From: Munir
Subject: PROPHET MUHAMED (PEACE BE UPON HIM) CARTOONS:

I have been a fond reader of About.com for years. I have never responded to your various articles appearing in your newsletter. Let me tell you please, they have always been shorouded in contempt and hatred while dealing with Islam.

This is just Munir’s interpretation of someone who is critical of Islam — and this isn’t the first time I’ve had a Muslim write to me to make such claims. Any number of Christians have written in to say something like this as well. I don’t think that people like Munir can handle sincere and pointed disagreement from someone who doesn’t share their beliefs and premises. Far too often, disagreement and criticism is automatically assumed to be hatred, especially when they come from someone outside one’s religion.

 

For example, your introduction to Prophet Muhamed (Peace be upon him) is based on malice and ignorance when you say that early life of Prophet Muhamed (peace be upon him) has been dormant and traceable. It is a big lie. Every minute of Prophet (PBUH) life has been recorded.

What Munir describes here is a myth which Muslims believe; it’s not verified historical fact. Only Muslim scholars who are committed to particular religious truths and outside scholars unwilling to engage in consistent, critical engagement believe everything written down in early Muslims sources. Those stories are as mythical as the Christian belief that Jesus died and rose from the tomb after three days (remember, Muslims deny that Jesus died).

It’s worth noting that Munir offered no substantive reasons to think that there are any flaws or errors in the critical histories of Islam and Muhammad. There’s a good reason for this, I think: the standards of historical scholarship which are used in every other facet of historical inquiry in the West would not allow us to accept the claims made by traditional Muslim works on Muhammad’s life. The conclusions of critical historians may not all be correct, but their methodology and scholarship are correct. This matters, at least to people who care about getting at the historical truth as opposed to merely preserving religious dogmas.

 

Why the cartoons were public, there is, inter alia, the following reasons behind: It is a naked fact that Islam is the fatest growing religion in Europe and the Americas. It was the fear of unkown as to what would happend to the decaying cultural and religious identity of the West.

Islam is a fast-growing religion, there is no doubt about this, but why is this a reason to think that the cartoons were created because of it? Does Munir seriously think that if Islam weren’t growing quickly, no one would ever create any cartoons that are critical of or even mock Islam? Perhaps — but only if he believes that Muslims and Islam have never done anything on the world stage which would justify criticism.

That’s not true, obviously, but it’s something which many Muslims believe. No matter how awfully some Muslims behave in the name of Islam, there is a perverse sense of Muslim innocence and perfection that pervades the Islamic community all over the world. Islam is perfect, lacking any flaws or problems whatsoever; therefore, Muslims are also perfect and Muslims don’t do anything really and truly wrong.

As a consequence, Muslims are innocent of any charges leveled against them and all criticisms, attacks, or mocking are totally unjustified. If criticisms or attacks appear, it can’t be because Muslims have done anything to merit it; therefore, the reasons must be something else — like jealousy of Muslims’ perfection or fear of Muslims’ numbers.

 

It is due to the decaying economies of Europe and America and a fast emerging economic power of the East, particularly that of Malaysia, Pakistan, UAE and other Muslim states of Asia. You want to penalize for this unprecedented growth with your contemptous acts by demolishing the sensitivities of the 1.5 billion Muslims of the world.

The cartoons were published for a Western audience, not for people in Malaysia or Pakistan. I doubt that the cartoonists thought much about or cared whether Muslims in Malaysia or Pakistan every saw them — a necessity if their goal were to demolish their “sensitivities.” Munir is, once again, relying more on his own prejudices than facts or reality.

If we set this aside, though, there remains a relevant question: should Muslim sensitivities be protected? Muslims are fast-growing group in the West, so shouldn’t they get used to the fact that, in the West, sensitivities aren’t generally protected in the press? All religions, but especially those religions making claims on political and social power, come in for criticism and attacks because all claims to power are treated critically. Why should Islam and Muslims be any different? Munir doesn’t say — Munir offered no reasons to think that criticism of or even mocking of Islam should be prevented.

 

More selections from the Agnosticism / Atheism Mailbag...