The Mohammed Malaise
Last September, the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published several
cartoons depicting Islam's founder Mohammed, much to the chagrin of
devout Muslims who felt ridiculed and disrespected.
Since then, the ripple effects of this incident have led to nothing less
than a clash between civilizations: Newspapers all over Europe showed
their solidarity with Denmark by reprinting the offending cartoons. In
democratic societies, they say, people have a right to free speech, and
no one should be allowed to infringe on that. A principled line in the
sand that has been answered with outrage and violence against European
institutions throughout the Islamic world.
Less courageously, major U.S. newspapers have yet to reprint the
Mohammed cartoons, but judging from the media buzz, everyone seems to be
on Europe's side. After all, defending free speech, our First Amendment
right, is a no-brainer, isn't it?
We at What We Now Know certainly don't endorse the over-the-top
mentality of fanatic Muslims, nor do we think violence is a solution
for... well, for anything, really. However, there is another side to the
story, a side widely ignored by the mainstream media--and therefore
worthy of our attention.
Fact is that Europe is generally much less "free speech" than most
Americans may think.
Indeed, as Deutsche Welle, Germany's international radio broadcaster,
recently pointed out, many EU countries have anti-blasphemy laws that
can cost you a fine or even land you in jail if you openly insult
religious figures.
Among the religious transgressions penalized in German courts were: A
drawing of Jesus on the cross in the form of a mouse trap; a picture of
the crucified Jesus with the words "Masochism is Curable"; a musical
play by the cabaret group "3 Tornadoes" making fun of the Catholic
doctrine of the immaculate conception by portraying crucified pigs.
In 2002, a satirical cartoon book titled The Life of Jesus, which
depicted Jesus as a pot-smoking hippie, caused a wave of protest in
Austria and Germany. The outraged Catholic community tried to get the
book banned, and the author, Austrian caricaturist Michael Haderer, was
sentenced in absentia by a Greek court to six months in prison.
As late as November 2005, a group of French bishops won a lawsuit
against French denim vendor Girbaud whose advertisement showed female
fashion models sitting at a table in an imitation of Da Vinci's famed
painting "The Last Supper." The judge described the ad as "a gratuitous.
. . act of intrusion on people's innermost beliefs."
Even Denmark itself has an anti-blasphemy law providing for fines and up
to 4 months in jail for anyone who "publicly offends or insults a
religion that is recognized in the country."
However, when last October 11 Muslim groups tried to sue Jyllands-Posten
over the Mohammed cartoons, their lawsuit was dismissed; the judges
declared freedom of expression was more important than the ban on
blasphemy.
Does Europe measure different religions by different standards?
Michael Schmuck, a German media law expert, excused the discrepancy by
claiming that anti-blasphemy law usually only concerns "living religious
figures" such as the Pope. Since Mohammed is not a living person,
Schmuck argues, the law doesn't apply.
Well, then what about the penalties for mock depictions of Jesus, who is
obviously not a living person, either?
In all fairness, it should be mentioned that more often than not,
blasphemy lawsuits--almost all of them brought on by Christians--have
been thrown out by the courts, but a few of the plaintiffs did
succeed... and generally, any kind of discrimination is taken very
seriously in Europe.
No wonder Muslims feel kind of short-changed in comparison, a feeling
exacerbated by their belief that their archenemies, the Jews, are
treated with kid gloves by European legislation. In most EU countries,
for example, denial or minimization of the Holocaust is a crime
punishable by up to five years in prison; in Germany, mere public
criticism of anyone or anything Jewish can have serious consequences.
As a reaction to the Mohammed dispute, Iran's bestselling newspaper
Hamshari called for a contest to find the best Holocaust cartoons,
daring Jyllands-Posten to print those as well.
Last Thursday, the Danish newspaper declared in a spectacular turnaround
that it would "in no circumstances" publish such drawings and apologized
to the Muslim community for the offense... only one day after J-P
culture editor Flemming Rose had taken a hard-line stance, saying that
his paper "would run the cartoons the same day as they publish them."
Do we think their frustration gives Muslims the right to throw hand
grenades at Danish embassies?
Of course not.
Do we feel freedom of speech should entail religious mockery?
Absolutely.
But if we like it or not, free speech in the European Union is largely
an illusion... and with that as our premise, we think those blasphemy
laws should apply to everyone equally.
Mike