Jyllands-Posten

I can’t think of anything more appropriate for my first weblog than an article to address the publishing of inflammatory comic strips in the Danish tabloid Jyllands-Posten back in September 2005 that resulted in widespread and sometimes violent protests among Muslim’s worldwide early this year. I mean, really, who better to speak to the issues of deference to religion and freedom of speech than the Grandchild of Christ?

Yeah, I can’t think of anyone better either.

So first of all let me address the strips themselves. The most obvious thing I can note about them, as one who has seen them, is that many of them are, in fact, inflammatory. Hateful even. To portray the central figure of Islam as an evil extremist is not humorous or clever or editorially responsible.

But, really, the quality of the images shouldn’t come as any surprise given the call for submissions that motivated their creation. Jyllands-Posten, according to The Christian Science Monitor, encouraged various illustrators to submit images in order to test whether or not Muslim fundamentalists were being successful in fostering a practice of fearful self-censorship in Denmark. Their suspicions in this regard arose from rumors that artists were refusing to illustrate for a children’s book about Muhammad for fear of reprisals from radical Muslims. Is the provocative nature of many of the submissions any wonder, then? And is it any wonder that they did, in fact, provoke?

Critics of the Muslim response have often suggested that such a strong reaction is indicative of a weak faith. After all, they point out, when Grandpappy is poorly portrayed in some newspaper you don’t see Christians up in arms about it all over the globe. This criticism misses two key points, however. First, I don’t know of any Christian sect that prohibits the graphic representation of Grandpappy. And second, and probably more significant, Christianity enjoys dominance on the world stage that prevents it from feeling threatened by the tossing of stones. This dominance comes mostly from Christianity’s association with the United States, arguably the most powerful nation in the world, who for no discernible political or economic (i.e. non-religious) reason favors the nation of Israel in its geopolitical tug-of-war with Palestine. And this foreign policy choice has become a symbol of how the US and its allies view not only Palestine, but the entire Muslim world. Cartoons like the ones that were published in the Jyllands-Posten do, in fact, add insult to injury, and Muslims are legitimately offended by them.

Now, none of this is to justify violence, although it certainly justifies protest. And I’ll also say that, in a pluralistic society, a religion cannot expect any but its own adherents to live by its rules. That is, the principle of free speech does protect the cartoons.

However, the principles of sensitivity and journalistic responsibility do not.

One of Grandpappy’s most famous parables had a Samaritan in the starring role, a person who would not have been well liked by his audience at the time. So part of the message of that parable is that folks shouldn’t give in to foolish prejudices, and no creed or lineage justifies casting compassion aside. The cartoons should not have been run and no violent response should have resulted from them being run. Just as important, though: the non-violent protests (which constituted the majority of them, by the way) and thoughtful calls for apology should be heeded.