From here:
Condemnation of the new edition of Charlie Hebdo was swift and often fierce Wednesday (Jan. 14) in many majority-Muslim nations after the cover featured a drawing of the Prophet Muhammad with a tear in his eye.
“You’re putting the lives of others at risk when you’re taunting bloodthirsty and mad terrorists,” said Hamad Alfarhan, 29, a Kuwaiti doctor. “I hope this doesn’t trigger more attacks. The world is already mourning the losses of many lives under the name of religion.”
Imagine the shrieks of sanctimonious outrage if, after the abortionist George Tiller was murdered, rather than limiting himself to roundly condemning the murderer, someone had had the temerity to suggest that abortionists must stop because they are inflaming “bloodthirsty and mad terrorists”. But, then, the cartoon below is so much more offensive than killing unborn babies.
I hardly think the two are related. Tensions are just a tad high in the world today, I see know real reason to further antagonize.
The thing that I don’t understand is: what is the evidence that this is a portrayal of the prophet? No one knows what he really looked like (obviously) and there is no label saying “this is a drawing of Muhammed.” Maybe it is a drawing of the gentleman who takes tickets at the Paris Zoo, who weeps because of the tragic loss of life?
While not a perfect equivalent, consider this Jewish example as it may shed some light on this for you….
Nobody really knows for sure how to pronounce Yahweh/Jehovah/YHWH. Regardless, attempting to pronounce or even write it is taboo for many Jews.
They are a bunch of hypocrites https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAWuVy0QW18#t=64
Free speech is limited in Canada too. Paul Fromm http://cafe.nfshost.com follows the case of Brad Love who he describes as “an inveterate letter writer, Brad Love, a construction worker in Fort McMurray, Alberta. A self taught writer, inveterate reader and opinionated curmudgeon, Mr. Love’s problems began in 2002. Over a 20 year period, he estimates he’d written over 10,000 letters to politicians at all levels, the media and public figures. That year he was charged under Canada’s notorious “hate” law — Section 318 of the Criminal Code — for 20 letters he’s written to politicians and public figures. It must be emphasize that none of these letters contained threats — just his populist opinions. He is critical of foreign aid, immigration and waste of taxpayers’ money.”
It all seems a but bizarre to me but the point is that we don’t have free speech either.
If the simple fact that white supremacists are now using this situation to argue for the right to free speech, then I’m not sure what will convince some that restraint in your words and actions are sometimes needed.