South Africa

Boys and girls we are on a slippery slope. Last Friday night at 10:30pm The Jamiat-ul Ulama of Transvaal (JUT), was granted an interdict against Johncom Media and Independent Newspapers among others, preventing them from publishing these cartoons. In a press statement the JUT stated :

 

The Jamiatul Ulama is deeply offended by cartoons mocking the Holy Prophet Muhammad Sallallâhu 'alayhi wasallam and depicting him as a terrorist in certain recent European publications. It is evident that these publications were aiming to demonise the character and personality of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) who is followed by 1.5 billion Muslims globally and who is admired by millions of others all over the world. The publication of these cartoons demonstrates contempt for the religious beliefs of the Muslim Community. These publications have abused freedom of speech by taking it to a dangerous, irresponsible and unacceptable level by showing disregard for the sensitivities of Muslims around the world.

 

The cartoons in question are (in my opinion), in very poor taste. Being an adult with the right to make up my own mind I have made a choice and decided to reject the message that has been transmitted to me by these cartoons. This is my right as an individual and (some would argue) obligation as an informed citizen. What kind of country would we live in if some entity or group decided what was the “correct” message for all people to receive and follow (think back about 15 years and you’d find a good example of this type country). This cannot stand!

 

The last time I checked we lived in a secular constitutional democracy, not a religious theocracy dominated by the clergy and religious sensitivities. The key word since the founding of our “new” Republic has been a theme of tolerance and not acceptance. What I mean by this is best illustrated by a simple example – say you are on a bus and you hear a baby crying loudly in a seat close to you. Even though you find the sound extremely irritating, you do not order the mother to keep the child quiet or order them off the bus. Instead you tolerate the noise – you may not like or accept the ruckus, but you tolerate it because you realize this is the price of living in a society with many different types of people. In a country as diverse as ours this is tolerance in action and is the tradeoff we make on a daily basis in order to peacefully coexist. 

 

Let’s look to another illustration, imagine a raving capitalist-agnostic stumbled on the JUT website and finds this article entitled “YOUR GREATEST THREAT!: Secularism - The Abandonment of Shari’ah”. The capitalist-agnostic finds this article extremely offensive because it goes against everything he believes in and furthermore insults his core beliefs through statements like:

 

Apart from waging a brutal and unholy war on Muslims, the aggressive and godless secularists are waging a quieter but more damaging war against Islam and its true followers. Through its seemingly shiny but truly deceptive tools such as democracy, free market trade, capitalism, pluralism and human rights, secularism brainwashes the world into believing that success and happiness lies in the secular approach, as religions are outdated and old fashioned! The acceptance of legislation formulated by man means a preference of mans limited knowledge and experience above the All Knowing and All Wise guidance of the Creator and Owner of all things.

 

So what should the agnostic do in the face of these openly hostile and insensitive statements? Should he approach the High Court and demand an interdict against the JUT for publishing such material, or should he just allow the JUT to have their own opinions and tolerate their unsavory views? If you are a JUT member remember you have set the precedent so you don't have a choice in answering (just like you made the choice for the rest of us on Friday)...

 

Once you open the Pandora’s box of censorship, it is extremely difficult to close.

 

I am nearly 100% sure this indictment will be overturned, if not it does not bode well at all for the future.

 

(For a more legalistic look at this debate checkout Politics.za. Thanks to Darren at Commentary for the links to the cartoons. The Times has a great collection of opinions from various personalities)