From newspapers, to televisions, to the Internet, there is constant mention of the murder of Charlie Hebdo employees. This attack was executed by individuals who saw the controversial cartoons produced by the satirical magazine, which depicted Muhammad, and took it as an inexcusable insult to their faith.
The question I have is why did this even have to happen?
I do not condone what happened in any way, shape or form, but I can see where the anger came from.
Seeing the illustrations firsthand, I have to say they are over the top. In fact, I’ve seen more tasteful episodes of South Park, which is saying something.
The cartoons are directed at specific groups so heavily and are so offensive, it is hard to see how they could do anything but bring about anger.
It is no secret that religion is one of the most fundamentally important aspects in many peoples’ lives. There are people in every religion who would get offended if a god or prophet they believe in was mocked in a cartoon. So why do it?
Many people say that it is to promote freedom of expression and speech, democracy or some other valiant cause, but in the end it just seems foolish. Publishing these cartoons didn’t promote anything other than religious insensitivity and ignorance.
Even if we said these cartoons were promoting some sort of freedom, it is important to remember that isn’t always a positive thing.
Some things are off limits. Some things are so offensive that as a society we have shunned them from being said.
This hit home especially hard last semester, when columnist George Will was paid to speak at graduation.
Hiring Will last fall wasn’t just hiring a man to present a speech; it was an attack on the core values of MSU students, staff, and supporters. His insensitive and uneducated statements were offensive on many levels, even though he was within his rights to think and say them. If I asked anybody if his statements made them feel patriotic or free, I venture to guess I would have received a resounding “no.”
His words alone were enough to elicit anger and resentment from many individuals, and that is exactly what these cartoons did. They didn’t make anyone laugh; all they did was attack the Islamic faith and the values of people who practice it. This mockery angered a few people to such extreme levels they took the lives of the Charlie Hebdo employees.
These illustrations clearly do more harm than good, so why continue to produce them? I am all for freedom of speech and the use of satire, but at what point is it pushing the limit?
These cartoons are not the equivalent of The Onion or harmless fun. They are an attack on faith. While I could continue on about what these cartoons are not, it would be much easier to say what they are: completely unnecessary.
