Mohammad cartoons row resembles dialogue of deaf

[tocqueville]

By Tom Heneghan, Religion Editor
34 minutes ago

PARIS (Reuters) - The row over caricatures of Islam's Prophet Mohammad resembles a dialogue of the deaf, with many European spokesmen defending the right to free speech and many Muslims insisting Islam must be treated with respect.

Calls for moderation, both from Muslim leaders and European politicians, risk getting lost in a public debate dominated by Europeans afraid of losing a core right of their culture and Muslims struggling to win more recognition for theirs.

Centuries of tradition stand behind both viewpoints, which may account for the virulence of the reactions aroused by the publication -- first in Denmark, then across Europe -- of cartoons depicting Mohammad as a terrorist.

The Europeans can date their long struggle for free speech to the 18th century Enlightenment and consider the liberty to criticize all authority a cornerstone of modern democracy.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060203/wl_nm/religion_cartoons_deaf_dc

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. but Muslim countries see it as a slap against their religion

and a reflection of the hatred many Europeans have for the Muslim immigrants in their midst. Pakistan is the latest Muslim country to condemn the cartoons as a slap against Islam.

What I think we see here is a struggle between the West and Islam, trying to figure out how to get along. As usual, when two disperate groups are put together, it takes a while to co-exist. What we have to decide is what can be tolerated and what cannot. Stereotypes on either side do not help, I think. Not all Europeans are hedonistic or Nazis, and not all Muslims are thin-skinned fundamentalists or terrorists. It might be a good idea for both sides to remind themselves of this.

[GrpCaptMandrake]

7. I think Muslims like yourself are the future

Tolerance. Enlightenment. Compassion as commanded by God.

From a psycho-social-anthropological standpoint, it's also valuable to examine the evolution of religions.

At the age of roughly 1400 years, the Hebrews were incredibly violent in the pursuit of their religion, going so far as to enshrine genocide in their holy books. They grew, changed and have become, in most instances, one of the most peaceful, introspective religions on earth.

At the age of 1400 years, Christianity was in the midst of a holocaust that burned literally millions of human beings alive in the name of purification of the the faith and committed genocide against native populations the world over. It has since grown substantially toward an understanding of a Yeshua who came to teach us not to be cruel to each other.

Here in the 21st century, Islam is roughly 1400 years old. In its infancy, it accomplished much of its growth by virtue of tremendous violence, conquest and bloodshed. It is now mired in a struggle between those who would advance the vengeful, hateful nature of God against those who would advance the "all-compassionate" nature of God.

In another six hundred years, Islam will likely be where Buddhism, Judaism, and Christianity are now, but only if contemplation and compassion are advanced over death-worshipping dogmatism.

NOTE: before the flames start, I freely acknowledge the hateful, deadly policies of Israel, the United States and other nations that claim piety, including, but not limited to Palestine, Iran and Saudi Arabia. But I reject the idea that a nation state may truly reflect the teachings of any personal faith.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

8. No flames here

I agree with what you said about Israel, etc. I like to think that all faiths are evolving towards tolerance and thoughtfulness towards others, as is found in the teachings of the major faiths.

[Mass]

2. Of course it it and it is also very hypocritical

The same countries that let this happen would be in arms if the drawing represented Jesus as a terrorist (and justly).

Two issues are at stake here:

- freedom of press
and
- respect of others.

As a French person, I find amazing that so many pictures and ads considered irrespectuous to Christians have been forbidden from public places throughout recent years and that we still hear about freedom of press in this case, rather than accepting that some of these pictures are simply anti-muslim and offensive. Yes to freedom of press, but for all.

[tocqueville]

4. you must live in a different country....

the French press is full and always have been of anti-clerical ("anti-christian") cartoons. You can see the "guignols" on TV making fun of the pope's parkinson alluding that holding his weenie he can automatically masturbate...

respect of others has nothing to do with the "Muslim" cartoons, they express provocation against extremism and certain sides of another Religion.

What you say is true about sensivity to anti-semitism : when a comedian makes fun of Rabbi by doing a Hitler salute he get sued (but wins)...

agrees completelely to disagree... Anti-clericalism may spark outrage in certain fundie circles in France, but most of the time, nobody cares and finds it very funny. One of the French standards in jokes has to do with sex and priests...

[Leopolds Ghost]

9. Obviously clerics are not respected in France... because they have no 1st

Amendment. Similarly, free speech as we know it in the US is not the same as free speech in Europe. Two different philospohies of free speech. In Europe the notion of free speech is heavily majoritarian. I see this in everything I read, everyone I've spoken to, especially the militantly secular crowd. I am not saying all agree. But there is no 1st Amendment in Europe, no respect for religious motives in the political arena (unlike the US which has the opposite prohem, but religion used to be a force for progressive change, not a tool of the ruling establishment like in France) due to past 100s of years interference by corrupt Catholic leaders, and the notion of free speech in Europe is very vague and humanistic notion revolving around vague ideas of cultural superiority. Hell, England doesn't even have right to privacy with all the Big Brother cams. They have completely subverted British common law or rather misapplied it in order to distinguish between good Brits and foreigners. I would compare it to US Republican's obsession with "freedom", a concept they don't embrace at all times and in all places.

[tocqueville]

12. WHAT ? NO " 1st AMENDMENT" ? CM'ON !!!!

1) Europe is not a country, there are different constitutions

The French constitution in its preamble include the "declaration of man an citizen" which states

11. The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law.

2) France has an efficient separation of Church and State translated in "laicity"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laicity

The term "laïcité", in its current sense, implies free exercise of religion, but no special status for religion: religious activities should submit to the same set of laws as other activities and are not considered above the law. The government refrains from taking positions on religious doctrine and only considers religious subjects from their practical consequences on the inhabitants' lives.

Laïcité does not necessarily imply, by itself, any hostility of the government with respect to religion. It is best described a belief that government and political issues should be kept separate from religious organizations and religious issues (as long as the latter do not have notable social consequences). This is meant to protect both the government from any possible interference from religious organizations, and to protect the religious organization from political quarrels and controversies.

3) Privacy :

laws about privacy are explicit in many European countries to the difference from the US where it is a "penumbral right"

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in article 12, states:

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. (note that this international declaration is incorporated in many European constitutions to the difference from the US and incorporated in the French constitution). Try to take a picture of my cat without my consent and I'll sue your ass. And my phone number is not for sale unlike in the US.

Countries such as France protect privacy explicitly in their constitution (France's Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen), while the Supreme Court of the United States has found that the U.S. constitution contains "penumbras" that implicitly grant a right to privacy against government intrusion, for example in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965). Other countries without constitutions have laws protecting privacy, such as the United Kingdom's Data Protection Act 1984. The European Union requires all member states to legislate to ensure that citizens have a right to privacy, through directives such as Directive 95/46.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy

so please check your sources before you start ranting.

The religious frenzy of mixture between State and Church like it can be seen in the US today is pratically impossible in Europe and specially in France, Germany, Scandinavia... God belongs to Church and privacy, the State belongs to free independent citizens. So we pledge on the Constitution and not the Bible and don't ask God for help.

What do you mean by "majoritarian" ? There are of course "mainstream politically correct" opinions
dominating the media, but where is the difference from the US ? Specially today ? But we have a whole array of different dissenting voices and they ARE heard. Show me the "dissenters" thrown in European jails for their opinions... We are even reluctant to put them in jail when they damage property.... Chirac doesn't need to have speech protected meetings and we can say fuck and show nipples on TV without national outrage.

The US Democrat opposition in Congress and Senate doesn't even use 5% of the heavy rethorics and accusations that oppositions use in Europe. Have you ever witnessed a parliamentary debate on a big issue in France, UK, Italy, Spain ?

"Religion used to be a progressive tool in the US" ? Of course it's the pastors that opened the way for religious freedom, abortion, women's rights, workers rights, social security etc... How many WHITE reverends where against slavery and segregation (the later still constitutional 1964)...

You must be kidding

[genie_weenie]

10. not a valid comparison

yeah because Christ and the "Blessed are the Peace Makers" and Muhammad and "Cut off the heads of the non-believers" is the same thing.


American movies, with non-flattering caricatures of Christ
Dogma
The Last Temptation of Christ
South Park


Your (and this is in general, not specific to you sir) right not to be offended does not trump my right to say whatever I want.

[GrpCaptMandrake]

3. The best part of the article is where the Grand Exalted Whoziss

says "We can't even question the Holocaust," as if to suggest that drawing a cariacature of a Seventh Century religious leader is the moral, physical and actual equivalent of the murder of 13 million Jews, Gypsies, Dissidents and Gays less than a hundred years ago.

Even in trying to defend their indefensible position ("no criticism of Islam is allowed"), these fanatics have to work a little anti-Jewish venom into the debate.

How in the name of whatever is holy are even modestly enlightened people supposed to take them seriously? Oh. Wait. I know how. They think we'll take them seriously if they kill a few more innocents. That's why George Bush is taken so much more seriously by the rest of the world now.

We are in a battle-to-the-death between "Tastes great" and "Less filling."

Damn. Just damn!

[Monkey see Monkey Do]

5. I love the irony in people complaining about the notion that Islam is

a violent religion by threatening to kill people who suggest that! And you just know these nutters will bring out the far-right nutters and slowly but surely we'll regress through the Enlightenment.

http://www.jesusandmo.net/2006/01/26/ball/

[fakeshemp]

6. Yes, that was very telling! n/t

[Ron Green]

11. A religion that imagines enemies is anachronistic and harmful. n/t