Yet another Scandinavian caricaturist with an extreme liberal political view, not refraining from insulting populations, just to demonstrate freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

There is a saying, which goes something in the lines of “where one’s freedom begins, another one’s ends”.

The terms “freedom of speech” and “freedom of the press” need to be redefined. Can it cross the line towards what is considered as insult by many?

There is a thin line between criticism and insult, and it’s not so hard to cross it. However, anyone with enough experience would have the necessary initiative to decide upon what crosses the line. I see the latest attempt at caricaturizing Prophet Muhammed as a desperate attempt to get attention and increase paper sales. It is a planned attempt to get the attention of the world and the Swedish, Norwegian and Danish speaking people.

One can’t depict any individual in any sexual situation with someone else. It’s humiliating and one would end up with a heavy lawsuit in their hands. Racism would also be crossing the line, depicting a member of another culture as an animal generaly seen as ‘lowly’.

What is so different when the Holy Prophet of the Islamic religion, whose iconization has been banned by Sunni religious authorities (the ulama) in the 16th century?

What the Europeans don’t understand is that Islam is not just a religion, but a lifestyle. Whoever worships Allah and accepts Muhammed as his prophet don’t just simply have a connection to them as a Christian would have to Jesus. The philosophy of “what would Jesus do” has actually been conceptualized in what is called the sunna; one tries to literaly imitate the lifestyle of Muhammad for the ultimate service to Allah.

Iconography has been banned by Islam to prevent the worship of icons instead of the true worship to Allah that comes from the heart (niyyat, literaly meaning ‘intention’, but having a deeper meaning in the context of Islam). I understand that it might be considered freedom of speech by a non-Muslim to depict the prophet in a caricature. Of course, the appropriate way would be to veil the face or not draw facial details, or draw the figure from behind, which has been done quite often in Ottoman miniature art.

Depicting the Prophet as anything, especialy a terrorist, is the biggest insult one can make to the Muslim community, and it’s nothing close to “freedom of speech”.

Europeans, if they claim to be the cradle of civilization, should be more tolerant to the beliefs and values of others, and by others I don’t mean single individuals, but masses.