Freedom of Expression and Poking Fun at Religion

Protecting freedom of expression and speech is absolutely critical for freedom in a liberal democratic society. When freedom of expression is not protected, the result is oppression and tyranny. Should poking fun at religion be allowed, though? Should the media be able to insult religious beliefs? Absolutely - religion and religious beliefs don't merit special deference not accorded to others.

The Economist explains:

Freedom of expression, including the freedom to poke fun at religion, is not just a hard-won human right but the defining freedom of liberal societies. When such a freedom comes under threat of violence, the job of governments should be to defend it without reservation. To their credit, many politicians in continental Europe have done just that. France’s interior minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, said rather magnificently that he preferred “an excess of caricature to an excess of censorship”—though President Jacques Chirac later spoiled the effect by condemning the cartoons as a “manifest provocation”.

Shouldn’t the right to free speech be tempered by a sense of responsibility? Of course. Most people do not go about insulting their fellows just because they have a right to. The media ought to show special sensitivity when the things they say might stir up hatred or hurt the feelings of vulnerable minorities. But sensitivity cannot always ordain silence. Protecting free expression will often require hurting the feelings of individuals or groups, even if this damages social harmony. The Muhammad cartoons may be such a case.

The Muhammad cartoons are definitely such a case, and the reason why is demonstrated by the reactions to the cartoons. If anything, the message of the cartoons is made more important by those reactions because the reactions demonstrate the existence of too much violence within the Muslim community.

Sensitivity is not silence. Muslims demanding silence are not asking for respect, because respect can only be given to those who have earned it through their actions and demands for censorship or violence do the opposite. Muslims demanding silence are demanding deference and submission to Islamic dogmas.

In Britain and America, few newspapers feel that their freedoms are at risk. But on the European mainland, some of the papers that published the cartoons say they did so precisely because their right to publish was being called into question. In the Netherlands two years ago a film maker was murdered for daring to criticise Islam. Danish journalists have received death threats. In a climate in which political correctness has morphed into fear of physical attack, showing solidarity may well be the responsible thing for a free press to do. And the decision, of course, must lie with the press, not governments.

As I said, the reaction to the cartoons validates the publishing of the cartoons, in particular the re-publishing of them by various European newspapers. The cartoons criticize the inclination among Muslims to censor criticisms and speech they don’t like, then resort to violence when censorship doesn’t occur or doesn’t work. This is precisely what the dominant Muslim reaction to the cartoons was and precisely what needs to be criticized — even harshly and mockingly, if that’s what it takes to get Muslims to understand that however justified their feelings of offense might be, their desire to censor something offensive certainly is not.

In another article:

Some Muslims find all the hullabaloo distressing. “What it shows is that we lack confidence,” says the headmaster of a Cairo school. “If we were confident about our faith we wouldn’t have to react so hysterically.”

Many others, however, feel it marks an important precedent. In a Friday sermon at the Grand Mosque in the holy city of Mecca, Saleh bin Humaid, a Saudi preacher, extolled the spirit of defiance that was unifying Muslims. “A great new spirit is flowing through the body of the Islamic nation,” he said. “The world can no longer ignore the nation and its feelings.”

The Cairo headmaster has the sensible reaction; it’s unfortunate that his reaction is shared by so few Muslims and that they aren’t doing enough to make this reaction the dominant expression of the Muslim community. Saleh bin Humaid sees Muslims being united, but they are united in anger, violence, and tyranny. The “spirit” flowing through Islam is the spirt of the bully. Is that really the sort of unity they want? If that’s what it takes to unify Muslims, do they really deserve to be unified?

 

Quick Poll: Should it be legal to mock, disrespect, and poke fun at religion, religious beliefs, and religious figures?

1. Absolutely. It's good for society in the long run.
2. Yes, technically, but people shouldn't do it.
3. In mild cases, yes, but really offensive material.
4. Only in cases where religious believers aren't offended.
5. No, it should be against the law.
6. I don't know.
7. I don't care.

Click an option to vote, or View Current Poll Results

 

Read More:

• Islam
• News About Islam
• Islam and Politics