Unconvincing arguement of the day

The Mail report that:

"A Government-funded charity was at the centre of a row last night after a magazine it publishes for children appeared to depict Christians as Islamaphobes who regard Muslims as terrorists.

In a cartoon strip, a boy wearing a large cross around his neck is shown telling a friend that a smiling Muslim girl in a veil looks like a terrorist.

He later confronts her and shouts: ‘Hey, whatever your name is, what are you hiding under your turban?’"

Do take a look at the picture and read the whole story and decide for yourself but do also not the comments made by the Who Cares? Trust chief executive Natasha Finlayson. She said that

"she had no intention of withdrawing it, describing the cross as ‘bling’ rather than a religious symbol.

She said the charity had received a complaint but did not agree the cartoon was derogatory towards Christians.

‘I am a Christian myself, so when a woman called us, I went back and looked at the comic strip from her point of view,’ Ms Finlayson said.

‘I am sorry that she is upset but I don’t share her view. When I saw the cartoon, I didn’t think of that character being a Christian because I saw the cross as ‘bling’, as jewellery.

‘To me it is a cartoon about bullying rather than discrimination or religion.’"

For some odd reason I don't find that argument particularly convincing...