What Should Westerners Do About Cartoons of Mohammed?

The article recently released by STRATFOR on the turmoil that has continued over such cartoons drawn by artists in Denmark and Sweden, of images of the Prophet, Muhammad, causes me to wonder: are these people living in the 21st Century? Are they truly so angry over a cartoon that they want to kill Westerners? But, of course, that's what they say they are. They appear to be mad enough to develop plots to attack places where Westerners congregate, and certainly, plots tp blow up, or shoot up the buildings of one of the offending newspapers which published these drawings, and, certainly, to kill the staff inside.
It's one thing for Muslims, who consider themselves devout, to adhere to the principles of Islam, which states that images of the Prophet are blasphemous, and call for punishment against blasphemers within. That's fine for Muslims on Muslims, although even there, it seems to me killing such a person is a pretty stiff penalty to pay for such a transgression. Frankly, Muslims have no right to butt into the business of westerners who have practiced their own right of free speech, if such expressions involve drawing cartoons lampooning Muhammad.
There have been similar cartoons, certainly, about Jesus Christ, Gandhi, certainly, many Popes, and even Jesus Christ on the Cross. The world didn't end, when such cartoons appeared. Certainly, modern Christian leaders -- i.e., Popes, or Leaders of the Mormon Faith -- don't go to St. Peter's Square or the Tabernacle in Salt Lake City (for American examples) and call for all "devout Christians," to carry the bloody sword of vengeance against such blasphemers.
I can't allow myself to be intimidated in my own homeland by such nonsense. I respect a Muslim's right to be outraged, and to even call on me to show proper respect for the Prophet. But, that doesn't mean I absolutely can't drawing images of Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Rev. Bonhoefer who stood against Hitler, and Muhammad, as men of Peace from their own religions. Theoretically, I could create such a drawing, but right now, I haven't enough objective information to confirm that Muhammad was, in fact, such a man of Peace.
I'm ignorant, then, of the reality of Muhammad's life, but I believe he led armies that conquered Arabs & Bedouins in his time. If that's true, and if there are statements within the Quran that call on Muslims to wage war against Infidels,then i do have a problem in authenticity. And, my own beliefs state that I cannot casually draw derogatory cartoons of Muhammad, just to make a point. That's really stirring a pot that doesn't need stirred by me.
At some point, however, let's face it: there are going to be people in various places who want to stir the pot, or, make a point, of drawing such cartoons, or burning the Quran, just to do it, because they can! Because living in modern Western states in the 21st Century give members of those societies the right to exercise their free speech in such ways.
Abdul al-Awkaki, the leader of Al-Qaeda of the Saudi Arabian Peninsula, and who spent time in the United States, seems to say: YOU in the West! Exercise your free speech all you want. But WE, here in the nations of Islam, will retaliate, and we will kill you ... maybe not you, the artists, but just whomever is in the way. And it's clear, he wants to foment others muslims nations where these cartoons were drawn, or published to kill the offenders. Not just send a nasty letter. Kill the artists, as warning: do not blaspheme the Prophet, no matter who you are, where you are, in the world, today.
I watched, six months ago, a film, "The Stoning of Soraya M," which shows the repulsive, utterly cruel process of stoning a woman accused of adultery, to DEATH. The nature of such an event is shown for what it is: a cowardly expression men have in traditional Islamic cultures of punishing women for even allegedly committing adultery. In the film, by the way, the entire charge is trumped up, and bogus. The men who foment the crowd to stone this women, buried to her elbows and bound, to death, are hypocrites and phonies. The woman's husband, supposedly the man aggrieved, is cruel, and evil, as portrayed in the film, because he has created a false story so that he can have his wife KILLED, so that he can have a younger worman who fills his heart with lust Of course, hundreds of year ago, Christians did the same thing, burning women, often, at the stake, or, torturing and killing others, heretics, during the Inquisition.
Today, Christians bomb their fellow men or women if those men or women conduct abortions. Frankly, those Christians who kill in the name of Christ disgust me. And, I also have evangelicals in my own life -- sister-in-law, sister, even my brother, who consider my expression of Christianity -- Quakerism -- not quite right in their eyes. When I tell them that I'm a Buddhist and a Quaker, that's all she wrote. Can't be both.
This is generally the time that I hear this statement: Well, I'm sorry, but you're not a "true Christian" if you haven't been saved. How, I ask, is one saved? "By believing and consecrating in my own life the words: 'I believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and that he died for my sins, on the cross, and that I accept that Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior, and that I am forgiven."
My retort is: Well, somehow I don't think Jesus left those words behind as the qualification for what it means to be a Christian. I would rather believe in Jesus, as he lived, and as demonstrated, in the New Testament rather than the Old Testament. The Old Testament simply portrays an ancient, bloody type of religion I want nothing to do with.
Among Christians, we have Quakers, Amish, and Mennonites, among a few others, who stand firmly, but peacefully, for peace & justice, in acts of non-violent protest. Where in all of Islam, are such like minded adherents to within Islam?
Are they the Sufis? That small fragment of Muslims of mystics, within the greater religion of Islam?
If we were to find a non-violent demonstration, outside the newspaper which permitted the cartoons of Muhammad to be published, and asked, "Who are these people?" and the answer was: "Oh, they're Sufis. You know, the branch of Islam that believes in non-violence."
If you have heard of such a segment of Islam so clearly defined, let me know.
I wish there were Islamic groups as well-known as Christian "Peace Churches," so that we could all work together to support Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus, who want to live peacefully with one another. My belief is, though, that any Muslims who try to make such a statement, or take such a stand, are intimidated, even killed, for such efforts. And so, if such people exist within Islam, no one I know knows who they are or where they are.
Please, Muslims, who wish to harm Christians or Jews or Hindus for drawing such cartoons ... don't do it! I won't render such drawings, but I support the right of others to make them. I hope that such drawings will not be created simply to stir the pot, and create religious violence. I hope they'll think such gestures through, just as people asked the minister in Florida who wanted to burn Qurans, from doing so.
On the other hand, I understand that people in the West would say: no one can intimidate me into NOT burning the Quran, in my own back yard, in my own country, if I want to. And, just for the hell of it, I'll be stupid and call the press before I do it. I want publicity, and no one's going to stop me from doing it as an American.
It's trite, but let's remember what Rodney King asked of his peers after the verdict in his trial: "Can't we all just get along?" I'd suggest that that has to be our comment in moments when people are testing their own rights of freedom of speech, freedom of religion. In the end, too, we all should try and remember that this is the 21st Century, not the 1500s. We certainly do not need to unleash a 21st Century Crusade over cartoons. At least, I hope we don't.
The Mohammed Cartoon Dust Has Not Settled is republished with permission of STRATFOR.