Je suis Charlie

Paris, France. The city of love has been under constant scrutiny this past week after a series of less than amorous events. Today, Charlie Hebdo has printed another cover depicting the Prophet Muhammad.

The original attack on the satirical magazine, although not entirely unprovoked, was appalling and the aftershocks of the two hostage situations added to already terrifying circumstances. As France grieves for those killed in the attacks, Charlie Hebdo has made the decision to once again publish the Prophet Muhammad on the front cover of their most recent edition. Whilst many people have taken to the streets under the slogan ‘Je suis Charlie’, I am struggling to understand why the magazine has repeated their actions.

I am a big believer in freedom of speech, but there needs to be boundaries; when an idea strays from being controversial and becomes offensive, a line needs to be drawn. I am not religious in any way, but I feel it is very important to respect those who are, and take into account their beliefs. In Islam, all images of Muhammad are forbidden; whether they are drawings or paintings or dolls, it is Muslim belief that representations of Muhammad shouldn’t exist. This is the reasoning behind the original attack on the magazine, and whilst I am not in any way condoning the actions of the three gunmen, I fail to see the logic in printing Muhammad’s image again. It is clearly offensive for Muslims, and that’s why I think that freedom of speech is a weak argument in this matter; it is no longer about being able to say what you want, but maintaining levels of respect for other peoples beliefs.

This morning, my mum said something to me that really made me think: “If you lived next to an angry bear, would you poke it with a stick simply because you had the freedom to do so?” The obvious answer is no. So why does this basic logic not apply to the situation in Paris? Whilst the freedom to print images of the Prophet Muhammad exists, it doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to do so. It may be that some people fail to realise or understand Muslim beliefs about representations of Muhammad, because we are so used to seeing images of Jesus and God and not thinking twice about them.

But when printing such images results in 17 lives being lost, should people not then realise that maybe it’s not a fantastic idea?

I’m not entirely convinced this is even slightly coherent but I’m too tired to try and do a decent job of editing it, so let’s just hope I make some sort of sense first time around.