I don't know what's dumber; treating Christianity with less sensitivity and respect than other religions or actually admitting such in public.

Daily Mail:

BBC director-general Mark Thompson has claimed Christianity is treated with far less sensitivity than other religions because it is 'pretty broad shouldered'.

He suggested other faiths have a 'very close identity with ethnic minorities', and were therefore covered in a far more careful way by broadcasters.

But he also revealed that producers had to consider the possibilities of 'violent threats' instead of polite complaints if they pushed ahead with certain types of satire.

Mr Thompson said: 'Without question, "I complain in the strongest possible terms", is different from, "I complain in the strongest possible terms and I am loading my AK47 as I write". This definitely raises the stakes.'

But he added that religion as a whole should never receive the same 'protection and sensitivity' in the law as race.

[...]

Many said that no one would have dreamed of making such a show about the Prophet Mohammed and Islam.

Mr Thompson has now appeared belatedly to accept their argument. In an interview, he said Islam was 'almost entirely' practised by people who already may feel in other ways 'isolated', 'prejudiced against' and who may regard an attack on their religion as 'racism by other means'.

But he said that Christianity was 'an established part of our cultural-built landscape' which meant it was 'a pretty broad- shouldered religion'.

He conceded that the broadcaster would never have aired a similar show about Mohammed because it could have had the same impact as a piece of 'grotesque child pornography'.

To sum up, 1) We don't run shows making fun of the prophet because Muslims might kill us; 2) Christianity doesn't rate protections because Christians won't try to kill us if we make fun of them; and 3) Christians should shut up and take it.

And now for something completely different...