood God's essential dominion. Jesus Christ IS Lord and the now ascended Prince of the kings of the earth, this I know by faith in the Scripture for it is written. Psalm 2
Hope, You asked if I have sermons on this sight. No, I don't. Where you looking to see where I stood on an issue or what my thoughts might be on something? Maybe I can answer for you. In regard to my statement about our country, I might ask if you think God is done with other countries like France or England? They have travel much further down the road of apostasy than the US has; is God done with them? So often we associate Christianity with patriotism, but only as it applies to OUR homeland. Is God donew with Israel? Or, as you did point out, is it that God is at work through the elect as a chosen nation of a heavenly origin? I guess that would be my view; God is at work through His church, regardless of where a particular nation might be in relationship to Him.
Cbcpreacher wrote: Therefore, I agree with Jesus still when He said, "My kingdom is not of this world". That would be why I made the statements that I did. Cbcpreacher, Just to clarify, when I said Protestant I could have replaced that with Reformed in doctrine and worship. I will comment on the above because I have meditated on this text as well. I believe the Lord meant, as he said in his high priestly prayer, regarding his disciples that his kingdom is still in the world but not of it. I am a historic post-millenialist. It would be just if God was done with our nation but because he is not done with his elect or his visible church it is hard to understand what God might determine. Do you have sermons on this sight?
Hope, Thank you for your kind response. I do have to say, however, that your explanation of your persuasions has left me befuddled! Protestant covers a wide range of denominations with varying doctrinal positions. I am Baptist in doctrine, holding to the doctrines of grace when it comes to salvation. I lean toward the pre-wrath view of the return of Christ and hold to the view that God will fulfill His promises to Israel in the Millenium. Therefore, I agree with Jesus still when He said, "My kingdom is not of this world". That would be why I made the statements that I did. I do agrre with you that revival without reformation would seem to be an incomplete work, yet God can do as He chooses. Our nation may very well be done, as far as God is concerned, but He will never be done with His bride.
Cbcpreacher wrote: Hope, I am assuming that you come from a dominion theology perspective.
Cbcpreacher I am not what was referred to as a Re-constructionist in my day. I am assuming that is what you mean by dominion theology. I will say that God has used some of their number to correct what I believe is an errant understanding in the visible professing church. For it is as authoritative as the New, our God is Immutable.
I agree with you that to whom much is given much is required. You may believe that means revival? I do not believe it safe to have revival without reformation. There is a mutual dependence of Church and State without it serious consequences will arise in the lives of the apple of God's eye, His people. I am Protestant in doctrine,and worship; Presbyterian in discipline and government best defined by the Free Church of Scotland's edition of the Westminster Confession of Faith.
Hope, First, I want to thank you for the kind way in which you responded. So often it gets nasty. Second, I am assuming that you come from a dominion theology perspective. If the church is going to take dominion, shouldn't it start within its own realm? We want to "christianize" America while the church is spiritually bankrupt. Would I like to see America return to its biblical roots? Absolutely! But it will only happen when the church returns to its first love, the Lord Jesus Christ. Then, and only then, will we see anything of lasting signifcance happen in our country. The church, not the media, is responsible for that.
Cbcpreacher wrote: Why do we expect any less from this newspaper or any other secular media in America?
CbcPreacher I believe your first statement on the topic above is related to the rest of the post. A house divided against itself cannot stand. That is true of the visible church and a nation when it combines error and truth when those truths have already been attained but lost by sin from generation to generation.
The proper understanding of Christ's Mediatorial Dominion has already been attained. I read this on the Lord's Day The Lord Jesus Christ has an essential dominion as a member of the adorable Trinity Rom. 9:5 over all Creation and a donative dominion as the Redeemer and Mediator of his Church given Him by the Father and administered by the Spirit's power on behalf of her Head the Lord Jesus Christ.
A Christian nation cannot have a secular media, a secular state will not long have a Christian Church, this has been proven historically, and repeats itself. It would seem to me it is the ministry and the congregation of the true religion who are instructed in the old paths that are even now being called to faithfulness at a dear price. see 1 Kings 22:24-28 Rev.11:3-4
Oooops I've been bitter, I'd better behave! Sorry Jesus and anyone I've been bitter to! Hebrews 12:15 "Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled;"
Hello, everyone! It's been a while since I've posted, but I couldn't help myself here. Why do we expect any less from this newspaper or any other secular media in America? We as believers often find it difficult to stand for truth, so why cast stones at the secular press? Let's take the plank out of our own eyes first! If we as believers would stand up for truth we wouldn't have to expect the press to do it for us!
Jessica Dawson wrote: Acts 19:37 For you have brought these men here who are neither robbers of temples nor blasphemers of your goddess.
Regarding the cartoon I do not believe it was the issue I was addressing. I was responding to your statement about editors rights and responsibilities in light of all of Scripture. All men and women of every vocation have the right and responsibility to obey God who reveals Himself in His Word. He is an Immutable God and therefore he does not change. I'll use your text for my point.
Demetrius was a tradesman, he was upset with Paul because of what he was teaching, see Acts 17:24-25; 19:26 It was going to affect his livelihood. Acts 19:24 He made no small gain. At that time, God's word had grown mightily and prevailed Acts 19:20. That was what was upsetting Demetrius. Paul was speaking the truth in love yet he did not fail to address idolatry and the worship of gods who were no gods at all. This came across clearly in Acts 17. He spoke in a manner so as not to offend for offense sake but he did not withhold truth that might be offensive. Jesus Christ to some is a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense.
Hope wrote: I thought your post sounded reasonable, but I did not think it was biblical.
Speaking the truth in love is what is right: But provoking Muslims with what seems like an innocent cartoon, when we know it upsets them, is not speaking the truth in love. Jesus Christ and His death on the cross is the answer, making light of Muslims is not. It is unnecessary to provoke Muslims, God wants them saved by The Blood of The Lamb. God bless!
You only noted part of my quote: The editors edit and "it's their money" refers to the owners on the newspaper who the editors answer to.
The Apostle Paul was caught in the midst of a riot in Ephesus and then was noted as a man who do not even blaspheme the Ephesian's goddess Diana. Paul devoted himself to the truth, speaking, teach and living truth. He didn't need to put people down for having alternate beliefs, but showed them in the way of love, to The Lord Jesus Christ.
Acts 19:37 For you have brought these men here who are neither robbers of temples nor blasphemers of your goddess.
Jessica Dawson wrote: The editors have the right to edit, it's their job. ... It's their money, their business.
I thought your post sounded reasonable, but I did not think it was biblical. I had to ask myself why not? "Let no man seek his own, but every man another's wealth." It would seem to me that every editor is duty bound before a holy God to speak the truth in love. But so few in every nation know it themselves or the God who is Love? But when the Church is the picture of Ephesians.4 teaching believers how to apply both the Old and New Testament Scriptures to their vocations and when necessary dealing with public scandals among her members, when Biblical Church discipline is being exercised with the keys given them by Christ because true biblical Church governors under one Government reflective of Ephes.4 then in that day, the local congregations will reflect Romans 12 and fulfill Rev. 11:11 by being faithful to their covenants. Then in due time the civil sphere will acknowledge it is their duty to kiss the Son lest he be angry and they perish in the way once his wrath begin to burn. Then they will protect the true religion and all their subjects, by punishing evil doers and rewarding the righteous. Isaiah 49:22-24