Given the above conversation, I would like to push the subject to examine how it impacts the way we respond to other things in life that might be associated with our respective faiths.
It seems that the issue is one regarding sensitivity. Be it that we label soone as over-sensitive or not sensitive enough, such labels seem to be to be making a value statement that there is a certain "correct" level of sensitivity that all should share. Personally, I don't think that is true.
I operate on more of a floating sensitivity scale. Two different people could say the same thing to me and with one I would be offended and another not based on what else I know about them. It's called considering the source. Thus, I try to not take offense at the things children say, because they often say "offensive" things not to incite or be cruel, but simply because they don't know any better. So, too, I try to not take offesne at things that people from outside my own culture say.
I've had to practice this often with some of my own (adult) children who are from other countries, and thus other cultures. Yesterday, my daughter (who is from Hong Kong, I'm from the USA) unknowningly said something that might normally be construed as offensive in a comment to me as we were planning a trip she is taking to come home for a visit. Now she was probably not even aware of how her remark might have been taken, and since she is really excited about coming home, she obviously wasn't seeking to offend. So, I had a choice to either allow myself to be upset by it, or dismiss it as something culturally related and not intended. I chose the latter.
I'm thinking that if this could happen within our family between me and my daughter, just how easyily it could happen between people of different religious and social backgrounds. One might use a pattern of behavior for reacting to things that is very common in one's own circle, but because in our global society no behavior is ever limited to one's own circle anymore and thus in the process offend others. An actual example that I, myself, still don't understand, is the reaction to the Danish cartoon about the Prophet. Now, in this case I can even see why people might have felt insulted, but I don't think I will ever understand why the response to it should have involved the violence that it did.
Then there is
Talking Jesus Doll; though I find it nausiating, I suppose that someone actually thinks this is a good idea. But that isn't the point. The issue is, even though, to me, this smacks more of capitalism run amock ("anything for a buck"), it isn't something that is worth fireboming a Wal-Mart (or whever these things get sold) over. Not that it isn't offensive; but I, not others, am in control of how I respond to the offense. I don't have to respond in kind, one offense provoking another till we have a world at war. My understanding is that the real Jesus is bigger than a Talking Jesus Doll, and doesn't need me to defend him from even an entire marketplace filled with them.
In the long run, I think a better response on my part to an offense, is to do exactly what I do with children:
- Ignore it, as being from someone who doesn't understand.
- If I'm in a position where I can respond, to speak to it explaining the nature of nature of the offense so that we might better understand each other and not continue to offend.
- If they do continue, to still ignore it, as being from someone who obviously isn't sensitive enough to care about other people's feelings, hence I don't need to give any weight to theirs. Just because someone else is insensitive doesn't require me to be intolerant.