ramblings~
Yijin + girls! '05
Xiz, Ms Wang + guys! '04
* 03S78
* hwachong junior college
* candice
* lifang
* yang
* xiaoxuan
* hilda
* quanyao
* xizhen
* sharon
* huiqi
* meiyin
* yijin
* yifan
* pear
* nwxiang
* weixin
* samuel
* ningqi
* pua
* yilin
* eliza
* wijaya
* ronnie
* weilei
* bong
* ryan shea
* wuwei
* r~linz
* hwachong!
* IVLE :)
* 30th Anniversary!
* HJC Council! :)
* our funky yahoogroups! :)
* winning thinkquest entry - i-Matrix
* blogger
* blogskins
* junior class!
* grandjuniors!
* 06s78
* 07s78
* 08s78
* dearly beloved ms wang!
* 03S77
* 03S75
* 03S71
* 03S7A
* 03A11
* 03A12
* 03S62
* 03S69
* 04S68
* 04S62
|
Saying the right thing
 Last September, a Danish newspaper (Jyllands-Posten) published 12 editorial cartoons caricaturing the Prophet Mohammed. One particularly blasphemous cartoon in the eyes of Muslims drew the Prophet wearing a turban covering a bomb. It took a while but I wonder if the cartoonist had envisaged that the entire Muslim world would rage over these publications.
The response from the rest of the world has been thought-provoking. So much so I felt compelled to add my thoughts to the already huge agglomeration of opinions…
Many of the European governments have called for a heightened sense of religious sensitivity along with the vote of confidence defending the freedom of expression in free, democratic countries. Like most political rhetoric, it pretty much sits on the fence and avoids dealing with what is really zero sum equation.
How does one prevent “irresponsible” entities from propagating offensive/inflammatory rhetoric on religion since freedom of expression is all encompassing and conferred on everyone? This couldn’t be more apparent when newspapers across Europe reprinted caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad to show support for the Danish paper.
France Soir said it had reprinted the full set to show that "religious dogma" had no place in a secular society. Under the headline "Yes, we have the right to caricature God", the daily carried a front-page cartoon of Buddhist, Jewish, Muslim and Christian gods floating on a cloud. It shows the Christian deity saying: "Don't complain, Muhammad, we've all been caricatured here."
Perhaps the most fitting summary of the events that have unfolded were in the words of French theologian Sohaib Bencheikh who spoke out against the pictures:
"One must find the borders between freedom of expression and freedom to protect the sacred," he wrote in a column accompanying the cartoons in France Soir. "Unfortunately, the West has lost its sense of the sacred."
This border that satisfies everyone probably doesn’t exist and to implement a freedom of expression with OB markers on religion internationally probably isn’t possible, probably wouldn’t solve the pressing problems and probably would be impossible to regulate in any case.
Certainly, there are other more significant elements around in the world today that contribute to the problems behind “Islamaphobia”. Such a furor would seemingly make a scapegoat out of the media and conveniently provides further fodder for militants to fan their case no doubt.
As Jihad Momani, editor of the Jordanian tabloid al-Shiran, pointed:
"What brings more prejudice against Islam, those caricatures or pictures of a hostage-taker slashing the throat of his victim in front of the cameras or a suicide bomber who blows himself up during a wedding ceremony in Amman?"
Jihad Momani was fired just hours after the editorial appeared. So was the editor of the Danish paper Jyllands-Posten who commissioned the cartoons and the editor of the French paper Soir.
Heads will roll as this story unfolds no doubt (and I certainly mean that metaphorically), but the problem still remains. Our societal systems across the world are different and the rules that govern how different societies function don’t necessarily corroborate. Ideally, we shouldn’t impose the ideologies on another society. Ideally, we would leave each country to sort out its own problems and this really should have been the case within Denmark.
But with the vested interests and relations every country has in the affairs of other countries, everyone has become embroiled in dealing with “Islamaphobia”. While we may choose not to change our societal ideologies which may include freedom of expression because of this, certainly, people in power today should certainly choose their words carefully.
Words are powerful mediators in solving the political and social problems of our world today and the words we choose are the first hurdle to overcome before concrete moves to solve any problem can be taken.
By stressing “of course the principal of freedom of expression is the most important principle for us… This is our priority number one.” the Danish PM obviously isn’t going to win many friends from the Islamic world seething over the “offence to Islam”. Certainly his tone and words would have been better used to draw attention to his advocacy of religious sensitivity instead even if he were not going to apologise on behalf of the newspaper. Muslim leaders also need to put out the flames quickly instead of continually pressuring for an apology from the government on behalf of the newspaper, which already has issued an apology.
As we grapple with finding the balance between freedom of expression and religious sensitivities, our political leaders need to say the right things first if we’re going to solve anything. And if anyone still has a part of play in this story, I hope the new Pope can rise to the occasion and… say the right thing.
“I would say that I do not regret having commissioned those cartoons and I think asking me that question is like asking a rape victim if she regrets wearing a short skirt Friday night at the discotheque” --- Flemming Rose, culture editor of the Jyllands-Posten
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/698
http://www.muslimwakeup.com/main/archives/2006/01/a_mountain_out.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Drawings
ryaniq lived on 11:27 PM
- 03S78 forever -
<$BlogCommentDeleteIcon$>
|
