By Dr. Darara Gubo and Faith J. H. McDonnell
The world has been horrified by the killings of 17 people, including cartoonists from Charlie Hebdo satire magazine and customers at a Jewish market in Paris, by Islamist jihadists. The killers said they were avenging the insults offered by the magazine to Muhammad. This, of course, does not explain the murder of the Jewish Parisians who were just shopping. But then, it doesn’t explain the slaughter of some 2000 people by Boko Haram in Nigeria last week, either, or any other jihadist attack that has occurred unprovoked by poking fun at the prophet.
Leaving all other jihadist attacks aside, it is important to see the danger of that blasphemy laws give to jihadists. Radical Islamists find justification in their bloodbaths for many reasons, but violation of blasphemy laws is a very common excuse. Twelve people at Charlie Hebdo, including a Muslim policeman who was guilty-by-association with these ‘infidels’ paid the price for their offense against Islam. The cartoonists were known for depicting politicians and religious figures from all faiths in extremely provocative ways. Unlike most cartoonists, comedians, and artists who feel free to denigrate Christianity but avoid any offense to Islam, Charlie Hebdo has been bold in their equal-opportunity offense, often depicting Muhammad in less-than-complimentary ways.
Many around the world find it incomprehensible that people could be killed over mere cartoons. Sadly, growing numbers are willing to accept the insanity and abide by dictates of radical Islam, willing to stay silent for fear of ever bringing offense. Blasphemy against Muhammad is known as Sabb al-rasul. Traditional interpretation of Islamic law does indeed prescribe a death sentence for this offense. Although many Muslim and non-Muslim reformers argue that such a harsh interpretation is not correct, their perspective is often stifled and in some cases the reformers themselves are killed for expressing their opinion about blasphemy laws! The (often violent) rejection of opposing views on the blasphemy law makes it a dangerous subject matter to talk about, thus perpetuating the status quo.
Some non-Muslim countries have historic laws banning blasphemy, but many secular countries have abolished their blasphemy laws. The trend in Islamic countries, on the other hand, is that of more entrenchment of the laws. For instance, Pakistan’s notorious blasphemy law prescribes the death sentence for blaspheming Muhammad, the Koran, and even Islam in general. Even more disturbingly, Muslim countries, under the umbrella of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), have attempted to introduce internationally-binding blasphemy laws. Fortunately, they have so far been unsuccessful in their attempts.
At the root of the issue is the question of what limits there are to freedom of expression. Muslim countries hold the view that offensive representation of Muhammad is off-limits whereas the West does not consider that to be the case. True freedom of speech is the freedom to be offensive. In Western democracy, the right to make offensive remarks about religion, politics and other sensitive issues is part and parcel of freedom of expression. Disturbingly, cultural elites, the mainstream media, and some U.S. government officials have weakened their stance on freedom of speech – when it comes to offending Islam. Without a strong conviction on the rightness of true freedom, the United States cannot successfully assist freedom-lovers around the world, and is in danger of losing that freedom itself.
The polarization of opinions on this issue will continue for the foreseeable future. The West must remain confident in the importance of freedom of speech, and put pressure on Muslim countries to strengthen the impulse towards democracy and religious freedom in those countries. One of the best ways to do this is to defend and empower both Muslim and non-Muslim activists and reformers who are courageously and self-sacrificingly pursuing the abolition of blasphemy laws.
No comments yet
