TIMES ONLINE: Yale has acted cravenly over images of Muhammad
A Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, published 12 cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in September 2005. This seemingly innocuous decision preceded worldwide protests, death threats, trade boycotts and attacks on Danish embassies.
An outstanding scholarly account of these events is published this week, entitled The Cartoons that Shook the World by Jytte Klausen, a Danish academic in the US. Klausen dissects the motives of the main actors and illuminates debates over free speech and the place of religion in Western societies. It’s a murky business, by which, she says, “protests developed from small-scale local demonstrations to global uproar only to subside without a proper conclusion”.
Yet while there has been no conclusion, there has been change and decay. The controversy spurred an argument that would defend the principle of free speech while deploring the failure to exercise it sensitively. “We believe freedom of the press entails responsibility and discretion, and should respect the beliefs and tenets of all religions,” declared the United Nations after Danish diplomatic missions were torched.
That principle is moderate, balanced and pernicious. The idea that people’s beliefs, merely by being deeply held, merit respect is grotesque. A constitutional society upholds freedom of speech and thought: it has no interest in its citizens’ feelings. If it sought to protect sensibilities, there would be no limit to the abridgements of freedom that the principle would justify. >>> Oliver Kamm | Monday, September 28, 2009
