Danish Cartoons - freedom of speech or freedom to insult?

The last two weeks have seen an unwelcome return of the controversy surrounding the publication in the Danish media of cartoons depicting the Islamic prophet Mohammed. This story began in 2005 when the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published twelve cartoons, including one of the prophet Mohammed wearing a bomb as a turban. Danish Muslim organizations, who objected to the depictions, responded by holding public protests attempting to raise awareness of Jyllands-Posten's publication. The controversy deepened when further examples of the cartoons were reprinted in newspapers in more than fifty other countries. This led to protests across the Muslim world, some of which escalated into violence with police firing on the crowds (resulting in more than 100 deaths), including setting fire to the Danish Embassies in Syria, Lebanon and Iran, and desecrating the Danish, Norwegian and German flags in Gaza City. While a number of Muslim leaders called for protesters to remain peaceful, other Muslim leaders across the globe, including Mahmoud al-Zahar of Hamas, issued death threats. Many Islamic organisations and nations implemented boycotts of Danish products in protest.

The Danish press defended the cartoons as an expression of freedom of speech, stating that many other religions had been depicted in a critical or humourous way and that this was part of a free society.

The controversy gradually died down but then, a couple of weeks ago on 12 February 2008, Danish police arrested three men (two Tunisians and a Danish national originally from Morocco) in connection with an alleged plot to kill the cartoonist responsible for the "bomb in the turban" cartoon, Kurt Westergaard. This prompted a very strong reaction among the Danish media and the following day nearly all of the main Danish newspapers reprinted the cartoon as a show of support for Westergaard, citing freedom of speech.

Now, to me, freedom of speech comes with some responsibility. Clearly the original publication of the cartoons was an innocent representation of free speech that sat comfortably alongside cartoonists satirical depiction of many other religions, individuals and organisations and there was no way they could have predicted the backlash that would follow. The fact that a few individuals chose to break the law and plot to kill the cartoonist represents a criminal offence and, rightly, these individuals were detained and deported. But is the right response to a tiny minority to republish the cartoons, knowing they are insulting to a wide section of the Muslim community, in the name of free speech? To me this is a blatant and intentional insult and is an abuse of the principle of free speech. Free speech should not be used as an excuse to go round deliberately insulting people just because you can... it is rude and wrong. I wouldn't dream of insulting my work colleagues, just because I can.. I might make fun of them, knowing that a joke would be taken in the right spirit, but if I KNEW they would take the joke as an insult, then it would be rude and wrong of me to make that joke.

The republication of the cartoons, to me, is a deliberate attempt by the Danish media to insult Muslims and is not a proportionate or fair response to the fact that three individuals were plotting to kill the cartoonist.

The Danes are struggling with immigration and the integration of Muslims into their communities. With the attitude of their media I think they have a lot to learn about respect and tolerance before they can hope to move towards a truly multicultural society.