o Gillian Gibbons was pardoned.  We are all relieved and grateful, of course.  But in an odd way, there is something dramatically wrong with this picture.  For the record, I am willing to concede that a teddy bear Mohammed is out of place.  After all, we don’t really do teddy bears of Moses or Jesus.  Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed are all sacred figures; and I supposed that trafficking in teddy bears of them tarnishes these sacred figures in some way by casting aspersions in some way upon the holiness of these individuals. There is a way in which this makes sense; for we do not normally have sacred items for toys.  No Jew, for instance, would think of using the Torah as a toy.

What is most intriguing to me, however, is not the disapproval of naming a teddy bear Mohammed, but the reaction to Ms. Gibbons having had a role in the school children naming a teddy bear Mohammed. I have asked myself over and over again: What was up with all the protesting and calling for the death of Ms. Gibbons.  This reaction was all out of proportion to the wrong done.

Not only that, the reaction was so shorn of compassion and gratitude for Ms. Gibbon’s work in the Sudan.  After all, she was there helping the children of Sudan—not exploiting the people of Sudan.

According to CNN, two Muslim members of Britain's House of Lords lobbied President Omar al-Bashir for the woman's release.  That it took this much to secure Ms. Gibbon’s release is in fact too much.

There is fundamental difference between instilling respect and instilling fear; and it is this difference that was roundly lost in the reaction by the Sudanese to Gillian Gibbon’s faux pas.

When I consider all the horrendous things that a person can do, it is simply impossible for me to fathom how so many Muslims in the Sudan could have called for Ms. Gibbon’s death. 

There is the issue of perspective here; and it is this that I should like to have someone explain to me.  Remember we are not talking about some fringe group like the folks of Westboro Baptist Church for whom just about anything is an excuse to parade around with signs that read “God Hates Fags” or “God Hates America”.  Even evangelical Christians tend to distant themselves from the folks of Westboro Baptist Church. 

But what explains large portions of the Muslim population of the country of Sudan calling for the death of a woman over something as trite as calling a teddy bear Mohammed?  And how is it possible to take this stand and then to say that Islam fosters respect for life? 

Obviously not all Muslims shared the sentiments of those who protested.  But this truth does not at all make go away the concern that I have raised.  How could Gibbon’s simple mistake be seen by faithful Muslims as a reason for her death.  And if this is all it takes to justify killing someone, then in what sense can it be said that Islam fosters respect for life?

It has seemed to me of late that in the name of being respectful, people are failing to ask searching questions of the adherents of Islam.  And that is not good for a democratic society, such as America, of which Muslims want to be a part.

No doubt there is much about Islam that Jews and Christians do not understand, and cannot understand from afar.  To this end, then, it seems to me that Muslims and, in particular, Muslim leaders have an obligation to set things straight.  Christianity is sufficiently woven into the fabric of American culture that all but the misguided know and understand straightaway that the folks of Westboro Baptist Church constitute a fringe, lunatic group. 

Insofar as we are to take Islam seriously, then, we must be able to ask whether there are fringe lunatic Islamic groups and what are the characteristics of such groups?  And if the Muslims in Sudan protesting over Gibbon’s behavior, of all things, do not constitute a fringe, lunatic group, then what on earth does. 

In the oddest ways, acceptability requires that we can differentiate the good from the bad.  And for no religion is it remotely plausible to say that all that any of its adherents do is good.  Islam will not, and cannot, be the exception here.

As I have said, I can actually understand that idea of not naming a teddy bear Mohammed; and it is curious to me that the impropriety of this did not occur to Gillian Gibbons, since I doubt if she can point to anyone giving as a Christmas toy the doll of Baby Jesus. 

This consideration notwithstanding, it is next to impossible for non-Muslims to take Islam seriously if non-Muslims cannot regard as lunatics those Muslims in Sudan marching in the streets call for, of all things, the death of Gillian Gibbons over her allowing her elementary school children to name a teddy bear Mohammed.  Indeed, I do not know how Muslims themselves can take Islam seriously unless they so categorize those Sudanese protestors. 

Every religion has its exemplars and its non-exemplars.  And respect for every religion tracks this difference.  Islam will not be the exception that proves the rule.