It’s a frickin cartoon!

When will Muslims grow up and join the 21st century? Some have. Some are indifferent to the latest drawings of the Prophet Muhammad, and to those Muslims I offer my respect and gratitude. But there is a significant majority who, if not will resort to violence, will at least be outraged and vocal about their prophet being criticised.

It’s long been known that in Islam depictions of Muhammad are forbidden because they can be easily ‘mislead’ and worshiped such as in Christianity with pictures of Jesus Christ. But for a religion that claims to have some of the world’s finest architecture and art, for some reason, drawing an image of Muhammad is out of the question. At least in Christianity works such as the Sixteenth Chappell by Michelangelo and the Last Supper by Leonardo Da Vinci, which are profound and wonderful pieces of art, would be burned and destroyed along with the deaths of their genius makers if Christianity had taken the same approach as these modern easily-and-wanting-to-be-offended-just-for-something-to-rampage-about Muslims do.

The most recent of events that escalated this whole saga was when a popular adult and satirist cartoon show called ‘South Park’ (which I strongly admire and recommend) received death threats from a radical Muslim group to the creators of ‘South Park’ Trey Parker and Matt Stone, for depicting the Prophet in their show. In the show, Muhammad is one of the ‘Super Best Friends’ who comprise of all the gods and prophets of the world’s major religions, including Jesus Christ, Buddha, Krishna, Joseph Smith (from Mormonism) and for extra humour, ‘Sea Man’ (pronounced semen) with his bird-friend ‘Swallow’.

Back in 2001, Muhammad was depicted in this ’Super Best Friends’ and not a word from Muslims (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:South_park_muhammad.jpg). Not a peep. Only in the most recent episodes (200th and 201st) were there then death threats. Aside from the largely hypocritical element, isn’t it all just very childish?

The Qur’an forbids idolatry, but does not specifically forbid representative art.

Sura 21, 52 - 54: Behold! he said to his father and his people, "What are these images, to which ye are (so assiduously) devoted?" They said, "We found our fathers worshipping them." He said, "Indeed ye have been in manifest error - ye and your fathers."

In fact, in history there have been depictions of Muhammad as early as the 14th century. The Investiture of Ali at Ghadir Khumm, MS Arab 161, (AD 1309/8), for starters, as well as art from Muhammad meeting the monk Bahira, from Jami Al-Tawarikh (c.1315), and Muhammad re-dedicating the Black Stone at the Kaaba, from Jami Al-Tawarikh, c. 1315, et cetera.

Are those OK? Where do we draw (if I may use the pun) the line? At what point is it OK to draw an image and name it ‘Muhammad’? Is it OK to draw a stick man and call it Muhammad, or does it require more artistic merit?

The clash arises from a fundamental difference between cultures. In the West, we believe in Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Speech. Its what makes us forward-thinking, progressive, and ultimately fairer for all. We don’t take religious faith that seriously in most cases, although there was an incident lately where a so-called ‘Militant’ Atheist left satirical images of Jesus Christ in a chapel at Liverpool John Lennon Airport, despite the inspirational singer/songwriter writing the words “Imagine there’s no heaven … And no religion too.”

Islam has not had or been through a period of Enlightenment yet. It is 600 years younger than Christianity, so its no surprise that it still contains a lot of outdated views. I really wish religion would disappear from this planet forever, but if people must be religious, then please acknowledge that your beliefs are never more important than anyone else’s.