“The Danish Cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed should never have been published.” — Aye
Upon the publication of the Danish Cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed, many around the world expressed astonishment and disgust at this seemingly intentional act of Western prejudice against the Islamic religion. This essay will argue why the proposed topic statement holds true in the face of freedom of speech, due to our human obligation to respect all peoples, including their religions.
To begin with, it is important to take into account the context of rising Islamophobia that presented itself in much of Europe at the time due to multiple terrorist attacks that had taken place. Thus, the publication of these cartoons can be viewed as exploiting prejudices and insecurities. The publication and lack of reaction on the part of the Dutch government only further social divisions and intolerance. In practice, the lack of repercussions faced by publishing outlets could have a much wider and discriminatory effect on Muslim people by inciting bigotry and violence.
Furthermore, the Danish Cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed should never have been published due to their blatant disregard and disrespect towards the Islamic religion. Depictions of the Prophet Mohammed are considered blasphemous and such media is deeply offensive towards the millions of Muslims all around the world. What does it say about society as a whole if we allow one group of people to be treated with such insolence?
On the other hand, critics argue that everyone has the right to freedom of speech, and prohibiting such material would go against this very right. To a certain extent, censorship should absolutely be prohibited. That being said, there comes a point in which types of media like these cartoons violate the rights of others. Along with the right to freedom of speech, there is also the universal human right to freedom from discrimination; and publications of depictions of the Prophet Mohammed should be considered discriminatory practice as they overlook respect that should be universal, no matter the religion. For instance, one would certainly not condone the publication of the swastika due to its historic connotation. Similarly, the same standards should be applied to this case. Freedom of speech should only go as far as it does not infringe on others’ rights, in this case, the rights of Muslims.
To conclude, the case for freedom of speech does not hold up when defending the publication of the Danish Cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed on the basis of basic human courtesy and dignity. The publication of such media would not lead to a more non-discriminatory and just society.
