IN THEORY
Q: Anger over a depiction of the Muslim prophet Muhammad has turned into protests after a Danish cartoon's depiction of the prophet. How do you feel about depictions of deities in Western media, and the media's right to present them? Is there a line to be drawn when it comes to depictions of deities?
A: The anger demonstrated over the cartoon does seem out of proportion for us. After all, we live in a society where the sacred no longer exists. Everything is up for grabs, including deities and of course, life itself.
The concept of free speech guarantees a public critique of government. It has a place within free society and certainly in ours. Editorial criticism is the foundation of progress. Cartoonist Thomas Nast brought down Boss Tweed and Tammy Hall with witty caricatures. Tragically, we shelter filth and profanity under the same free speech guarantees and expect it to all come out clean in the wash, but it doesn't.
These Muslims are saying that the sacred should remain untouchable. When publishers and media owners are more interested in shock and disrespect, it is the right of the consumer to boycott and protest. The rioting is that protest taken to an extreme. Of course, it would be nice if they were consistent in their protest - say when a person is beheaded or terrorized - to protest the disrespect of human life. But it's always easier to love a god that we don't see rather than the brothers and sisters we do see.
As tempers flare up, we need to keep focused to a few inescapable realities; namely, we live on this planet together. The survival of our species depends on our ability to live together. Sure we're free to write, say, or draw anything, but that doesn't make it right, especially when there is disrespect for another person's beliefs.
Approach one another with love and respect and see if the world can be a better place.
FR. VAZKEN MOVSESIAN
Armenian Church Youth
Ministries
In Context
The unflattering depiction of Muhammad presented in a Danish newspaper may indicate ignorance of His importance to so many. Worse yet, it may represent a rude jab at Muslims everywhere, throwing them into the same bag with a violent minority who misrepresent that faith by acts of terror.
The Baha'i teachings, like those followed by Muslims, prohibit the representation of its prophet founder in art or the use of His photograph. We are thereby discouraged from worshiping the human form at the expense of the perfect reflection of God found in His life and teachings. Although this rule is not observed in Christianity, images of Christ through the ages have been respectful, with the intent of magnifying His glory and showing deep reverence. Imagine the sadness and disgust one would feel seeing His image tainted by ridicule.
Perhaps the disrespect shown to Islam in this case has something to do, in part, with the medium in question. Newspapers are casually cast upon wet driveways or into bushes. People often use newspapers to kindle a fire, train a puppy or line a bird cage after they're done reading it. This could be seen as reckless disregard for a religious figure who should be treated with the utmost respect.
Regardless of the distress caused by the unfortunate misuse of literary freedom by some cartoonists and editors, it is not a cause for violent protest. Now more than ever is the time for religious unity and understanding in the world.
BARBARA CRAMER
Secretary
Local Spiritual Assembly
of the Baha'is of Glendale
European newspapers that published the controversial cartoons jumped into a volatile, violent situation and only made things worse. How? They wanted to avoid self-censorship regarding coverage of Islamic issues. But they approached the truth (worldwide violence in the name of Islam) in an unkind and insensitive manner.
Proverbs 15:1 says, "A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger." Apparently harsh cartoons stir up anger as well.
Should the press be free to publish uncensored facts and editorials? Yes, but in a self-controlled and measured manner.
God wants us to speak the truth, but He advises us to include two sweetening ingredients along with the often bitter facts. One "sweetener" is kindness: "Do not let kindness and truth leave you; Bind them around your neck, Write them on the tablet of your heart." (Proverbs 3:3) Another "sweetener" is love: " ... speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him, who is the head, even Christ ... " (Ephesians 4:15)
Kindness and love. Seems to me that if any region needs more of these, it's the Middle East.
PASTOR JON BARTA
Valley Baptist Church
Burbank
The anger demonstrated over the cartoon does seem out of proportion for us.
After all, we live in a society where the sacred no longer exists.
Everything is up for grabs, including deities and, of course, life itself.
The concept of free speech guarantees a public critique of government. It has a place within free society and certainly in ours. Editorial criticism is the foundation of progress. Tragically, we shelter filth and profanity under the same free speech guarantees and expect it to all come out clean in the wash, but it doesn't.
These Muslims are saying that the sacred should remain untouchable. When publishers and media owners are more interested in shock and disrespect, it is the right of the consumer to boycott and protest. The rioting is that protest taken to an extreme. As tempers flare up, we need to keep focused to a few inescapable realities; namely, we live on this planet together. The survival of our species depends on our ability to live together. Sure we're free to write, say, or draw anything, but that doesn't make it right, especially when there is disrespect for another person's beliefs.
Approach one another with love and respect and see if the world can be a better place.
FR. VAZKEN MOVSESIAN
Armenian Church
Youth Ministries
A cornerstone of western civilization is freedom of speech. I believe this is an inalienable right of every human being. At the same time, I also believe that there are limits to this right. Freedom of speech does not include incitement to violence nor should it never come at the expense of another person's safety.
The controversy we are seeing today, which began when a Danish newspaper published various cartoons several months ago, can hardly be classified as incitement to violence or a danger to anyone's safety. I therefore feel that the worldwide Muslim response to this episode is absolutely wrong.
I also find it upsetting that media outlets in the Arab world and governments, who have zero tolerance for other worldwide religious beliefs, expect a courtesy they have never extended to others.
I write this on my return from a week in Jerusalem. In Israel, the sole democracy in the Middle East, all are given the right to practice and express their religious beliefs. On Tuesday, at the Western Wall, I focused on three men standing shoulder to shoulder: a Jewish rabbi, Franciscan monk and Muslim imam. I wondered why, in the entire region, this is the only country where this scenario is a possibility. The answer is quite simple: tolerance.
RABBI SIMCHA BACKMAN
Chabad Jewish Center
Actions have consequences is a phrase that comes to mind in this situation.
Did the cartoonists have the freedom to draw these depictions? The answer is yes. A more important question is: Should they have been published? I think that answer is no. Why? Because all actions really do have consequences. We are seeing negative consequences taking place right now in terms of death and destruction of property. I do not condone those who are rioting; neither do I suggest censorship. I am calling for responsibility.
I have heard it said that something or other is "over the line." Where is the line today? It keeps moving and the movement, it seems to me, is almost always toward the negative.
People who cry out "freedom of speech" in matters such as this one are often simply declaring the freedom to be obnoxious and irresponsible.
Everyone who believe such cartoons to be offensive needs to urge that the line be redrawn toward human decency. I think our right to freedom of speech might have been better expressed by our founders if the phrase "with common decency" had been added.
THE REV. THOMAS
E. WITHERSPOON
Unity Church of the Valley
La Crescenta
What a tough issue! The Apostle Paul says that all things are lawful, but not all things are helpful. Don't I believe in freedom of the press? Absolutely. But are cartoons that are offensive to others (in this case, Muslims) helpful? Maybe not.
As I understand Islam, no representations of man or mankind are permitted (graven images, you know). However, according to one report I've recently seen, the government-controlled media in some Islamic countries is often directed at Jews and less often at Christians.
We need to get along. But there is a double standard being applied, and it seems to those of us in the West that the radical Islamists can say and do and teach and print whatever they want about "the Great Satan," but if we so much as print "mild little doodles," as I've read them described, there'll be hell to pay.
I don't know the answer, but stifling freedom of the press is not an option. I just had an idea: how about referring to sacred things the way Garry Trudeau draws one of his characters in the cartoon "Doonsbury"? Have a voice come from an imageless space, and pretty soon all who read the cartoon will know to whom the cartoonist is referring. Couldn't hurt! Well, maybe it could, after all. Interesting, isn't it? Westerners have grown up thinking the truth will make us free, when in actuality it may make us dead. I'm sorry for the dour outlook, but this dilemma comes awfully close to the category "unsolvable" -- although my faith tells me that with God, all things are possible.
THE REV. C.L.
"SKIP" LINDEMAN
Congregational Church
of the Lighted Window
United Church of Christ
La Cañada Flintridge