|
|
 |
|
50.0%ANMag Issue 25 Personal Maintenance
Draw the Line
By Rasha Aljundi, Contributing Writer
Beirut, Lebanon − With the escalating various man-made and natural events in Lebanon and around the world, a thousand thoughts came rushing through my mind. I was torn between watching the political threats, the earthquake camps, the university shootings, the alarming weather updates, the Gazan hunger and the American debates. Within this mixture of events, the reprinting of the Danish sarcastic cartoons of Prophet Mohammad in several European countries must have slipped somewhere between the lines. It was only when a Danish friend brought the news up to me that I became aware of it. All the riots and the violent reactions from several Muslim populations a couple of years back came rushing back to me, as I read her input on the matter. She brought up the fact that the Danish media asserted their “right to freedom of speech” and hence they can write (or draw in this case) whatever they want. Yet again, my friend’s argument was that if one would utilize a ‘right’ to insult other people, or nations for that matter, then why be granted that right in the first place? And so we both wonder: when and where should the line be drawn for the freedom of speech?
As expected a number of arguments could be put forward from such a controversial issue. To start with, it is proposed that reprinting the cartoons is part of a conspiracy planned by the European media which aims at intensifying the negative image about Islam and its followers by triggering violent reactions. Hence, proving the “terrorism/violent” label given to Muslims around the world. In fact, why would the cartoonist draw Prophet Mohammad in the first place, to reflect a certain global matter, while he could have just settled for Ossama bil Laden or a regular bearded man with a turban?! It should be made clear that religious figures like the Pope, priests, sheikhs or rabbis are drastically different from religious icons that were sent by God to the rest of the human race with a certain holy message.
Actually, a vast number of non-Muslim Western thinkers, historians and researches dedicated a significant amount of their work studying Prophet Mohammad’s personality in all its dimensions. Many resources discuss his extraordinary personality as a prophet carrying a message, as a leader, a husband, a father and a friend. Regardless of the fact that it’s forbidden in Islam to draw any picture of any prophet, painting Prophet Mohammad in a sarcastic manner to convey a certain idea about a specific phenomenon is definitely offending Islam and its followers.
Alternatively, others may assert that the cartoonist was just naïve to draw the cartoons in the first place. He probably did not do enough research on the laws in Islam regarding drawing pictures of prophets in general. Still, why re-print the cartoons for a second time (and in various newspapers around Europe!)? Here, many held the editors responsible for they supposedly understood that Muslims consider the cartoons an insult to the precious carrier of Islam. This brings us back to the possible scheme such newspapers follow. Of course, it can also be asserted that those newspapers only considered the economical and publicity benefits they would acquire from re-printing the cartoons.
As for the violent reactions that erupted after the re-printing in some Muslim countries, it should be understood that such reactions are related to the cultural norms they come from. Countries like Pakistan, Iran and Indonesia may have cultures that reside to violence as a tool to express private or public anger. So, it is incorrect to generalize that the millions of Muslims around the globe are violent and aggressive in their reactions. Conversely, such reactions are definitely wrong since they lack any constructive sense and lead to further destruction in terms of the image of Islam, the relations with the offenders specifically and the Western world in general. A reasonable response to such printed offense should be a constructive and intellectual one. It should be able to clarify why this whole ordeal offended the Muslims in order to display the educational face of Islam. We should build strong bridges for dialogue between the two worlds because we certainly do not need any more violence.
It can be generalized that a certain negative propaganda is practiced by the media around the world. Come to think of it, the Muslim/Arab media resources extracted one sentence from the Pope’s speech last year and used it against Christians around the world (especially the Europeans). The sentence was about how Prophet Mohammad spread Islam using “the sword”. Yet, the accusers failed to relay the whole speech which called for more dialogue between the main religions. It is time for us, as educated people, to widen our knowledge base about other religions and cultures before unleashing false and offending labels.
Finally, a Norwegian acquaintance pointed out that media laws and ethics do exist regardless of the “right to freedom of speech” that allows you to write/say anything in the European media. For instance, laws draw strict lines on racist words or phrases used in the media. So, maybe they failed to consider re-printing the cartoons an action that falls within those rigid lines.
It is a gift to be granted a right and be allowed to practice it freely. Yet, it is a pity to loose basic communication skills that come with a certain level of respect for one another. We should definitely fight for the freedom to practice our rights, but we also need to learn when to draw the line for our practices.