"No, I said Muhammad had to kick the goat out of the outhouse before he had sex with his mother"

|

Larry Flynt weighs in on the intoonfada. Some highlights:

Do you think Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell really like the jews and the muslims? No, they tolerate them because they have to because of freedom of religion, but other countries don't have that…

[Evangelicals are] just as bad as the Muslims in many respects; they are fundamentalists…but as I say, we've been able to keep the spirit of people's right to choose a religion pretty much intact because of the way our constitution was devised…

[The media are] so wimp-kneed, you know, there's no point in even discussing the media. They're a bunch of suits in an ivory tower trying to decide what we should see, what we shouldn't see…

I haven't seen [the cartoons] yet; if I had it I'd be happy to run it. I'd do something even more offensive…

If you went out into the street and took a poll: "How many believe in free speech?" 97% would say yes. But then if you say "what about hate speech, what about flag-burning, what about pornography," that 97% falls down below 50 again. And we need Freedom of Speech to protect that.

I'll tell you what you do get in European countries: a much-more laid-back attitude towards religion and social issues like adultery…they've been through a lot and they don't get so excited over things… over anything, like these cartoons…

What I'm trying to say is European people go with the flow, and Americans are always looking for a reason to protest things.

Whole interview.

Kidding, Muhammad, kidding! We all know it was Jerry Falwell who had to kick the goat out of the outhouse.

NEXT: Fuhrer Furor

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Larry Flynt is, unfortunately, right. One of the first college papers to run the articles were rewarded with suspensions for its editors.

    Freedom to think, speak, and express is dead… atleast on our nation’s campuses of “higher” education.

  2. Larry Flint is right — I love the guy…

  3. In an interview with a Danish TV host, Alan Dershowitz fucks up an otherwise equally good rant with this:

    “If you have a circle of symmetry where everything is equally permissible or everything is equally impermissible, that is fair.”

    Flint does’t make that misstake.

  4. Flynt is, without doubt, one of the greatest defenders of the First Amendment in our time. I hope some day our society will be brave enough to erect a statue in his honor, and I hope it’s designed to offend at least half the people who see it.

  5. “I’ll tell you what you do get in European countries: a much-more laid-back attitude towards religion and social issues like adultery…they’ve been through a lot and they don’t get so excited over things… over anything, like these cartoons…”

    What is Flynt talking about here? Europe is much more restrictive as a matter of law on speech issues than the US is. If anything, as a result of this incident, Europe is going to be worse, as evidenced by this:

    “Franco Frattini, the European Union commissioner for justice, freedom and security, revealed the idea for a code of conduct in an interview with The Daily Telegraph. Mr Frattini, a former Italian foreign minister, said the EU faced the “very real problem” of trying to reconcile “two fundamental freedoms, the freedom of expression and the freedom of religion”.

    Millions of European Muslims felt “humiliated” by the publication of cartoons of Mohammed, he added, calling on journalists and media chiefs to accept that “the exercising of a right is always the assumption of a responsibility”. He appealed to European media to agree to “self-regulate”.

    Accepting such self-regulation would send an important political message to the Muslim world, Mr Frattini said.

    By agreeing to a charter “the press will give the Muslim world the message: we are aware of the consequences of exercising the right of free expression, we can and we are ready to self-regulate that right”, he said.” –
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/09/ncart109.xml

    It would behoove Flynt to see Europe and Europeans as they really are, rather than the Europe of the fantasies of American libertines.

  6. “If you have a circle of symmetry where everything is equally permissible or everything is equally impermissible, that is fair.”

    It is fair. It is NOT just. Dershowitz of all people sould know the difference.

  7. “that 97% falls down below 50 again.”

    Granted, the math-processing section of my brain is very smooth, but….wha..??

  8. Okay, that tiny wrinkle just kicked in.. He’s saying 97% would drop to minus 50%.

    Barbie is right. Math IS hard!

  9. I’ll tell you what you do get in European countries: a much-more laid-back attitude towards religion and social issues like adultery…

    Oh, hooray. That’s exactly what we need: a more permissive attitude toward people betraying and stabbing each other in the back. That will truly foster a more civil society.

    Guys? Do me a favor and work a little harder to make the libertine/libertarian cliche a little less true?

    What I’m trying to say is European people go with the flow, and Americans are always looking for a reason to protest things.

    Yeah, those Europeans really just go with the flow… as long as the flow is setting fire to cars.

  10. “…as long as the flow is setting fire to cars.”

    Says another changeling. Got mod status oh masked avenger? Hehehey.

  11. Subversive,

    Here, here. But will the statue portray him standing or sitting? And if sitting, will the wheels be visible?

  12. I hope some day our society will be brave enough to erect a statue in his honor

    The Erect Larry Flint Society.

  13. I give Larry a fully erect on this interview!

  14. Says another changeling. Got mod status oh masked avenger? Hehehey.

    Jigga what?

    I can’t understand anything in that sentence. Do you speak English? And are there names for people like you? I’m beginning to think there should be. So much of the crap I read in blogs/forums these days is unintelligible hipster stream-of-consciousness gibberish. Here’s a tip: the rest of us can’t hear the voices in your head.

  15. That entire rant was just a grand display of ignorance… does he know anything at all about Europe? They don’t protest in Europe? What the fuck is he talking about? They’re more laid back over there? Jesus is he a moron…

  16. I haven’t seen [the cartoons] yet; if I had it I’d be happy to run it. I’d do something even more offensive…

    Put your money where your mouth is, Larry. We’ll be glad to wait.

    A prediction: Larry won’t run the cartoons in question, and he certainly won’t run one showing Muhammed masturbating while thinking about his momma. He’s a pompous windbag publicity hound who realizes that Evangelical Christians might get mad at you when you smear them, but they don’t saw your head off or tear you into little pieces.

    And since Larry really wants to live a few years longer, he won’t do anything to offend Muslims.

    What a prick.

  17. DENMARK: (to Muslims) We made a fair move. Screaming about it won’t help you.
    U.S. STATE DEPT.: (interrupting) Let them have it. It’s not wise to upset a Muslim.
    DENMARK: But sir, nobody worries about upsetting a Christian.
    U.S. STATE DEPT.: That’s ’cause Christians don’t pull people’s arms out of their socket when they get offended. Muslims are known to do that.

  18. One can only hope that the result of this is a photo spread in Hustler that involves Muhammad.

  19. That’s what I was hoping for when I read this article.

    Something I read further up was about “trying to reconcile ‘two fundamental freedoms, the freedom of expression and the freedom of religion.'” Since when has someone’s expression impinged on your religious practices? I mean, if someone burns your church down and call that “expression,” then yeah, I could see that, but I don’t get how a dozen cartoons are making it more difficult for anyone to be a practicing muslims.

  20. “I’ll tell you what you do get in European countries: a much-more laid-back attitude towards religion and social issues like adultery…they’ve been through a lot and they don’t get so excited over things… over anything, like these cartoons…”

    He’s talking about the same bloc of nation-states that punish people judicially for Holocaust-denial. However abhorrent such denial is, if they had such a “laid-back attitude” they would tolerate it.

  21. Larry’s heart is in the right place, but he is like a 13 year old who gets his politics from reading the liner notes to his favorite CDs or maybe a skateboarding magazine. “All wars were caused by religion… in Europe they let everything hang out, man,” etc. There is some germ of truth to what he says, but it is banal and exaggerated.

    I certanly hope he prints those Danish cartoons, though.

  22. The best thing to come out of this so far, a new anti-Semitic cartoons contest – this time drawn by Jews themselves:

    http://www.boomka.org/

  23. Pro Lib – That was righteous! May the Schwartz be with you!

  24. He’s a pompous windbag publicity hound who realizes that Evangelical Christians might get mad at you when you smear them, but they don’t saw your head off or tear you into little pieces.

    What about that guy who shot him?

  25. I may have left this site, but look for me in next month’s Penthouse! I just got a call from Larry! Yay!

  26. Hey, RPG, will you be playing Ayesha Bibi in a pictorial?

  27. What about that guy who shot him?

    The guy who shot him was mentally deranged, IIRC. Whatever his motiviations, he certainly didn’t do it in response to some fatwa issued by Jerry Falwell.

    Which neatly expresses my original point. Larry Flynt is more than happy to smear Evangelical Christians because he knows deep down inside nothing worse than a futile lawsuit or an angry letter-writing campaign will happen.

    It will be a cold snowy day in Mecca before he does the same thing to Muslims, because he knows deep down inside he would truly be risking his life.

  28. Evangelical Christians might get mad at you when you smear them, but they don’t saw your head off or tear you into little pieces.

    A couple of them have been known to bomb abortion clinics, shoot abortion doctors and menace said doctor’s family members, though. The difference between extremist evangelical Christians and extremist Muslims is that the evangelicals, fortunately, live in a society where the law won’t let them do whatever they feel like doing.

  29. By the way, Captain Holly, did you know that when Pat Robertson was running for President, one of his proposals was to set up special Christian courts? The idea was that if a Christian killed somebody, or bombed a building, he could go before this special court and argue that he only committed this crime because God told him to; if the court agreed that his behavior was inspired by God, then the criminal would get off scot-free.

    Luckily, this lunatic wasn’t elected and is unlikely to ever be elected. But don’t delude yourself into thinking that there aren’t people in America who would be just as loony as the Muslim fanatics, if only they had the chance.

  30. By the way, Captain Holly, did you know that when Pat Robertson was running for President, one of his proposals was to set up special Christian courts? The idea was that if a Christian killed somebody, or bombed a building, he could go before this special court and argue that he only committed this crime because God told him to; if the court agreed that his behavior was inspired by God, then the criminal would get off scot-free.

    Sounds interesting. Got an original source for that, or is it just something you heard?

  31. A couple of them have been known to bomb abortion clinics, shoot abortion doctors and menace said doctor’s family members, though. The difference between extremist evangelical Christians and extremist Muslims is that the evangelicals, fortunately, live in a society where the law won’t let them do whatever they feel like doing.

    and

    Luckily, this lunatic wasn’t elected and is unlikely to ever be elected. But don’t delude yourself into thinking that there aren’t people in America who would be just as loony as the Muslim fanatics, if only they had the chance.

    Do you really, truly believe this tripe, Jennifer? I mean, you seem to be a rather intelligent person. But this is roughly on par with some pronouncements of…Pat Robertson.

    Which is it, Jennifer? Are Evangelicals an odd fringe group that don’t represent mainstream America, or are they an oppressive majority that, given the chance, would force a Taliban-like existence on everyone who doesn’t convert? They can’t be both.

    The difference between extremist Christians and extremist Muslims (besides the fact that there are many more of the latter as opposed to the former) is that the overwhelming majority of Christians don’t support their whackos.

  32. Holly,

    A few weeks ago somebody in a Hit and Run thread posted a link to a list of his presidential proposals. I have had no luck finding it myself; however, if you Google “Pat Robertson” and “church tribunal” you’ll find ample coverage of his scary proposal.

    Luckily, as I said before, America’s modern political climate is such that someone like this is unlikely to be elected. But things can change, and if Robertsonian Christians took over this country they’d be just as bad as the Islamic fundamentalists are.

    There’s nothing inherent to Christianity or Islam that makes one religion peaceful and the other violent; it all has to do with how much political power is mixed in with that religion.

  33. Are Evangelicals an odd fringe group that don’t represent mainstream America, or are they an oppressive majority that, given the chance, would force a Taliban-like existence on everyone who doesn’t convert?

    This is what is known as a “false dichotomy,” Holly. What I said was that if Christianity got the same political power in this country that Islam has in other countries, you’d see the same sort of behavior. Fortunately, our laws are based on secular laws, not religious laws.

  34. Were he a Muslim cleric would you have considered Pat Robertson’s comments about Hugo Chavez a fatwa?

  35. It seems to me the difference between Muslim fundamentalists and Biblical fundamentalists is that the Muslims aren’t afraid to carry out the barbaric morality described in their Holy Book. The fact that Biblical fundamentalists aren’t killing homosexuals, adulterers, kids who disrespect their parents, and people who work on the Sabbath (as is called for in the Old Testament, and which Jesus confirmed in Matthew 5:17) I think probably has a lot to do with the fact that our government wouldn’t tolerate it. I’m sure there are many other reasons that Muslim fundamentalists are more likely to act out on their barbaric beliefs.

  36. In other words, what Jennifer said. I should read more before I post.

  37. Considering all the hype around Robertson, I’d have to see a pdf copy of the original, unedited transcript before I’d believe that one.

    And since you’re not likely to find a PDF transcript of an event that occurred 20 years ago, you don’t have to believe it.

    But here’s a hypothetical question: let’s say that in some alternate universe Pat Robertson DID get elected, and DID set up these special church tribunals. Do you think that in this case, we wouldn’t see crimes committed in the name of Christianity? Do you still think evil religious-based governments would still be exclusive to Islam, or do you think it might be possible for people to do horrible things in the name of Jesus?

  38. Thanks, Cap’n Obvious, except that I just realized that I left out a key line at the end:

    DENMARK: I see your point, sir. I suggest a new strategy. Let the Muslims win.

  39. Pro Libertate, your “Star Wars remake” was … genius.

  40. Do you think it might be possible for people to do horrible things in the name of Jesus?

    Never happened, never will.

  41. To back up Jennifer on Pat Robertson’s “Church Tribunal” notion, I found the following:

    In a September of 1984 edition of The 700 Club, Robertson suggested that special church tribunals could be called upon to discern if a believer had in fact received an authentic word from God which compelled him to break a civil law. According to Robertson, if this church tribunal did determine the believer had in fact received an authentic message from God – how they could reach this conclusion without issuing God a subpoena wasn’t made clear – then, Robertson said, the church tribunal would have the civil authority to provide the believer with immunity from prosecution.

    Full text can be found here and other references can be found here and here.

  42. Oh, hooray. That’s exactly what we need: a more permissive attitude toward people betraying and stabbing each other in the back. That will truly foster a more civil society.

    Yeah, because it’s so much more honest to remain in a loveless marriage after you relize that you don’t want to fuck the same person for the rest of your life.

    Yeah, those Europeans really just go with the flow… as long as the flow is setting fire to cars.

    What the hell do the recent French Riots have anything to do with European sexual attitudes? When last I checked the riots where committed by long-suffering Middle Eastern immigrants, not French adulterers.

    Of course, I don’t expect logic from Christards…

  43. Oh! I forgot to comment on another of Amanda’s inane remarks:

    Guys? Do me a favor and work a little harder to make the libertine/libertarian cliche a little less true?

    Why? So we can end up as prudish and anal retentive as you and Captain Holly? Without the sex, drugs, and rock n’ roll, we libertarians might as just become Republicans. In my experience, you can’t be a very credible “libertarian” without being an enthusiastic “libertine.”

  44. But here’s a hypothetical question: let’s say that in some alternate universe Pat Robertson DID get elected, and DID set up these special church tribunals.

    Oh great, it’s the “if it could happen in an alternate universe, it could happen here” line of argument. Perhaps also known as the “First they came for the goateed Vulcans” school of debate.

  45. Oh great, it’s the “if it could happen in an alternate universe, it could happen here” line of argument. Perhaps also known as the “First they came for the goateed Vulcans” school of debate.

    Did you even read the rest of my statement? Do you not understand the concepts of “hypothetical question” and “context”?

    Apparently not.

  46. “Were he a Muslim cleric would you have considered Pat Robertson’s comments about Hugo Chavez a fatwa?” – SPD

    No, even tho he’s clearly as nutty as a fatwa-issuing imam, Pat was advocating the GOV’T take out Chavez not appealing to all faithful followers to go out and find a way to kill the guy.

    The gov’t just shrugged at Pat and went on with whatever it was doing. But there are millions of folks who take a fatwa as seriously as Moses did the burning bush…

  47. In my experience, you can’t be a very credible “libertarian” without being an enthusiastic “libertine.”

    Why? There are plenty of leftist and rightwing libertines who don’t give a damn about anyone’s else’s freedom, unless it’s to buy a copy of their magazine.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.