Reaction over the pope's comments and cartoons?

Question

why is there such a marked difference between the reactions of Muslims against criticisms of their religion and the reactions of people of other religions. Westerners are exposed to pictures of islamic militants shooting dummies with the cross on it and hear speeches of prominant hard-line muslum clerics stating that indfidels should be killed. Yet the Western reaction is quite different. The pope and the cartoons printed in European newspapers about 6 months ago made a valid social criticism about the relationship between Islam and violence. So, after the catroons were printed, why did Muslims react with violent protests that killed many and damaged property? (seems kind of counter-intuitive if you want to dispell stereotypes) Why is the Muslim reaction so strong to the Pope's remarks. Why do hard-line government officials (in iran and pakistan) demand an apology when they themselves have made comments that are just as inflamatory about Christianity?

Please someone who majored in anthropology, religion or middle eastern studues answer this question.

Answer 1

I'm afraid i didn't major in any of the subjects you mentioned.

i think there are 2 main reasons why what happened has happened, one of which can be subdivided.

the first would not make me popular with many muslims but the fact is that islamic civilisation never underwent the rational "enlightenment" that Europe and the US experienced in the 17th/18th Century, as a consequence of which the power of the church (theocrats) declined (the church split and protestantism (from "protest") emerged). in other words, there was a successful rebellion against religious institutions and edicts.

the second reason is that much of the islamic world feels threatened by the power and success of the west. while some on this site seem to express ideas that islam went all out to attack the west, the reality is that (as well as a long history of mutual conflict), recent events have made muslims feel targeted. i think that this can be traced back to the ending of the cold war and the search for a new enemy to train all these weapons at.

first, the west's (especially US) support of non-democratic Arab regimes and israel despite its illegal and inhuman actions with its occupation of Palestine (US has used its veto in UN 15 times for Israel in last 16 years, 3 times more than all other countries vetoes (for any reason) put together)) second, the cultural representation of Arabs as the new enemy in Hollywood films after the end of the cold war and the humiliation of iraqi POWs on Tv during the Gulf War (1991).

the muslim world feels victimised and some parts have retreated into a pre-modern mentality combined with a utilisation of very modern technology to attack the west.

the cartoons were highly offensive (the prophet should never be portrayed - to depict him as a terrorist is just incitement) and the pope's remarks (whilst referring to valid points) were careless in that they did not allow for the fact that christians have attempted to do exactly what he was criticisng. to many muslims, George W Bush's evangelical christianity and his naming of the atttacks on afghanistan (crusades, changed to infinite justice) imply religious elements which hark back to previous (13th century) conflicts.

to us, the protests seem to prove the point. to many in the muslim world, they are defensive acts which state they cannot be treated so badly. however, until there is a muslim reformation/enlightenment, i think we will see emotional/aggressive muslim reactions to things that we in the west consider "an opening of dialogue".

phew...

Answer 2

I think it's in part because the vast majority of Muslim (not the extremist who use Islam to give a reasons for their atrocious acts.) don't appreciate being painted with the same brush.

It is obvious that in every Religion, when what you believe in is being challenged, people are going to react. I guess we would be fed up too if the World had only the image of Catholic religious extremists and terrorists fuel by the media as the soul representatives of our faith and what it stands for.

I believe religious thoughts should perhaps be spoken with a little more diplomacy while going through sensitive and troubled times.

Let's not forget that the Roman Catholics also have a tainted past. If Muslims had a "Grand Representative" of their faith like the Pope is for the Roman Catholics. How would we react to his speech about Religion if he commented that Catholics Faith is "evil and inhumane" because it murdered millions during the Inquisition?

The question of the day is: Did the Pope deliberately use that text to provoke or was it just carelessness. If so, Did nobody at the Vatican anticipate the way the Pope's words might be taken out of context, and the likely reaction?

Answer 3

I feel that it is very hypocritical. Muslims in other nations want everyone to fully respect their religion and if anyone commits an act that offends their religion (Muhammad Cartoons, the Pope's latest remarks) they respond with outrage. However they have their own Jewish/Christian cartoons that make fun of those religions and they make remarks that are very offensive to other religions.
What I find even more ironic is that those two offenses I highlighted reflect the violence associated with Islam, and Muslims react with violence
I really dislike these "politically correct" views of religions. If anyone says anything offensive about someone else's beliefs they are condemned by society. People need to open their eyes and see the truth for themselves.
I think the problem is that if a society starts condemning Islam for its intrinsic violence, the muslim world will be in such outrage that they will go after that society. For example, the Danes that drew those Muhammad cartoons had death threats. People are afraid that if they offend Muslims, violence will result. Its analogous to possibly a bully at school: you know what he is doing is wrong but if you tell him that then you will get beaten up. So your only solution is to just avoid him

Answer 4

The Pope was telling it like it is. Then he backed down and apologized. Islam is a false religion. Mohamed is a false prophet. Christ warned us to be wary of false prophets and false Christs. The Pope owed no one an apology. There is just no way for those of us in the west to understand the thinking of radical Muslims and their leaders. The one thing we need to wake up to is that there is evil in the world. There is an unseen battle being waged between good and evil. The sooner we realize that true evil exists (remember 9/11) the better off we'll be.

Answer 5

Neither side is willing to concede anything nor have they ever been. The Muslim's reaction to the Pope's speech realistically just proved him right. However, the Pope might have shown a little more tact in light of all the unrest taking place in that area now. You don't go swinging sticks at active beehives, stir up the bees, and expect them not to come out stingers at the ready.

Answer 6

Any group that can't take jokes or slander about it is a very weak group. The Muslims seem to think that anything they say against others is fair game, but don't say anything against Islam, or they all scream their heads off.
Strong societies laugh it off. Weak societies, well they do what the Muslims are doing now, and have done in the past.

Answer 7

There is a marked difference in what is allowed.
One seems like a parent trying to control a child having a tantrum. The parent isn't allowed any respect or dignity.
But the child can behave in any inappropriate manner he wants.
Why?? Because if he doesn't get his own way he throws a fit and kills people. Burns up buildings and destroys his own toys.
they are like unruly children. They are very uncivilized and barbaric. We have become the parent.

Answer 8

They're just misunderstood. Don't you remember all the many times we've been told that Islam is really a religion of Peace and of Tolerance?

I personally haven't seen the peace and tolerance of Islam but it must be true....they keep telling us it is.

Oh yea.....the check's in the mail too.

Answer 9

Scarce sex and no booze.
No wonder they have such bad temper!

Answer 10

What follows below is my response to a friend’s email concerning the same issue as what is being discussed in this forum:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Its one thing for the common street hoodlum, or radical foot soldier, in Muslim countries, to be enraged by the comments made by the Pope. I don’t expect many of them to take time to deliberate the issue, or subsume the Pope’s comments in the proper context. They are reactionary beings. However, you would think that Imams’ and other Muslim clerics would me more academic in their reception of comments made by other religious leaders, affording their colleagues on the other side of the religious spectrum a fair hearing. Instead these so called learned men of Muslim upbringing are just as reactionary as the ruffians on the streets of Palestine, or the insurgents attacking their own people in Iraq.

It’s bizarre that both Jews and Christians are called to make concessions and penance to placate Muslim sensitivities, and yet any offense to Christian ideals or people by Muslim authorities is met with deafening silence. When Christian churches are burned to the ground, when our iconography is desecrated because of Islamic militancy, and when death threats are levied on our most revered religious figures, no one in our ranks cries out for apologies or even reparations. No calls for the destruction of Mosques; no command for the assassination of Muslim leaders; and no vitriolic statements from our religious leaders are made concerning Muslim clerics. Even when the more radical fringe of Christendom – men like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson – make inflammatory remarks concerning Muslims and Islam, there is a large outcry from both mainline Christianity and the western secular media denouncing their statements as inane and immoral.

It is the Muslim world that has failed dismally in their efforts to do the same. We always point the incriminating finger at those within our fold that act in a manner that is in discord with what we believe to be the noble thing to do. Muslim “moderates” standby quietly giving tacit approval to the aggression of their more “radical” brethren.

Muslims constantly lament the disproportionate military response to 9/11 that Bush has made. Many in the Christian wing and in the rest of the western world have called him on it, and criticize him constantly for it. Yet when Muslim people attack Christian churches for something as trivial as a cartoon or an insensitive statement made by another Christian, no one talks about the Muslim disproportionate reaction. At least our attack of Afghanistan and Iraq, though focusing on the wrong people, returned violence for violence. Muslims, in reaction to mere rhetoric, returns temporarily hurtful words with violence. Words are eventually forgotten; a loss of life has repercussions that never really go away. You tell me who is responding in a more disproportionate fashion? Who in this scenario is responding more unjustly?

I wonder if Muslims realize how utterly feeble minded they look every time they respond like this? I am curious if “moderate” Muslims are cognizant of the fact that the more they remain mute concerning the wrong doings of their radical counterparts, the more the rest of the world will see them as one in the same? For my part, I a little doubtful as to how divergent “moderate” Muslims are ideologically from their “radical” colleagues. Both of them believe that Muhammad is the supreme prophet, one who supersedes even Jesus in divine significance. Muslims of both “radical” and “moderate” stripe believe that Muhammad is also the ultimate paradigm of human behavior; a model that should be emulated as close as possible. Both, if truly candid, must acknowledge that Muhammad, UNLIKE Jesus, who is the Christian’s primary example for living, was a military commander that took part in violence, order assassinations, and engaged in all the brutality associated with a military enterprise. He ordered the execution of those whose only sin was to ridicule him. These are historical facts attested to in their Qu’ran, Hadith, and secular Arabian history. Maybe the so called “moderate” Muslims don’t vocalize dissent against the “radicals” in their midst because they know, in their heart of hearts, that those the world likes to marginalize as “radicals” really represent the manner of behavior Muhammad would have condoned. The “moderates” remain silent, so as not to underscore their secret agreement with “radical” tactics and their own cowardice at not acting on principles they agree with.

I am disappointed at my Pope for apologizing for statements that are truthful. The truth is always offensive. Jesus made statements to the Pharisees that were infused with controversy. He never apologized for them, despite how inflammatory they might have been. There is no need for Pope Benedict XVI to qualify his statement with an appeal to proper context. Even as an isolated statement, the statements by the Byzantine emperor, that the Pope was quoting, are a truthful assessment of Islam’s prophet. The Catholic Church needs stop being politically correct. The Catholic Church needs to cease abiding by a culture of appeasement. Why should the Pope apologize for the narrow minds of those who cannot read a statement in its context, or who cannot admit to the dark side of their faith? Contrition and forgiveness are foundations to the Christian faith, but to be contrite, when one is not at fault, makes a mockery of reconciliation. If the church continues to be spineless like this, even I will want to leave it.