The worst repercussions I can expect for writing something is to be sued for libel. Not so in Afghanistan.
See here.
The 23-year-old Sayed Parwiz Kambakhsh allegedly added three paragraphs to a story which criticizes "the ignorance of the Prophet Muhammad on women’s rights," according to the NY Times, and distributed the story around school. He can appeal his death sentence, but even without the Taliban, Afghanistan clearly isn't a place for free speech.
So what about the United States? Could I say something like that here?
A Danish paper in 2005 ignited controversy across the Muslim world when they ran cartoons of the prophet Muhammad. The Wikipedia entry on the subject depicts the original cartoons. It's hard to believe mere cartoons resulted in embassies being set on fire, but that is the sensitivity of this issue.
I've seen various student and professional newspapers publish controversial items just to draw attention to themselves. I would never publish something just for the sake of creating controversy, but, conversely, would I shy away from publishing something for fear of the consequences?
I'd like to say no but I can't honestly say that is really the case. The religious fanaticism and consequences of publishing a negative depiction of Muhammad, even in America, can be great. Being a "fearless journalist" becomes a much more complex issue when dealing with the prospect of fanaticism. Would we be the ones putting our heads on the chopping block if we called Muhammad ignorant, or would fanatics lash out at others? Would we be responsible if that happened? What about all the moderate and liberal Muslims who would also be offended by such a reference?
Is defaming Muhammad the equivalent of screaming "Fire!" in a crowded theater?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Muslims Against Sharia strongly denounce this draconian sentence. We appeal to President Hamid Karzai, NATO, and the International community to intervene on behalf of Sayed Parwiz Kambakhsh. Afghanistan cannot be a member of the free world while its citizens are being charged with blasphemy.
Source: http://muslimsagainstsharia.blogspot.com/2008/01/death-sentence-for-afghan-student.html
Whether or not depicting a figure like Jesus or Muhammed is in bad taste does not take precedent over the right to speech. Yet the editors who ran the cartoon erred in judgement big time.
Similarly, the text messages published last week between the mayor and his chief of staff by the Detroit Free Press, showed bad taste by a small group of people who should have exercised more professionalism. But if we desire to maintain a freedom, then even the sacred can not be considered below the belt.
Falsely shouting fire, Ian. :) Interesting perspective!
Post a Comment