On September 30, 2005, the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published several cartoon depictions of the prophet Muhammad, the most beloved figure in the Islamic faith. The cartoons have been reprinted in countries around the world, sparking a mixed reaction from the Islamic community, ranging from editorials and boycotts of Danish goods to violent—and sometimes deadly—protests in both the East and West. What follows are the opinions of University at Buffalo students on the ongoing controversy.
Freedom of Speech?
by the Muslim Student Association
Most UB students and indeed most Americans don’t seem to fully understand why Muslims are so angered over the recent publications of cartoons which slander and defile the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Many ask, “What’s the big deal?”
The Quran expressly forbids the cursing of another man’s religion and religious figures (6:106). Is it really too much to ask that Muslims get the same respect back? One must remember that the cartoons themselves were not a mature expression of one’s opinion; they were an outright cursing of a man’s most beloved.
Many Americans see this issue as one of free speech vs. religious sensitivity. However, this is not the case. In many European countries, such as Austria, slandering or defiling Jews, the Jewish faith, or Jewish culture is a crime. (Historian David Irving was convicted recently for denying the Holocaust.) Those very countries, however, allowed the publication of these cartoons.
Furthermore, the Editor of the Danish newspaper that first published the article admitted that he knew that these cartoons would anger Muslims when he asked several illustrators to draw such cartoons for publication. That same newspaper, Jyllands Posten, also refused to publish demeaning pictures of Jesus in April of 2005 because they felt it was in bad taste. Okay, so quick recap: if you say something anti-Semitic, you’ll be jailed, if you say something against Christians, you won’t be published, but if you degrade Muslims, you are a champion of free speech?
The point is that in many Western countries, freedom of speech is restricted when it is slanderous or supremely insulting to a group or religious community. Governments understand that there is nothing wrong with expressing one’s opinion, but at the same time, there is a certain responsibility that comes with it.
The Muslim Reaction
Muslim scholars from all over the world issued “fatwas” (or official religious opinions) stating that the violence against KFCs, Danish Embassies, and other buildings was against the precepts of Islam. After September 11, 2001, Christian evangelists openly called the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) a terrorist on national television and radio addresses. Muslims in America peacefully protested until the same evangelists were forced to apologize. So, why didn’t Muslims react peacefully this time? There are two points to consider.
First, the cartoon came out after two wars against Muslim countries and more violence towards Muslims in Israel. Hence, the geopolitical situation this time around was much more heated. Muslims around the world genuinely feel that they are hated by the West. This cartoon is very much the straw the broke the camel’s back.
Secondly, Muslims did react peacefully. When the cartoons first came out, Danish Muslims worked peacefully towards getting an apology and also pursued legal actions. What is more, Muslims all over the world participated in boycotting Danish goods, which caused the loss of millions of dollars of revenue for Danish companies every day.
However, the only thing the media covers is the violence. The violence primarily took place in poorer countries like Pakistan, which are controlled by military regimes supported by Western governments. This is important to note because in such countries, people are not allowed to participate in government the way we in America are. With no other means of having say in politics, people took to the streets in a misguided anger.
Another View
by Jacob Drum
If I could speak to all the violent demonstrators in Denmark, Nigeria, Afghanistan, and other nations around the world, I would have one simple message: “Have some perspective.”
This is a cartoon. Seriously, a drawing on paper. Jyllands-Posten ran a series of 12 depictions of the prophet Muhammad—some showing him in a positive light, others negative, others neutral.
Some of the cartoonists obviously wanted to depict the Islamic faith as a source of terrorism, showing Muhammad with a bomb in his turban or a knife in his grasp. Another is a simple portrait of the prophet leading a mule through the desert with a staff in his hand. Still another, perhaps presciently, shows Muhammad advising angry Muslims that a cartoon depiction of his likeness was not worth a violent reaction.
And there’s the rub: there is simply no justifiable reason for burning, looting, and killing people over an editorial cartoon, let alone one that is more complex than a kneejerk attack on Muslims. The debate over censorship of arguably anti-Semitic or anti-Christian editorial content is a necessary one and a serious conversation should be had about that, but such concerns should not blind us to the destruction caused by the opportunistic outrage of a populace that is simply angry at the West for internal problems that are outside their political control.
