Wisconsin Atheists Draw Cartoon Muhammad
The Atheists, Humanists, & Agnostics of the University of Wisconsin – Madison drew stick figures of Muhammad around the campus tonight as a protest against the violent threats made in response to the recent South Park controversy. For the show’s 200th episode, the prophet Muhammad was portrayed in a bear costume, inciting threatening responses from Revolution Islam and other groups.
The Wisconsin group evidently got the idea to criticize the strong Islamic reaction with chalk stick figures from the Atheists, Agnostics & Freethinkers at the University of Illinois, who used the same technique last week, drawing over 150 images of Muhammad. The Wisconsin group, however, is facing resistance from the Muslim Student Association (MSA), which calls the planned cartoon criticism “illegal” and a “slap in the face.”
The Wisconsin atheist group sent a letter to the MSA, informing them of their intent and explaining their reasons.
We are aware that depicting images of Muhammad is a controversial issue that is highly offensive to many Muslims around the world. We acknowledge that you may view this as an unproductive, misguided, or hurtful event. We are very sensitive to these facts, and want to ensure that this event is done in a way that does not lead to Muslims feeling uncomfortable on campus. That is why I want to explain our position and our intentions as clearly as possible before the event takes place.
These drawings are not intended to mock, intimidate, or harass anyone – rather, we aim to make the following statements:
1) We have the right to criticize religion and to perform actions considered blasphemous, even if many individuals find this offensive.
2) A free society cannot tolerate violence or threats of violence which seek to limit our freedom of expression.
Further, we fully understand that Revolution Islam is a radical, fringe organization that does not represent mainstream Islam in any way. It goes without saying that the overwhelming majority of Muslims, in the U.S. and across the world, do not view their tactics as acceptable.
The MSA could have responded in several ways or could have just let the cartoon criticism go. They could have joined in criticizing violent threats and radical suppression of free speech while still maintaining their own views about blasphemy. Instead, they responded with a threat to challenge the legality of the cartoon criticism.
I would like to inform you that, as far as we understand, the event you are planning is illegal by the constitution of the University of Wisconsin (88-12 RACIST AND OTHER DISCRIMINATORY CONDUCT POLICY). Deviating from this law will offend not only the UW Muslim Students Association but the entire Muslim community on this campus and other organization of similar culture and faith. The Dean of Students shall be contacted immediately.
The university discrimination policy states that “racist and other discriminatory conduct toward students… will not be tolerated.” The policy defines such behavior as follows:
Racist and other discriminatory conduct means intentional conduct, either verbal or physical, that explicitly demeans the race, sex, religion, color, creed, disability, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry, or age of an individual or individuals, and (1) has the purpose or effect of interfering with the education, university-related work, or other university authorized activity of a university student, employee, official or guest; or (2) creates an intimidating, hostile or demeaning environment for education, university related work, or other university authorized activity.
The Wisconsin atheists’ plan to draw Muhammad tonight may come close to the boundary demarcated by university policy, but it seems to fall short of what would be prohibited. The policy exists to prevent hate speech and harassment, not political and social criticism that offends some who hear it. The MSA’s interpretation of the discrimination policy fails both prongs. Drawing cartoons of Muhammad does not demean the religion of any individuals, nor does it create a hostile university environment. This is clearly protected political speech, and university campuses need this kind of open criticism more than anyplace else.
In another ripple eminating from the South Park controversy, there is speculation that the Times Square bombing attempt may have been motivated by the show’s blasphemous depiction of the prophet. The man believed responsible for the failed attack has been arrested, and authorities will not rule out the South Park controversy as a possible motive.
After their original comment sparked intense criticism, Revolution Islam posted a clarification defending their right to free speech, ironically, as they try to deny that right to satirical cartoonists:
[A]s Muslims we do not define speech which has no place in a moral society as ‘free speech.’ Furthermore, we will never tolerate the mocking or insulting of any one of the prophets, peace be upon them.
This view of free speech may be alarmingly typical of even mainstream Muslim organizations. Muslims have the right to abide by their own religious commands and prohibitions, but they do not have the right to impose those laws on others, by force or by using the legal system. Hemant Mehta makes an excellent point, noting, “You don’t see Jews getting this upset when other people eat pork.”
h/t: the Friendly Atheist
Barring prohibitions via the constitution of the university, I think Wisconsin University group has every right to do what they are doing. However, I think what they are doing is stupid, disrespectful, and tactless.
Consider their statement:
“We acknowledge that you may view this as an unproductive, misguided, or hurtful event.”
Unproductive, misguided, or hurtful? If they truly believe this action may lead to these types of results some serious reconsideration is probably warranted.
“We are very sensitive to these facts, and want to ensure that this event is done in a way that does not lead to Muslims feeling uncomfortable on campus.”
They obviously don’t know much about Islam, do they?
The MSA could have responded very intelligently, stating the sensitive nature of graphical pictures in Islam. They could have even gone on the offensive by shaming the other group from religious toleration or other ‘academic’ route. Instead they come off as a whinny child. You hurt my feelings. I’m telling the Dean of Students on you!
This reminds me of that article by Stanley Fish about free speech and the value of speech. It could be critically applied here. Perhaps tomorrow I’ll read it.
After you mentioned that Fish article last time, I ordered the book by the same name. It is a compilation of essays, some great, some dull. That one was a good one, but I really liked his essays on affirmative action. He goes into a critical analysis of words like “common” and “fair.” Anyway, it’s very interesting stuff and I’d like to read more by him.
I have the Fish Reader. I haven’t started reading it yet. I became really interesting in Fish after reading some of his literary criticism in college. I should read some more of his essays.
Then again, if I look at the actual drawing of the stick-figures, I think to myself: good-god, get over yourselves!
It’s important to note that the atheists aren’t acknowledging that their planned event will be “unproductive, misguided, or hurtful,” only that the MSA may interpret it as such.
I agree that a roundtable discussion or forum or something would be a more academic way of approaching the issue and airing the criticism, but it would never have made the same impact.
I think that anyone who becomes violent when nonbelievers do something that violates their religious laws is automatically classified as extremist. Furthermore, I think it is always acceptable to criticize religious extremism. Criticizing religious extremism is not at all the same thing as criticizing religion, and even if it were, it is not the same thing as demeaning or intimidating individuals because of their religion.
The Christian Bible quotes Jesus as saying that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (whatever that means) is the worst sin possible. If Pat Robertson or some other Christian lunatic suggested that Christians should kill anyone who commits this terrible sin, and some atheist group decided to blaspheme the Holy Spirit (whatever that means) on a college campus, would that be the same thing? How should a Christian campus group respond to a situation like that?
“And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.” Matthew 12:31-32
Friendly Atheist updated today. The AHA drew a bunch of stick figures and labeled them “Muhammad” and the MSA followed them around adding “Ali” and drawing boxing gloves on them. :) I think the fact that MSA eventually approached it with some humor while still expressing their distaste for the event is going to garner them a lot more sympathy than all the angry letters and whatnot.
Anyway. It’s ridiculous to get upset because someone drew a picture of someone. You can respect someone’s right to believe what they want while still finding their specific beliefs ridiculous. And a ridiculous belief coupled with a ridiculously disproportionate reaction to a perceived offense absolutely deserves to be mocked.
…maybe they are upset because it is a bad drawing of Mohammed.
As far as the students reactions..I think it’s kids being kids…just like these terrorist threats coming from a radicalized sect of Islam.
Extremist exist in all cultures and religions.
The message is “We don’t intend to offend you, we are just going to do exactly everything that would offend you for no particular reason other than two idiots decided to post something stupid on a website, and Comedy Central decided to be idiots and do some censoring. Have a nice day!”
Come ON people. You have the right to draw the figure. Fine. Whatever. But, WHY!? Why intentionally piss people off, because that is what you are doing. To just say you aren’t doing it to offend or hurt is not good enough. It offends and it hurts! “But we said that isn’t what we wanted to do?” My hand is now hitting my forehead. SMACK! Great, you said it! Yeah! Well, as long as you guys SAID that we shouldn’t be offended, WONDERFUL, we won’t be. Thanks for spitting in our faces and telling us it is a gift of love!
Why not take something sacred and off-limits to these folks, like maybe pasting pictures of their grandmother’s naked around campus or something. It’s not meant as disrespect to anyone. It is not meant to hurt anyone. We just have pictures of your grandmother naked and we will post them up, because we don’t like it that you don’t like it and we know that you may want to hurt us, but tough, we have the right! Have a nice day!
Let’s stop with all of the theatrics, start listening to each other and stop just needlessly pissing people off. How about that? What does everyone think, eh? Good idea? It is obvious that this group of “free thinkers” isn’t actually thinking about anyone but themselves, and what is important to them. Very sad. The law is on their side. The constitution is on their side. To bad good judgment, respect, civility and class weren’t on their side.
I am the LEAST religious person around. This has little to do with religion, and everything to do with us, as humans, not being complete jerks to each other.