“If my good friend Dr. Gasparri says a curse word against my mother, he can expect a punch,” Francis said, throwing a pretend punch his way. “It’s normal. You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others.”… [Source]
Speaking of our mothers, the Muslim Council of Britain made clear:
1. For Muslims, love of the Prophet ( ﷺ peace be upon him) is a NECESSARY part of our FAITH. He is dearer to us than our parents and children. We prefer him to our own self.
So if punching someone for mocking your mother is normal, than what of mocking someone you are told to esteem beyond your mother? A fatal knockout blow perhaps because you have to punch that much harder as it is not your mother, but Mohammed. Show the love.
The Pope did say killing in the name of religion is wrong, but his comment is the apology any fundamentalist needs to whitewash the bloodstains. They so love Mohammed, that if ever they were to look on him:
“My eyes have never seen anyone more perfect than you
No woman has given birth to anyone more handsome than you
You have been created free from all defects
As if you were created the way you wished”
That a Charlie Hebdo caricature, that showed him crying at the thought of murder done in his name, would be a provocation to further murder. Idolatry is meant to be avoided, yet the very image of Mohammed portrayed goes beyond esteem as the couplet above mentions (again via MCB).
Giles Fraser calls Charlie Hebdo iconoclasts for this reason. I am inclined to agree. The need to challenge the idea that any man must be lionised in this manner, and worse that we must kowtow before this idea is preposterous. An image of the mind that must never be made real, and certainly not satirically depicted. We are expected to be as a devout believer.
Power is the right subject for satire. This is why religious figures are legitimate subjects. It is dangerous to suggest violence against this is normal, that insults lead to murder for those things we care passionately about. Honour killings, and persecution of other religions and sects are justified this way too.
We would do well to include persecution of atheists, often at the forefront of questioning religious ideas, and opinions:
Karim Ashraf Mohamed al-Banna was arrested with a group of people at a cafe in November, according to the Association for Freedom of Thought and Expression. An Egyptian minor offenses court sentenced him on blasphemy charges Saturday in what Human Rights Watch called “part of a wider government push to combat atheism and other forms of dissent.” [CNN]
Karim’s parents so much loved the prophet more that they lured him to the cafe so the police could arrest him. His father testified in court against his son. This is the pure love demanded when you must place a dead man you never knew before your own living child.
The Pope says people make a game of insulting religion. This is no game. The ideas of religion as sacrosanct need to be shown for what they are. The pretentious nature of sycophancy to a man’s physique, the requirement to love him beyond that of your own children so that to betray them for him is right.
We must continue to lampoon religion not because it hurts others, but because the hurt done by religion is very real. Offence because piety demands you must react that way is not natural; your emotions to your children are natural. If the choice is the welfare of your children or your religion no holy book need be reached for or cleric called for the answer. A loving parent should know which comes first, every, single, time.
The need to smash idols is ever present, and the apologetics for massacres. It means very little to say murder is wrong when you then justify it. When you demand the implausible is done, the unthinkable will happen.
Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog