Stand Up Speak Up

Wednesday, February 08, 2006

Cartoon Catastrophe


Hey yaars,

After giving it a few days of thought, I figured I'd make a post with regards to the now infamous cartoons of the Prophen Muhammad published in a Danish newspaper. I, like many Muslims, was outraged, and felt I should give it a few days before commenting in order to carefully select my words.

For those who have been under a rock, the whole hub-bub regards a cartoonists' satirical drawings with regards to Islam. Along with the usual jabs at the whole "72 virgins for a martyr" jokes, the key drawing - which has incited many Muslims worldwide - was a drawing of the Prophet Muhammad, wearing a turban with a bomb secluded inside of it.

Now, for the non-Muslims out there, I can see why there might be a tad bit of confusion as to why such a fuss. Well, to begin with, most Muslims avoid depicting the Prophet Muhammad in ANY means in order to prevent any sort of idolic worship. As the Prophet had said, he was only but a messenger, and it was Allah (God) who was worthy of worship. Now seeing as we don't take a liking to generic depictions, one can understand why a mocking cartoon would cause such a stupor.

I totally agree that freedom of speech should be adhered to, with some guidelines. The caveat should be that you can say what you want, so long as your expression isn't meant to be deliberately hurtful. Now arguments can be made as to what defines being hurtful, but if you argue based on fact, and do so in a respectable fashion, I have no qualms.

Personally, I felt that the other jokes were somewhat amusing. There's a drawing I've seen of terrorists waiting in heaven with the caption saying "Sorry, we're out of virgins". I thought that to be a decent jab, and something that occurs commonplace amongst religions and sects. It didn't aim it's punchline at the founder of the religion.

In arguments, I've heard the European press justify it's publishing of the picture by stating that it is in the interests of free press. I find that to be utter rubbish. If that were the case, publications across the globe should have carte blanche to print anything hurtful towards others based on colour, religion, sexual preference, etc. There's a fine line to be taken, and to ignore this would be simply archaic. There's a reason there aren't satirical cartoons about the holocaust, why should it be different for others. (And no, this is not an anti-Jew rant. It was simply the first example that popped into my head that puts things in perspective)

In the end, I think the protesting Muslims are directing their anger in the wrong direction. We should remember that it wasn't Denmark that published the cartoon, but one of their newspapers. Though I think protests in front of their embassies are commendable, burning flags is not. By doing so, you're only encouraging the ignorant, justifying their reasons for creating such garbage. And if you truly believe in God, you'll know that those responsible will get their just desserts.

OK, OK, long rant from me, I hope I haven't alienated anyone (except if you liked that cartoon, than I'm getting my gangsta gear ready). It was my thinking that I should expand the horizons of this blog and talk about more than just sports, tv, and base-runners :P


2 Comments:

  • Would any other religion in the world froth at the mouth as much to see one of their prophets depicted in an equally unfavorable way?

    By Blogger Clint, at 7:11 PM, February 08, 2006  

  • Though I'd say no to your question, I'd have to argue that the circumstances would be different.

    Faiths such as Christianity, Hinduism, and Sikhism proudly display images of their religious founders. Muslims are different in the respect that we tend to avoid any sort of image-making of our prophet, be it postivite or negative.

    And I think we "froth" as you so eloquently put it, because our faith tends to be ostracized more than any other in the current times. It might be a case of over-sensitivity, though we don't want to see the past repeat itself.

    By Blogger Naveed, at 10:07 PM, February 08, 2006  

Post a Comment

<< Home