 |
| Thomas Paine, famous author of Common Sense, offered treatise on how we should treat religious opposing views |
France has historically led the way with its philosophers, who like kings of congresses set precedents for people to use in developing a path to constitutional freedom. Thomas Jefferson, President of the United States during the early days of the country, was known to be a fan of Voltaire and Rossaeu, using many of their ideas to formulate his own, even in reference to his development of America's foundation of freedoms, its Constitution and Declaration of Independence.
All around the world many people are cheering the newspaper in France who dared to print cartoons making fun of the Prophet Muhammad. Indeed the controversy, followed by violence, might make some folks assume that these cartoons were few in nature and just recent. However, these cartoons have been in Charlie publications for several years. And there have been ongoing discussions about them, including the appropriateness of cartooning a religious figure in such a high profile way.
The Christian Science Monitor is one of those publications that offered observations about the cartoons of Muhammad in 2012. They questioned whether or not French President Francois Hollande would be negatively affected by the cartoons that showed Muhammad naked and lying in provocative positions, as observed by the Christian Science Monitor's article. These cartoons had come on the heels of a film entitled "Innocence of Muslims, " an anti-Islamic movie that had incited protests both in France and other areas of the world.
It was expressed as especially of concern given the religious prohibition of Muslims not to depict the image of the Prophet Muhammad, a prohibition that has been said was done to prevent Muslims from worshiping the Prophet over God Himself.
In response to the objections of printing the cartoons in Charlie several years ago, its editor, Stephane Charbonnier was quoted as saying there should be no limits on free speech, referring to those opposing the cartoons as "fascists." Charlie had its office set on fire in 2011 after a cartoon of Muhammad appeared on its front page.
France is considered to be the most articulate in its expression of free speech in comparison with other countries in Europe due to its secularism and historical struggles with the Catholic Church. Some people outside of the Islamic community, however, have questioned the wisdom of ridiculing the Prophet Muhammad, its timing and how it might further antagonize extremists as well as disturb more moderate Islamic communities. Some French officials had also called for restraint after the publications containing cartoons of Muhammad those several years ago.
And indeed the more moderate Muslims have written of their dismay regarding cartooning Muhammad, especially in the way it was done. ABC News quotes Dyab Abou Jahjah, a writer from Lebanon, as tweeting this: "I am not Charlie, I am Ahmed the dead cop. Charlie ridiculed my faith and culture and I died defending his right to do so. #JesuisAhmed." Furthermore, the Associated Press has refused to show the images that were in the Charlie newspaper and about which the controversy has developed.
Even the Pope has weighed in on the issue of free speech vs making a mockery of the religion of another by saying,"One cannot make war (or) kill in the name of one's own religion, that is, in the name of God. To kill in the name of God is an aberration." But he also observed, "One cannot provoke, one cannot insult other people's faith, one cannot make fun of faith. Every religion has its dignity." As the Cato organization that published the Pope's remarks observed, the pontiff was declaring there is a difference between having a right to do something and exercising that right when there are serious consequences that ensue as a result.
Thomas Jefferson is vigorously quoted by those upholding freedom of the press and its role and speech in the United States. Against the background of Jefferson's own unique view of religion, as individual and worthy of respect and protection, Jefferson also engaged in examining a balance in the press. In fact at one time he owned a newspaper in order to impact political events, just like others of his day and those individuals who offer information by way of online blogs, magazines and newspapers. He did, however, highlight the value of people not injuring one another intentionally and maliciously in using that free speech. Restraint, as opposed to restriction, was part of his philosophy expressed in his First Inaugural Address.
While in France Jefferson is quoted as saying about free speech,"Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost." He also included people of all faiths in his discussion about freedom of religion with a specific directive that maintained "We have no right to prejudice another in his civil enjoyments because he is of another church."Church, in Jefferson's ideas in his arguments against including "Jesus Christ" in the Constitution and other government documents specifically was used in the broader sense to include Hindus, Muslims, Jews, etc.
Jefferson's belief in the freedom of conscience, and the right of people to express their ideas is sewn into the fabric of much of his writings. On the other hand, he had enough concern about the injurious nature of words that he said this as well in a letter to James Madison in 1789: "The following [addition to the Bill of Rights] would have pleased me: The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or otherwise to publish anything but false facts affecting injuriously the life, liberty or reputation of others, or affecting the peace of the [United States] with foreign nations."
Yet Jefferson himself was mocked, as were others politicians among the Founding Fathers, with political cartoons. He himself encouraged political attacks in print against his opposition. But outside of his vociferous oral and written opinions referencing the tyranny of England that brought about the Revolutionary War, using free speech in the press to incite violence against an entire group was not his aim.
Thomas Paine was the pamphleteer and spokesperson-in-writing for the feelings of many of the Founding Fathers as to the mission of government, how it evolves and where it should or should not exercise influence. When it comes to religion Paine said this:" As to religion, I hold it to be the indispensable duty of all government, to protect all conscientious professors thereof, and I know of no other business which government hath to do therewith. Let a man throw aside that narrowness of soul, that selfishness of principle, which the niggards of all professions are so unwilling to part with, and he will be at once delivered of his fears on that head. Suspicion is the companion of mean souls, and the bane of all good society. For myself I fully and conscientiously believe, that it is the will of the Almighty, that there should be diversity of religious opinions among us: It affords a larger field for our Christian kindness. Were we all of one way of thinking, our religious dispositions would want matter for probation; and on this liberal principle, I look on the various denominations among us, to be like children of the same family, differing only, in what is called their Christian names."
That religious tolerance, expressed by those who formed the foundations of the American government is one of the highlights of the writings surrounding freedom. Is it violated when a religious leader is mocked by way of cartoons that depict its leader provocatively and in the nude?
Hawaii is one of those regions of the world that prides itself on diversity of religion, race and culture. It also has an informal lifestyle that brings people of different beliefs together more amicably than one might find elsewhere. Still it is likely that the people of Hawaii are similar to people who are not Muslims and don't like the idea of cartooning people in a way that is vulgar or tasteless.
And how would people in the United States respond to a nude, provocative image of Jesus on the New York Times front page? Gloria Jacobsen of Hawaii does volunteer work for a local Christian group but espouses no specific religious belief. Her opinion comes not from a religious view, "It would be distasteful and not humorous."
Michell Perez, a Christian and member of the Native Hawaiian community, agreed with Jacobsen. "It certainly is tasteless to make fun of the leader of a major religion by showing the person nude and in a sexy way. That's not a good thing, especially if the religion you make fun of says not to show a picture at all of the person. It is not funny also because when there are bad people out there, they can get mad; and things can get worse. Even good people don't think making fun of other religious leaders is right."
That might be the Jeffersonian view as well, of the inappropriateness of using a nude image of a major religious leader of an entire religion as a front page cartoon.
Related articles.
The risk of faith-based politics to religious ideals
History's record and public's perception of the press role differ over events like Brown shooting
Traditional ethics mixed with new media recommended to avoid 'America's Got Talent News
No comments:
Post a Comment
Say something constructive. Negative remarks and name-calling are not allowed.