# Mohammed cartoons **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [January 13, 2015, 8:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695 "2015-01-13T08:11:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Chefguy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chefguy/32/138_2.png) [@Chefguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chefguy)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2015, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/41 "2015-01-13T20:26:08Z")
If Christians could get past stoning people for whatever reason (per the old testament), I would hope that at some point Muslims can get past the whole images of Muhammad thing. While I refuse to let my life revolve around what people want to believe in, it’s publish or perish. ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2015, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/42 "2015-01-13T20:28:16Z")
> [@G0sp3l](#): > > I voted Yes, yes, yes. I’m sick of the norm being to kowtow to religious fairy-tales. The BBC wouldn’t have hesitated for a moment to reprint Andres Serrano’s “Piss Christ” or that controversial dung-covered Virgin Mary. It hasn’t been the norm to kowtow to “religious fairy tales” in ages. Only to fairy tales sacred to Muslims. The Pope doesn’t issue fatwas. If I were an editor, I probably WOULDN’T have published the cartoons (which, as Shodan said, were mostly stupid and offensive without being clever or isightful)… but any publication that publishes cartoons thta insult Christians has a duty not to wimp out now. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2015, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/43 "2015-01-13T20:43:50Z")
> [@StJoan](#): > > he only reason I would publish them is if I found them funny, satiric and to the point. This. ---
**Author:** ![Merneith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/57b2e6/32.png) [@Merneith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merneith)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2015, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/44 "2015-01-13T21:09:36Z")
I agree that typically, I would only publish them if they were _good_ satirical cartoons - but this week, Charlie Hebdo gets a pass for not being at the top of their game. “You can’t kill freedom of expression” is _the_ most on-point message at the moment. Publishers everywhere have a duty to not wimp out on that (regardless of their stance on Christianity, which is not even close to the point, at the moment.) It is truly shocking to me that any Western publisher would refrain from publishing the current Charlie Hedbo cover. If I was in fact a publisher, I would put out a special issue with every damn Mohammed cartoon I could lay hands on. I have no problem being a dick when the situation calls for it. The time for being polite about this issue is over, imo. ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2015, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/45 "2015-01-13T21:10:35Z")
> [@El\_Kabong](#): > > Look closer, he’s wearing a name tag saying “Hi! I’m Mohammed”. Not in [this one](http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.2075277.1421103134!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_970/charlie13n-1-web.jpg?enlarged) that the OP linked to. “Mohammed” is also [the most popular name in the world](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_%28name%29#Statistics), so just saying “I’m Mohammed” doesn’t imply you’re referring to the prophet. Do these cartoons ever say “I’m the Prophet Mohammed”? Oh yeah, consider me in the “print for free speech” camp. And yes, if some Nazis or Klansmen were brutally killed in a terrorist attack over what they’ve published, I’d reprint that too. No one has the right to not be offended or to violently retaliate for said offense, and sending would be killers a message is worth the PR hit that publishing swastikas and burning crosses would incur. Offensive speech is the only speech that needs protected. Not that crude cartoons of Mohammed are even remotely comparable to the decades of genocide and violence Nazi and Klan propaganda represents. ---
**Author:** ![Lemmytheseal2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/82dd89/32.png) [@Lemmytheseal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemmytheseal2)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2015, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/46 "2015-01-13T21:11:42Z")
Yes, because I hate religion. It’s not race, or anything else involuntary (and harmless), it’s a choice. I don’t have to respect your taste in music, so I shouldn’t have to respect your taste in superstition. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2015, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/47 "2015-01-13T21:20:30Z")
> [@Peremensoe](#): > > So if, say, a neo-Nazi pamphleteer or white-supremacist blogger were shot by an outraged black or Jewish vigilante, you would republish the racist materials? “Flood the world” with them? What about good old Larry Flynt? He was shot for publishing nasty spread-crotch shots in his _Hustler_ porn mags (while walking with his lawyer while actually being prosecuted for obscenity, if I recall correctly). He didn’t die, but he was very seriously injured. Flood the world with spread-crotch shots from Hustler, very widely seen as demeaning? Or merely support his right to do so free from being shot at, without publishing them yourself? ---
**Author:** ![Lemmytheseal2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/82dd89/32.png) [@Lemmytheseal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemmytheseal2)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2015, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/48 "2015-01-13T21:21:18Z")
> [@stillownedbysetters](#): > > Yes, I would publish, and yes, I would do so because of the right to free speech. > > However, and this is a big however, there is a line between free speech and being offensively anti-religious. I don’t think anything worthwhile is accomplished by crossing that line and would no sooner agree to publish something blatantly offensive to the Muslim faith than I would agree to publish something blatantly offensive to my own Christian faith. > > I do not believe the cartoon under discussion here is offensively anti-religious, so publish away! It is offensively anti-religious to many, but that’s why I want them published everywhere. Nobody has the right not to be offended, especially about superstition. > [@control-z](#): > > Sure, I’d do it, because yay free speech and boo organized religion. > > But there limits to tastefulness, many of the same people that are happy to Mohammed parodied would get peeved by a bunch of cartoons disparaging Jesus. So I believe the very act of drawing Mohammed or Jesus or any fictional or real person should be legal and tolerated, but we don’t need to be overly disrespectful about it. Make your point and move on. No, being overly disrespectful is the best part! ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2015, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/49 "2015-01-13T22:05:14Z")
> [@dangermom](#): > > For me, free speech is a paramount political value. Me too. > [@Malthus](#): > > What about good old Larry Flynt? He was shot…very seriously injured. > > Flood the world with spread-crotch shots from Hustler, very widely seen as demeaning? Or merely support his right to do so free from being shot at, without publishing them yourself? Just so. I _do_ support his right to do so, just the same as _Charlie Hebdo_’s, and Westboro Baptist’s, and the Muslim Brotherhood’s, and the Klan’s. But if it’s _my_ newspaper we’re talking about, that’s _my_ speech. As I said, per my understanding of the duties of journalism, I would redistribute specifically offensive material _if_ it was necessary to cover the story, not otherwise. If a further “message” needs sending, I can write (or assign) my own editorials. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Kobayashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4af34b/32.png) [@Mr.Kobayashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Kobayashi)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2015, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/50 "2015-01-13T23:56:43Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > I voted, _Yes because Free Speech_, but really it’s - _Yes, because Fuck Off You Ignorant Fundamentalist Fucking Shit Stains_. I was going to add “Yes - Because fuck 'em if they can’t take a joke” but thought it prudent not to give ISIS any reason to hack me. > [@Arch\_Trout](#): > > I’ve seen the cartoon in question and what struck me is how do people know it’s Mohammed? > Yes, I know they’ve said it’s him but if you showed it to a random person in the street how would they know? You wouldn’t, other than being told that it’s meant to be Mohammed. Not a big deal to you or me maybe but still enough to seriously piss people off. > [@QuickSilver](#): > > More to the point; Who is being forgiven and by whom? And why the rush to forgive when the victim’s bodies are barely interned? > > I listened to NPR this morning and the BBC interviewer spoke to one of the CH editors (or writers?). She couldn’t explain the “Tout est pardonne” comment either. Something about the victims having a coffee with their killers (in some alternate universe, I guess) to discuss the reasons they did what they did. Made absolutely no sense. :dubious: They’re French and trying to make a point, probably best not to think about it too much. > [@Skammer](#): > > I’m not sure if I’m being asked if I would publish the cartoon as the editor of Charlie Hebdo, or if I would publish them as the editor/news director of another outlet doing a story on Charlie Hebdo. The latter, like say the BBC article. ---
**Author:** ![El\_Kabong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_kabong/32/496_2.png) [@El\_Kabong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Kabong)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2015, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/51 "2015-01-14T00:16:20Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > Not in [this one](http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.2075277.1421103134!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_970/charlie13n-1-web.jpg?enlarged) that the OP linked to. Well, of course you can’t see it with him holding that “Je suis Charlie” placard up in front of him like that. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2015, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/52 "2015-01-14T01:52:34Z")
Picked #1, which kind of sums up my thoughts on _Charlie_’s couv’ but also kind of doesn’t. Here’s the thing : Charlie got shot up by a bunch of cunts who figured Islam justified what they did. In doing so, they murdered another Muslim and ensured the entire French Muslim community would face public opprobrium for a long, long while (and it was already so easy to be a Muslim in France, too !). In the wake of these events, thousands upon thousands of Muslims, in France and elsewhere, have condemned the attacks, have expressed sympathy and mourning, have marched, have tweeted and blogged and facebooked that they, and their own understanding of Islam, wasn’t about that, was in fact about the opposite of that. They continue to do so on the Internet, in their schools, in their workplaces, in their cities even as they are taken to task by the hateful, the ignorant and those looking for pointless fights. And yet whoever took over \*Charlie \*chose to respond with a slap in their collective faces and a cartoon that says “Fuck you, we won’t forgive any of you just because you say Je Suis Charlie like everyone else is. You all bear the guilt. Oh, and here’s Muhammad because we know y’all hate when we do that”. That’s not particularly clever. \*Especially \*when it was such a golden opportunity to riff on their most famous cover, the one that earned them state censorship the day De Gaulle died - simple white letters on plain black background, “Balles tragiques à Charlie - 12 morts”. That would have been clever. I would have bought it on the spot, for the wit alone. ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2015, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/53 "2015-01-14T05:21:26Z")
The moment a civilization descends into tyranny is the moment when free speech is abolished. To the extent that we have free speech is the extent that we’re free. ---
**Author:** ![Lemmytheseal2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/82dd89/32.png) [@Lemmytheseal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemmytheseal2)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2015, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/54 "2015-01-14T05:57:16Z")
It seems to me that lots of people are missing something here. Wouldn’t this whole episode be properly called an assault on free speech only if _the state_ was in some way involved in stopping Charlie Hebdo from publishing, or punished them after the fact (with death or anything else)? Really, what we’re opposing here is terrorism of a particular variety. ---
**Author:** ![Stringbean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Stringbean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stringbean)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2015, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/55 "2015-01-14T06:08:30Z")
It is the most important cartoon published in the past 50 years, if not ever. To not publish it is to deny its importance out of fear. Not to mention, it was tasteful and conciliatory. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2015, 6:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/56 "2015-01-14T06:12:31Z")
> [@Lemmytheseal2](#): > > It seems to me that lots of people are missing something here. Wouldn’t this whole episode be properly called an assault on free speech only if _the state_ was in some way involved in stopping Charlie Hebdo from publishing, or punished them after the fact (with death or anything else)? I think you’re confusing the concept of free speech with the First Amendment. In the US, only the government can violate the First Amendment, because the First is specifically a check on what the government is allowed to do. When the Klan was running wild, and any black person who spoke up about it got killed, it was not a violation of the First Amendment. It was, however, an attack on the concept of free speech. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2015, 6:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/57 "2015-01-14T06:26:06Z")
> [@Merneith](#): > > It is truly shocking to me that any Western publisher would refrain from publishing the current Charlie Hedbo cover. If I was in fact a publisher, I would put out a special issue with every damn Mohammed cartoon I could lay hands on. I have no problem being a dick when the situation calls for it. The time for being polite about this issue is over, imo. \*Does \*the situation call for it, though? There are over a billion Muslims in the world. 99% of them have never killed anyone. Is it justifiable to insult them, because of the actions of a tiny handful of people who happen to share one characteristic with them? The terrorists were also black - would you publish a cartoon calling them niggers? If not, why not? Why is being a dick to millions of innocent Muslims more acceptable than being a dick to millions of innocent blacks? ---
**Author:** ![Stringbean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Stringbean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stringbean)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2015, 6:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/58 "2015-01-14T06:53:14Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > \*Does \*the situation call for it, though? There are over a billion Muslims in the world. 99% of them have never killed anyone. Is it justifiable to insult them, because of the actions of a tiny handful of people who happen to share one characteristic with them? The terrorists were also black - would you publish a cartoon calling them niggers? If not, why not? Why is being a dick to millions of innocent Muslims more acceptable than being a dick to millions of innocent blacks? Because they have been doing it for a decade, and have been equal toward all religions in their ridicule. If a magazine had similarly published satirical cartoons making fun of niggers, wetbacks, towelheads, krauts, chinks, kikes, in equal measure, then you can’t have one group cry foul as being “picked on.” They’re just a bunch of butthurt nannies. Not to mention, free speech is free speech, and Charlie Hebdo owes it to no one to censor their freedom of expression. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2015, 6:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/59 "2015-01-14T06:59:27Z")
> [@Stringbean](#): > > Because they have been doing it for a decade, and have been equal toward all religions in their ridicule. > > If a magazine had similarly published satirical cartoons making fun of niggers, wetbacks, towelheads, krauts, chinks, kikes, in equal measure, then you can’t have one group cry foul as being “picked on.” They’re just a bunch of butthurt nannies. > > Not to mention, free speech is free speech, and Charlie Hebdo owes it to no one to censor their freedom of expression. That’s lovely, but it has virtually nothing to do with what I wrote. ---
**Author:** ![StJoan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bc79bd/32.png) [@StJoan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/StJoan)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2015, 7:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695/60 "2015-01-14T07:09:46Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > And yet whoever took over \*Charlie \*chose to respond with a slap in their collective faces and a cartoon that says “Fuck you, we won’t forgive any of you just because you say Je Suis Charlie like everyone else is. You all bear the guilt. Oh, and here’s Muhammad because we know y’all hate when we do that”. > That’s not particularly clever. I think you have misunderstood the “Je suis Charlie” + “tout est pardonne” cartoon. In English, it translates to Mohammad holding up the “I am (with) Charlie” (i.e. “I support Charlie”) placard, while the caption reads “all is forgiven”. On one level, this cartoon can be seen as an attempt to reclaim Muhammad/Islam, and its supposed message of peace, love, universal brotherhood of mankind blah blah blah… in the face of a brutal attack from followers of a murderous philosophy. There is a deep sense of irony here. On another level, the fact that they are again publishing a _cartoon of Mohammed_ (the “provocation” for the attacks), shows defiance in the face some really nasty odds. Finally, they have avoided any suggestion of a retaliation on the local Muslim population. Taken together, the cartoon says: “We will continue to say what we want, when we want, and where we want, so do your worst. Our message is one of peace and reconciliation – like you keep preaching. Try beating us on that!”. Charlie Hebdo is sending out a uniquely powerful message. I’d say it’s the best possible response that they could have made and more power to them for that. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mohammed-cartoons/709695.md?page=4)