LETTERS: Readers Weigh Muhammad Cartoon Controversy

By: E&P Staff Unless you've been living in a cave somewhere you've probably read plenty about the cartoons of Muhammad that have sparked debate over press freedoms and religious sensitivity around the world. For those just coming to the story or who want to read more, E&P's coverage is widespread, and can be found here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here. Today, we let readers have their say. To add your voice to the mix, send us an e-mail at letters@editorandpublisher.com.

***

To Publish or Not to Publish?

This one was easy to decide. I just made up a little caricature for myself of Jesus with a mushroom cloud coming out of his head and figured I'd never run that, so I didn't see any reason to run the Prophet Muhammad with a fused bomb on his head either. Then again, I didn't see any reason to keep running Johnny Hart after he broke apart a menorah to make a Christian cross. Why should editors feel it necessary to run despicable, insulting images denigrating anyone's religion?

Randolph D. Brandt
Editor, The Journal Times
Racine, Wis.

***

Malicious Cartoons Go Beyond Freedom of Speech

As an American-Muslim, I am very saddened and deeply troubled by the senseless violence that has erupted in parts of the Middle East and Asia following peaceful demonstrations. The Qu'ran teaches Muslims to use wisdom and respectful arguments when being confronted with those who are disrespect the faith. The death threats, burning of property, and killing are extreme unwarranted reactions that go against the teachings of Islam. Unfortunately, this whole situation gives more fuel to the extremists on all sides to make divisions of the nations even further.

There is an issue of insensitivity regarding showing an image of the Holy Prophet, however it goes beyond that. Muslims are offended and highly insulted at the slanderous depiction of Prophet Muhammad as a terrorist.

Time and time again, several Muslim leaders around the world have condemned terrorism and al Qaeda and have tried to show the world that Bin Laden and his followers have twisted and perverted the message of Islam. But time and time again, many in the media around the world try to portray all Muslims and Islam as anti-west and pro-terrorism.

This outrageous cartoon and blatant disregard for the sanctity and holiness of Prophet Muhammad serves as a slap in the face to 1.5 billion Muslims worldwide.

This is a case of slander in the highest degree. What does Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) have to do with the un-Islamic acts of al Qaeda or terrorism?

People need to understand that this goes beyond merely a right of freedom of press or freedom of speech.

We live in a world where very little is sacred and holy. In the name of secularism, respect for religion is thrown out the window. As citizens of the earth, we need to realize that we are all brothers in the human family and must show respect for each other's faith and convictions. Our survival to live in harmony depends upon it.

Sehmina Chopra
Student Islamic Couselor
Salisbury University Muslim Student Association
Salisbury, Md.

***

It really does help to know what these cartoons look like so a person can make their own judgments about the controversy. If the media won't publish them, then how will we ever know what this is all about? I really think your failure to print is making us ignorant in order to satisfy some Islamic extremists, and that hurts everybody, me and you.

Randy Koenders

***

Freedom of the Press vs. Inciting Violence

While certainly the press has the right to publish what it wants, it seems that the wise choice is to not publish cartoons that are already known to inflame the passions of those who already distrust the west. Just because we have the right to free speech doesn?t give one the right to yell fire in a crowded theater.

Crusading European newspapers have already demonstrated the point of a free press with disastrous results. To publish images that have such far-reaching negative effects is tantamount to inciting violence, especially when one knows what will happen. The use of ink that results in the spilling of blood is irresponsible!

H. Michael Sarkisian
Sacramento, Calif.

***

That is why Big Media is obsolete. It is clear that the "vexing issue" has nothing to do with offending anybody. They never had any "vexing issues" with publishing the famous "Piss Christ" or any other offensive material about anybody or any thing. They typically "celebrate" controversial issues as "freedom of the press". But now, when confronted with offending a group that will really fight back, these brave defenders of freedom of the press cower in the corner.

While Big Old Media struggles with these "vexing issues", the New Media has already published, discussed, and analyzed the issue several times over. Big Old Media is always a day late and a dollar short. What they think or decide to do has almost no relevance any longer.

John Nerz

***

It may be called "judgment" but it is actually cowardice and hypocrisy. We recall plenty of photos of "Piss Christ" and "Virgin Mary with Elephant Dung" and a Rolling Stone cover of Christ enacted by a rap star of sorts. This may be vexing for some of the "journalists" and "editors" but it is quite clear to most of the public. Spare us, please, from the predictable upcoming reports from members of the mainstream media about "journalistic courage".

G. van den Bosch
Olympia, Wash.

***

Let's see... there is controversy about the cartoons. You (the press) tell me that they are offensive. But you do not allow me to make a judgment based on looking at the cartoons, which are the "meat" of the news here. USA Today actually has the audacity to say that they are not "self censoring"? Of course they are! Duh!

I get my information from blogs now because they are not yet so tangled up in political correctness as to not know what to do.

You guys had no problem at all with printing the "Mary covered in dung" or "Jesus in a glass of pee," etc. Don't tell me that you won't print the cartoons out of respect for "religion." You just don't want to offend Muslims, because you treat one religion differently than all others.

Your objectivity is gone. You are no longer on the front of freedom of the press. Blogs are.

The MSM editors have difficulty making the decision because they no longer hold press freedom above political agendas.

Arthur Gary

***

Somebody ought to ask the militants who are going crazy over anti-Islamist cartoons if they are not the very same folks who are perpetually burning everyone else's flags and desecrating everybody else's sacred symbols as provocatively as possible -- not that they may not have genuine provocation for their actions (the occupation, etc.) -- its just that since they can give it so often, maybe they ought to be able to take it themselves without getting completely hysterical, once in a while.

Denis Drew