So… if, by law, religious figures
Are deserving of respect
From the meditating Buddha
To the Manson, spittle-flecked,
From the image of Mohammed
To the memory of Jim Jones,
From Joseph Smith to Jesus Christ
To dusty relics’ bones
From the ancients on Olympus
To the modern Kanye West,
I’m required to respect them
Shall we put this to the test?
Say “there is no god but Allah”;
Aren’t you disrespecting Thor?
And if “Jesus is the only way”
That’s disrespect, once more—
If we see such disagreement
On what is—or not—divine
Can you force me to respect your views
Without respecting mine?
I won’t ask for your approval
Of the way I choose to live
(Which is fine, cos we both know it’s not
A thing that you would give)
I won’t ask you bow to other gods
I know you’ve got your own…
And in exchange, the thing I want,
Is left the fuck alone.
Your holy rules apply to you;
Their holy rules are theirs
You break each other’s holy rules
And no one really cares.
I have no god I worship, so
It’s really plain to see
Your holy rules apply to you…
They don’t apply to me.
(We all are bound by civic law,
And that is quite enough;
You want me to respect your god?
My one-word answer: tough.)
Or maybe I’m thinking about this all wrong. The images of Jesus and Mo, for instance, by this assertion, must be respectful. So they are.
Hey, they must be.
That’s what it says. Their pictures show respect.
None will demand pre-eminence.
The whole gang’s in cahoots, as you’d expect,
Only their faithful vie in bloody penitence.
(waves fist) JIMI HENDRIX!!!!!
Cuttlefish, I wondered if there was some definition of “deemed” that I was missing, also. Nope. The quote in the title, “We Assert That Images Of The Spiritual Leaders Of All Religions Should Be Deemed To Be Respectful”, reads as, “We hold that all images of spiritual leaders are respectful.” You’re absolutely right.