You don't have to like me, let's get that out of the way.
You probably hate me and my ideology even though you've never met me, and that's fine. You might even draw parallels between my methodology and that of Islamic extremists. More a question of different flavors of the same poison you might say. Merely a palette swap on the same monster. While I certainly don't endorse illegal activities like terrorism I can see the merit in your position. Again, this post isn't about us agreeing on those principles. This post is about an observation I've made that I want to share that I feel transcends the boundaries of political ideology.
We must stop perpetuating the myth in western culture that not depicting Muhammad is a question of respect.
The question of whether or not "The Prophet" Muhammad can be depicted isn't a question of respect, it is a question of blasphemy. Various individuals have chimed in on whether or not the Koran specifically forbids the depiction of their prophet, and the inherent irony of killing in his name. What is clear to the casual observer and rank and file member of western society is that the bulk of Muslims are offended by the idea.
This isn't simply a matter of frankly rude depictions of their prophet, such as some of those published by Charlie Hebdo. The average person 100% understands people being offended in general by depictions of their important historical figures engaging in activities anathema to their lifestyle. I think that if Neo-Nazis were depicting prominent Jews gassing other Jews, or the KKK published cartoons of MLK Jr cracking a whip against black people, there would be considerable outrage. We all understand that, and most of us are even willing to have a debate about where to draw the line on what should be done about that. Few people stomach the notion of state censorship, but I think the vast majority would side with conventionally ostracizing those papers - such as people did with Charlie Hebdo by its small following, and as they do for Neo-Nazi and KKK propaganda. ( That's not to insinuate equivalency to those works, mind you )
Let's look past that non-issue at the core of this debate: reasonable and respectful depictions of the man Muhammad. A very large number of Muslims consider this to be blasphemous, and that is what we are actually fighting against. This isn't a question of sensitivity or disrespect, it is a question of abiding by blasphemy laws - whether we enforce them through the state or through widespread shame and self-censorship. If you think that I am wrong, take the popular punching bag in mainstream conversation - Christianity. In most of the known world it used to be against the law to commit blasphemy against God and the church. There are innumerable examples throughout history of individuals being killed or imprisoned for the offense of insulting the church, and God. We no longer withhold reasonable and respectful debate of Christian principles, whether they consider objection to them blasphemous or not.
Due to advances in popular thought and the expansion of freedom, we are no longer bound by archaic restrictions imposed by stagnant religion. Religion has a place in modern society, but that place is in the free market of ideas where it will evolve and adapt with the rest of humanity to the ever changing landscape of our destiny as a race. We must maintain the freedom of religion and the freedom from religion. Christians are routinely offended by the society they live in, and at times they get quite vocal about it - and yes a minority has even opted toward violence. However, the bulk of Christianity has adapted to the minimum standards of freedom established by modern civilization. They have been FORCED to evolve and face the fact that co-existence is necessary, that they must harden themselves to offense and blasphemy, and that their policy agendas and decisions must be made within the framework of democracy.
One of the minimum standards of freedom for the future of the human race is that you can draw a reasonable and respectful picture of whoever you want. At the bare minimum we must have the freedom and confidence to engage in constructive dialogue with each other on our thoughts and ideas. A picture is worth a thousand words. It is a form of communication. If an entire set of people absolutely refuses to let us communicate with them in a perfectly reasonable manner then there is no productive way forward. It is incumbent on the Muslim community to prove their willingness to engage in conversation in any and all effective forms.
No comments:
Post a Comment