The broader principle

The BBC reports:

The president of a London university atheist society has resigned over a row about an image of the Prophet Muhammad.

The society at University College London (UCL) published an image on its Facebook page showing "Jesus and Mo" having a drink at a bar.

The atheist group was asked by the UCL union to remove it, but refused and started a petition defending its freedom of expression.

A student Muslim group began a counter-petition asking for its removal.

UCL's Atheist, Secularist and Humanist society said its president Robbie Yellon was stepping down to be replaced by former vice president Michael Thor.

"Robbie stepped aside because he signed up as president to organise events and run a student society," said Michael Paynter, secretary for the National Federation of Atheist, Humanist and Secular Student Societies.

"He did not appreciate the stress he would be under when dealing with a controversy like this, so he wanted to make way for someone else."

The Ahmadiyya Muslim Youth Association is continuing with its protest against the image, saying it has wider implications.

Adam Walker, the association's national spokesperson, said the two student groups had worked well together in the past and said the offence was unnecessary.

"The principle is more important than who is being attacked - this time it is Muslims and Christians but in the future it could be atheists themselves."

What a fatuous comment. For a start, no, it isn't Muslims and Christians. No Christians complained. And no one was "attacked". Certain Muslims chose to be offended by logging on to an atheist society's Facebook page. That is all. And the idea that atheists would be horrified if they were offended in turn is simply laughable. What does this idiot think? - that a rude cartoon of Richard Dawkins would be met with howls of outrage?  

"There is no need to print these things other than to cause offence and history has told us that these things cause offence."

He added: "I wouldn't say we're specifically pursuing UCL atheist society, it's more about the broader principle."

What broader principle? That no one should ever be offended? In a free society there is no such principle.

The article closes with this smug pronunciation from the UCL Union:

"The atheist society has agreed they will take more consideration when drawing up publicity for future events.

"The society was asked to remove the image because UCLU aims to foster good relations between different groups of students and create a safe environment where all students can benefit from societies regardless of their religious or other beliefs."

So for the Beeb and the UCL Union it all ends happily: the atheists have learned their lesson; their president has resigned under a cloud; and in future they'll show more consideration for the feelings of Muslims others.

How very depressing.

Comments

[Dom]

"...this time it is Muslims and Christians but in the future it could be atheists themselves."

In the future it could be atheists? Atheists were threatened, by the Muslim students. Maybe he didn't think this through.