The fatwa as threat
The news is spreading among Scandinavian cartoonists, clearly. It’s not that you offend, it’s who you offend.
A Swedish artist, Lars Vilks, has gone into hiding after Al Qaeda in Iraq took time off from sabotaging Iraqi democracy and killing Iraqi civilians to make death threats against him. His crime? Oh, the usual. He offended Islam. He calls its prophet unknown, and the religion outdated. And then he drew a picture of a stray dog with a human head and a turban to illustrate. It’s tacky, granted, but if I were religious, it wouldn’t exactly shatter my faith.
Now the European Council for Fatwa and Research has penned what has been described simply as a condemnation of the death threats. It’s much more than that. The fatwa is in itself a threat, at the very least to freedom of expression.
Here is the text in full:
- We condemn the caricatures and see them as an insult to the Muslim religion, but also as an insult to all people’s religion.
- We believe in a free press and work to widen the limits of free speech. But offending that which is sacred to other people is not part of freedom of speech, it is a violation of human rights.
- We think that the caricatures contradict our effort towards positive integration among different European societies, of which Islam is part.
- We think that the caricatures are undermining our effort to create a dialogue between religions.
- We call on European governments to protect Muslims and other believers against offending their religion.
- We ask religious and human rights groups to discourage people from offending religions and what is sacred.
- We distance ourselves from all acts of violence including murder, because as in the case of offending other groups this contradicts the teachings of Islam.
- We call on European legislative assemblies to pass laws criminalizing offense of any religion and what is sacred.
- We ask all Muslims in Europe to be prudent and defend what is sacred to them through existing democratic laws and we condemn everything that has to do with violence and criminal acts.
- We stand by our goal to help European Muslims to contribute to the wealth and prosperity of their countries and we insist that the crazy caricature shall not stop this important process.
Sheesh. These people want to criminalise offense against any religion, and they talk about “positive integration”? Haven’t they heard about this Enlightenment thing? It’s sort of a big part of the European tradition. Flemming Rose has a more detailed fisking of the fatwa.
I’m sorry I fail to see how the list you’ve provided is a threat in any way.
Also, being an enlightened individual, I;’d suggest you actually try and find out what Islam is before you make a fool of yourself.
Calling on a government to protect any group from being offended, and worse, passing laws that criminalise doing so, is a fundamental threat to freedom of speech. By contrast, permitting freedom of speech, including the right to offend, does not pose a threat to any freedom, including freedom of religion.
I may find the work tasteless or offensive, as I do certain work caricaturing Jews or Christians or their sacred symbols. I may choose not to lightly offend religious people or the religion they hold, as I do. In neither case do I need to belong to those religions or even understand them. In neither case do I have the right to impose these choices and principles on others by law, because that would infringe on their own freedom of speech and conscience.
I treat all religions equally. If that makes a fool of me, then a fool I be.
I also recommend finding out what Islam is… Certainly helps understanding the violent reaction of its followers to simple cartoons.
In the meantime, here’s a dreaded cat of blasphemy from a Bangladeshi cartoon: http://www.somewhereinblog.net/blog/sudharamblog
The cartoonist has been arrested: http://www.zeenews.com/znnew/articles.asp?aid=395742&sid=SAS&sname=&news=Arrest%20warrant%20against%20cartoonist%20for%20%60blasphemous%60%20caricature
Understanding the reaction (which I do) doesn’t make it right.
I grew up in a country where films and publications were habitually banned for this or that offensive content. Sometimes it was because of blasphemy against the state religion, sometimes because it caused moral offence, and sometimes it was politically threatening to the government. Often, the censors just didn’t have a clue. I understood why the government’s reaction was the way it was. I understood why many people agreed with the laws. But that didn’t change the fact that both the censorship and the public support for it contributed to the maintenance of an oppressive and unjust society.
No matter what religion is involved, prosecuting or punishing people for speech that offends others is a violation of their freedom of speech, possibly of their freedom of religion, and definitely of the separation of church and state. Therefore, I oppose any such laws, and consider a call for such laws in free countries a fundamental and dangerous threat to liberty. It’s a matter of principle. Understanding doesn’t enter into it.
I have to agree that there are a lot of things in life and art that I find offensive and get vocal about my dislike. But these fatwa actions are not the road to travel. From my Internet readings it seems that it mostly galvanizes support against the whole Muslim community for not being vociferous enough in condemning and not more personally involved in preventing the fatwa actions. These radicals are hurting more than they are helping the Muslim faith.
Muslims Against Sharia praise the courage of Lars Vilks, Ulf Johansson, Thorbjorn Larsson and the staff of Nerikes Allehanda and Dagens Nyheter and condemn threats issued by Abu Omar Al Baghdadi and the Islamic State of Iraq. Muslims Against Sharia will provide a payment of 100,000kr (about $15,000) for the information leading to capture or neutralization of Abu Omar Al Baghdadi.
Muslimer mot Sharia berömmer Lars Vilks, Ulf Johansson, Torbjörn Larsson och övriga anställda på Nerikes Allehanda och Dagens Nyheter för deras tapperhet och fördömer hotet från Abu Omar Al Baghdadi och Islamistiska Iraq. Muslimer mot Sharia betalar 100 000 SEK (ca 15 000$) för information som leder till gripande eller oskadligörande av Abu Omar Al Baghdadi.
Muslims Against Sharia
Now there’s an organisation I’d join, if I were Muslim. You do your faith credit.
I think it was Voltaire who said: “I disapprove of what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”