Source; New York Times
By The Editorial Board
There is no question that images ridiculing religion, however offensive they may be to believers, qualify as protected free speech in the United States and most Western democracies. There is also no question that however offensive the images, they do not justify murder, and that it is incumbent on leaders of all religious faiths to make this clear to their followers.
But it is equally clear that the Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest in Garland, Tex., was not really about free speech. It was an exercise in bigotry and hatred posing as a blow for freedom.
That distinction is critical because the conflicts that have erupted over depictions of the Prophet Muhammad, most notably the massacre of staff members at the French satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo in January by two Muslim brothers, have generated a furious and often confused debate about free speech versus hate speech. The current dispute at the American chapter of the PEN literary organization over its selection of Charlie Hebdo for a freedom of expression courage award is a case in point — hundreds of PEN’s members have opposed the selection for “valorizing selectively offensive material.”
Categories: Americas, Free Speech
Freedom of speech is important and must be protected. However, the message of Islam was offensive to the pagan Arabs and yet Islam continued to attack idols and pagan way of life. The offensive methods of Charlie Hebdo were not calculated with reason to change the lives of the people. The message of the Holy Prophet of Islam although offensive to the people of ancient Arabia, the people quickly realised the message was to uplift them to the the status of proper human beings. Thus, they stop burying alive baby girls, stop drinking intoxicants, stop fornication, start to love each other etc etc.
If modern freedom of speech is to change the lives of people to be better human beings – love for all and hatred for none then no one will have any qualms.
@ M O Ceesay:
“The message of the Holy Prophet of Islam although offensive to the people of ancient Arabia, the people quickly realised the message was to uplift them to the the status of proper human beings. Thus, they stop burying alive baby girls, stop drinking intoxicants, stop fornication, start to love each other etc etc.”
With respect, the above is your opinion. You may find the message of your prophet a positive thing, but for others, they find much of what is written in the Koran (and Bible for that matter) offensive – that is their opinion, and it is not for you to tell them they’re wrong. For example, for many people, there’s nothing wrong with “drinking intoxicants” and “fornication”; but there is something wrong with considering homosexuality sinful.
“The offensive methods of Charlie Hebdo were not calculated with reason to change the lives of the people.”
Again, this is your opinion. Political and religious ideologies are incredibly powerful, and absolutely should be open to challenge, criticism, and ridicule. That is what CH does. You have the right to disagree, but you don’t have the right to be the arbiter of what is and is not acceptable free speech for everyone, based on your particular, subjective values.
The point is this – pretty much everything we express will offend someone somewhere. That’s part of living in a free, progressive, and civilised society, and I wouldn’t want to change it for anything.
Al
Incidentally, the Holy Quran will agree with your opinion:
I hope you can read it with a light heart. Our positions can always change. I have changed several of my opinions, which I held dearly just a decade ago.
To see our collection of articles about the Holy Quran, please click here.
@Zia Shah
I’m struggling to understand the relevance of the passage you quote from the Quran in relation to my previous comment.
For the avoidance of doubt, my opinion is this: We are all entitled to believe whatever we like. We are all entitled to express those beliefs in various forms – whether it be freedom of speech, or some other form of expression. There are exceptions to those freedoms, but they are extremely limited (being offended isn’t one of them, and being protected from feeling offence is not a human right).
Each and every one of us will feel offence at something; often something that another person feels is completely innocuous and inoffensive. That doesn’t give the “offended” the right to silence the “offender”. My position on this will never change – free speech for all, even those whose views offend me. If that’s what your excerpt is saying, then great.
There is no punishment for hate speech in Islam. There is no punishment for blasphemy in Islam, either by Muslims or Non-Muslims. There is no compulsion in religion according to Islamic teachings, neither within a religion nor outside of the religion. Anyone who teaches against these basic principals has to show a verse from the Holy Quran supporting his or her position.
People belonging to all Faiths are involved in the violence in the Middle East, Christians, Muslims and Jews. This violence is not based in any religion. It is the result of politics and ambition of certain powers.
Surely religion is being used by both sides, Christians and Jews by vilifying Islam and creating hatred against the Muslims, and Muslims by inciting their own people by misleading them in the name of Islam.