Cartoons should remind us to balance freedom of expression with incitement to violence

Editor's note: The following \ncolumn pertains to 12 cartoons that were published in Denmark. One cartoon, drawn by Kurt Westergaard, depicts the Islamic Prophet Muhammad with a lit bomb as his turban.\nNearly six months have passed since the infamous Muhammad cartoon controversy first erupted in Denmark. Unfortunately, the deplorable actions executed by disgruntled Muslims and unsympathetic responses from newspaper editors have further exacerbated the situation. After reading myriad articles, editorials, responses and interviews during the past month, in addition to viewing all of the cartoons, I can't help but discuss two key issues that have been at the center of the storm from the beginning. It is my belief that these issues could have sparked positive and constructive dialogue between all parties.\nFirst, it behooves all of us to examine the assertion that Islam forbids any pictorial representation or the image of the Prophet Muhammad and put this into context with regard to why so many Muslims are boycotting and protesting. While one could debate whether or not this is allowed within the confines of traditional Islam, for the purpose of this argument I will not. However, I do wish to make it clear that depictions of the Prophet Muhammad do exist and are commonplace in many Muslim countries. \nAnyone who appreciates Islamic art, particularly 14th and 15th Century Persian paintings and manuscripts, will find numerous human depictions, including those of the Prophet Muhammad. No one is calling for the destruction of these works, or harm to be inflicted upon those who buy and sell them. Likewise, no one is venting frustration because museums display these works of art. \nIndeed, Fleming Rose, the culture editor of Jyllands-Posten, still believes that depicting the Prophet Muhammad is a "taboo" which exists within Islam, something for which he should not be held responsible with regard to his publishing the cartoons. From the beginning, this has been the central explanation, posed by the media, as to why so many Muslims reacted as passionately as they did. However, does this adequately explain the issue and resultant reaction by Muslims? No, for one need only look at the offensive context in which the image of the Prophet is placed. The issue is not the representation of the Prophet Muhammad but rather the manner in which he is being represented. For example, would Muslims have reacted as violently and passionately had the cartoonists merely depicted the Prophet giving a sermon in front of his followers or whilst sitting amongst his family?\nNext, one should look at the newsworthiness in publishing, and eventually republishing, such cartoons. Many people, including Mr. Rose, have stated that these are simply satirical cartoons, commonplace within the pages of European media. The freedom to publish any images, even satirical ones, must be balanced with journalistic responsibilities. While these cartoons may have been subjected to the test "can these images be published," they certainly did not get subjected to "should the images be published?" The decision by many American newspapers not to print images from Abu Ghraib, for fear that their publication would incite violence against coalition forces, is an example of the acknowledgement of that balance.\nLastly, we should look at the claim that the newspapers that publish the cartoons are merely upholding their rights to freedom of expression. This has been repeated to no end in the media. However, who said that freedom of expression is absolute? London's Guardian newspaper recently stated, "Like other principles, freedom of speech is only absolute until it is shaped by its context." There are always limits and boundaries when governing freedom of expression and free speech.\nMany have also stated, and rightly so, that newspapers and televisions throughout the Muslim and Arab world are replete with hateful and racist propaganda. I end with this final thought from author Reza Aslan: "We in the West want Muslim leaders to condemn the racial and religious prejudices that are so widespread (within the media) in the Muslim world. Let us lead by example"