Cartoons?

[Ethel]

Edit: I decided it would be better to copy the whole post rather than just providing a link. I know this conversation is going on elsewhere and will certainly not be offended by anyone who chooses not to respond here because they have done so elsewhere. We're a trifle splintered. But this does look to be turning into a Really Big Deal...

*** reposted from TOB ***

I'm sure you've been reading about this - Danish and Norwegian consulates being torched all over the Middle East. I was just interested in hearing your thoughts.

There's quite a good thread in Manwë about this - lots of different points of view and interesting links.

Here's the story as I understand it...

Since WWII, there has been significant immigration to European countries from Islamic countries. The Muslims in Europe are very much a minority, and have experienced significant discrimination in places. The recent riots in Paris were a symptom of this. (Oddly, considering 9/11 and the wrath of the Islamic world against the US, we seem to get along with our Muslim immigrants a little better here. But then we have much longer experience with minority groups than many European countries. We fought some of these battles decades ago.)

So - there is considerable tension between Europeans "natives" and the Muslim minority which has taken up permanent residence in those countries.

In 2004, a Dutch filmmaker made a short film protesting the treatment of women in the Islamic world. Whether it had any worth as a film or was pure provocation, I can't say. I haven't seen it. The filmmaker's name was Theo Van Gogh, and in response to the film he was murdered by a radical Islamist.

In September of 2005, an allegedly "right wing" Danish newspaper (Jyllands-Posten) published 12 cartoons depicting Mohammed. They had commissioned the drawings as part of an article about freedom of expression and self-censorship after Danish writer Kare Bluitgen was unable to find artists willing to illustrate his children's book about Mohammed for fear of violent attacks by extremist Muslims.

So. Looked at one way, this is a simple test of freedom of expression. But many, including some in the west, see it as a deliberate provocation of already-enraged Muslim sensibilities. If you want to see the drawings, and an explication of them, go here (a New Zealand newspaper's website.) They are mostly not very funny, mostly not very offensive, and at least one of them actually mocks the newspaper which commissioned the drawings. The one cartoon that really does seem offensive is of Mohammed wearing a turban shaped like a bomb - with the fuse lit.

When the cartoons were published, there was a local ruckus in Denmark. Danish Muslims asked the paper and the prime minister to apologize, which they refused to do on the grounds that this was a free speech issue.

One of the Danish imams decided to take the matter further. He put together a little booklet of the cartoons. For unknown reasons - it's hard not to suspect he was afraid the published cartoons wouldn't provoke sufficient rage - he added some more cartoons that really were deeply offensive. One showed Muhammad as a pedophile, another as a pig and the last depicted a praying Muslim being raped by a dog. And with this incendiary material he took a trip to Cairo to enlist the aid of his fellow Muslims.

It's almost impossible to say whether the horrific reaction from Islamic countries is because of the original 12 cartoons, or the far more offensive ones in the pamphlet that were never published anywhere.

So here we are. On the brink of cross-civilization warfare over 12 fairly mild cartoons. Consulates are being burned. Danish flags are being burned. Danish products are being boycotted throughout the Islamic world.

A number of European newspapers chose to reprint the cartoons as a freedom of expression issue. They're all over the internet. Lines are being drawn. For Muslims, any disrespect to Mohammed is something to fight to the death over. For westerners, infringement of freedom of speech is something to fight to the death over.

I do hope we're not going to be fighting to the death here.

If we are, though, I have to throw my hat into the free speech ring. For me, it is sacred. Bedrock. The very basis of liberty. Plenty of people see the Danish newspaper's action as uncalled-for provocation, though - screaming "Fire!" in a crowded theater type thing.

What do y'all think? I mean, on the one hand this is crazy and trival. On the other though...

[Impenitent]

I've posted at TOB - I won't post here because I'll get dizzy with the revolving doors.

[Túrin Turambar]

I'm stuck in a debate on this in two threads at the moment - I'm not sure if I want to dive into a third. I'll comment on any developments that are bought up though.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Utter idiocy, compounded by utter-er idiocy.

[nerdanel]

My most heartfelt response, which isn't really high-quality enough to be posted here is, "Cry me a river, grow up, and get over it."

I suppose I would be sympathetic if those offended had expressed their feelings in a remotely civilized manner - by writing to the papers, explaining why they felt offended, asking for greater sensitivity in the future. And I am sympathetic to those who acted this way - even though I, too, fall into the "freedom of speech is sacrosanct" camp, and wouldn't have thought that the Danish paper should do anything in response to such complaints.

However, the extent of the hysteria is insane and inane. In particular, I find the idea that non-Muslims are expected to follow Muslim beliefs re: visual depictions of Mohammed to be ridiculous. Your entitlement to your beliefs does not mean you are entitled to have others follow your beliefs. And certainly the subjugation of women in many to most Islamic countries due to alleged "religious beliefs" is a legitimate subject for criticism, satire, and condemnation in the strongest possible terms.

As for even the allegedly most offensive cartoon, of Mohammed with a bomb-shaped turban, after viewing it I felt it was a reasonable, relevant commentary on modern-day events. Of course, the relevant question it poses is, "Is THIS what Mohammed stood for?" - a question that should be clearly and unambiguously resolved in the negative by followers of that faith.

Lastly, the only thing I see to be upset about here is that the American media has been remarkably reluctant to give its own readers/viewers access to the cartoons out of fear of people taking offense. Granted, this deprivation is less severe because of open Internet access (another reason for major concern when Internet providers and/or search engines limit access anywhere in response to local regulations) - but it still is deeply troubling that we could not turn to our own media for complete coverage of such a major happening. I believe I ultimately found the cartoons at a German newspaper.

[yovargas]

http://info2us.dk/muhammed/

The new cartoons are towards the bottom.

[Whistler]

I am in a unique position here.

I am a cartoonist who has actually drawn and published a cartoon featuring Muhammad. I didn't realize, at the time, that I was doing anything controversial.

Nor would I have cared, particularly. I do believe that all of us should take reasonable measures not to offend each other needlessly. But any Muslim who expects me to live according to the rules of Islam is going to be disappointed.

I'd love to offer up a list of all the Islamic traditions that offend my Christianity, and see how many these protestors are willing to surrender for the sake of my feelings.

[sauronsfinger]

Once again, the same problem seems to resurface in another form.

One of the huge differences between Western Christianity and Islam is the fact that many believers of Islam still look at it as the One True Religion and all others mean nothing. Christians used to believe that, but then the Sixties came and the spirt of the ecumenical took over.

If you view your religion as the one true faith, of course you will take serious offense at anyone poking even the smallest amount of fun at at.
If you view your religion as good, but just one path to spirituality with others valuable as well, you will tend to be more open minded and not take such serious offense at cartoons like this.

We in the West who fail to understand this basic difference in the believers of Islam do so at our peril.

[Padme]

How many Christian cartoons are there in the world? How many of those same Muslims would draw up Christ in a cartoon....oh yes its already been done.

I am not saying two wrongs make a right, but hey its not like other religions haven't been targeted, and no burnings have occured (well at least not in a few centuries).

[Whistler]

Has anybody seen Monty Python's Life of Muhammad recently?

Didn't think so. If anything, Islam has been handled with kid gloves while the face and faith of Christ is dragged through the mud with impunity.

Cry me a river, indeed.

[halplm]

I'm a Christian, and I view my religion as the one true faith. I don't know many Christians who don't.

That is not the difference. The difference is, Muslims throughout the world have leaders telling them that the west is evil and all non-muslims should die...

[Cerin]

If someone makes a less than flattering image of Jesus, they don't have to fear for their life. I would also have been afraid to illustrate the book; I wouldn't consider it worth dying for, or living the rest of my life in fear of death because I was considered a blasphemer by Muslims.

I hope that the differentiation between the original cartoons and the one added by the Muslim is made clear in news reports; that was a detail I had not heard before.

[sauronsfinger]

hal

because you view your faith as the one true religion, how do you view the billions of people who are not members of your one true faith but still believe in their own way and fashion?

[JewelSong]

I'm a Christian, and I view my religion as the one true faith. I don't know many Christians who don't.

*raises hand*

I am a Christian, though I suspect my beliefs are a bit different than yours.

I do not believe that there is only one way to reach the Divine. It would make the Holy One very small indeed, if there was but one path and one set of practices.

I think the whole idea of there even being "one true faith" has caused much death and destruction.

[halplm]

hal

because you view your faith as the one true religion, how do you view the billions of people who are not members of your one true faith but still believe in their own way and fashion?

For the time being, lost.

I've often wished it wasn't so, but there's no other way to view it in my mind.

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Cry me a river, indeed.

Mark down the date! Whistler and tp agree on something!

[vison]

The issue is more than the issue of free speech in different societies or cultures. The issue is more profound, one of a completely different cultural mindset.

We in the west have had centuries to work out these matters.

But even before we began the political processes that led, ultimately, to such freedoms as we enjoy, Jesus said, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's." (Luke 20:22)

That is where the road forks.

[sauronsfinger]

hal
is the demonination of religion you belong to considered "old school"?

Many Christian religions including Judaism, Catholocism, and many major denominations of Protestantism have long adopted a far more ecumenical attitude about members of other religions. Most progressive Christian denominations have the attitude that people must find God in whatever way they can... different paths to the same goal. I remember I was raised Catholic and went to Catholic school for 12 years. We used to believe that if you were not Catholic, you were doomed to burn in Hell. In the Sixties that attitude went the way of high button shoes.

Regardless of your own experience, I do think that the belief of Muslims that their faith is the only one that counts, allows them to take liberties with members of other faiths, thus the term infidel and the behaviors that flow from it.

Nothing against you or the denomination you subscribe to, but I do think many Western Christians have moved past that provincial attitude. Islam has not. In fact, it is going in the other direction as more liberal brands of Islamic study have fallen aside in favor of such fundamental types as wahabiism. The two faiths are going in quite opposite directions.

[yovargas]

Most progressive Christian denominations have the attitude that people must find God in whatever way they can... different paths to the same goal.

I have no proof but I doubt the "Most" in that sentence is correct.

[halplm]

A basic belief of Christianity is "love your neighbor as yourself." This, if followed, makes it impossible to treat people of other faiths negatively because of their faith.

It doesn't matter if I think they're going to hell, or doomed, or lost, or anything like that. All I can do is love, and explain to people who want to know, what I believe.

I don't claim belonging to any denomination, including those that call themselves non-denominational .

However, I have issues with Christians saying "there are many paths." That's an easy way to think, and fits well with the Western ideals of equality and freedom. After all, if we can accept everyone as our equal, why can't God do the same? That's a bigger issue than this thread can deal with. However, it's spelled out quite plainly in the Bible. Jesus is the only way.