In reaction to the publication of an offensive image of Mohammed, Protestors have taken to the streets, lighting the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Damascus on fire. Apparently ignorant of the concept of free speech, this violence is in retribution for the governments allowing the publication of the offensive cartoon.

When discussing the outrage, pundits have rightly turned to the now notorious "Piss Christ" in order to establish relevance in our majority Christian society. It is an apt comparison. And the response of the offended groups in question show a decided difference between the way that practitioners of the Islamic and Christian faith react to offenses.

Now let me state that the Christian reaction to "Piss Christ" was, in my estimation, ridiculous. But at no time did it turn into violence. Let me further state that it is entirely possible that the thousands putting these embassies to the torch are not representative of the Muslim faith, but rather of fringe elements among the faith. As noted before (September 11, notably), whenever these attacks occur and are committed by Muslims, the mainstream Muslim community is slow to denounce them (the "Piss Christ" debate, on the other hand, was quite lively in the Christian community, and I still chuckle at the image of buttoned down pastors struggling to force out the word "piss" in their protestations of the controversial piece).

Muslim leaders have been working hard to remake the image of Islam into that of a group of peaceful citizens working to make the world a better place. And some of them are. Matter of fact, the MAJORITY of them probably are, or we'd have a whole lot more instability than we do. But there's a SIZABLE faction that is, indeed, Islam's ugly side, and it MUST be addressed before we can seriously consider Islam's claim for "peaceful religion" status.