I am a firm believer in the first amendment; it allows reporters around the world, and around the region, to bring the masses news and information. It also allows for the potential of change.
My opinion of the cartoons is not relevant to this entry; this is about freedom of speech, expression and the press and the aftermath thereof in this particular issue.
I applaud the Danish authorities for continuing to fund the Danish daily where the cartoon first appeared of the Prophet with a bomb-turban. The editors of the newspaper have courageously worked past a world-wide backlash to ensure its freedoms.
Norway has seen much of the international wrath that Denmark has had suffered from because a small newspaper there was one of the first nations outside of Denmark to publish the controversial cartoon. Since the publication, the cartoons have appeared in papers around Europe and the Middle East including Bulgaria, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Jordan, New Zealand, Poland, Spain, and Switzerland.
Regardless of what the cartoons' message was or if the governments of this dozen countries agreed with it, they deserve credit for not prohibiting its reproduction.
I am young. I have only been around for slightly over two decades and have memories of slightly less. However, even I can recall many exhibits and cartoons that I did agree, or for that matter, like to look at, as a Christian and as a person.
Just a few years ago, there was an exhibit in New York that had dung thrown all over a picture of the virgin Mary, the woman Christians revere as a the mother of Christ; without her, there would be no Jesus, no Savior, no Messiah. However, did I rise up, take a train into Manhattan and burn down the museum? No. Did I burn down Manhattan? No. Did I burn the artist? No. Did Americans come in groves to burn his home and kill his family? Of course not. Did Christians around the world rise up and threaten the lives of American diplomats, American property overseas or even spit on American embassies? No. And can you remember what happened to that exhibit? Exactly, you can't because the media attention it evaporated and it quietly disappeared into yet another thing people were upset about.
I like former President Bill Clinton. There have been countless political cartoons about him as well as my current President George W. Bush -- particularly in Middle Eastern newspapers. Have I gone to Washington to torch Middle Eastern embassies? No. Has anyone? No.
The Muslims who destroyed the embassies in the Middle East are doing the worst thing they possibly can. They are turning a minor series of cartoons into an international news story.
I do not read daily newspapers in Scandinavia and so I would never have seen those cartoons at question, nor would the vast majority of people who did. Even the people who read the newspapers that the cartoon was printed probably would not have focused for more than a second or two, five at the very most, on the cartoon. But now, people are reading it all over the world.
To make matters worse, the people who are "defending" the Prophet are making him look worse. Let's look at what they are saying.
Violent protests have been transpiring around the Muslim world causing countless damage to property - and people; hundreds of Palestinians tried to gain entry into the office of the European Union in Gaza and, according to the BBC, "pledged to give their 'blood to redeem the Prophet.'"
It seems to me just a little ironic that these individuals have come to the conclusion that the best way to fight the stereotype that their Prophet is a terrorist is by carrying out terrorist attacks in his name.