Salt * Wet * Fish

Was further discussing the Danish caricature issue with my friend and it dawned onto me that commentors or people who supported the Danish and their rights of expression and saw no wrong in printing the caricatures were people who grew up in generally homogeneous environment where multi-religiosity was not part of their landscape. Whereas, those who felt that it shouldn’t be print are those who grew up in a more multi-religious environment.

Of course, this is not to say that ALL people from such environment supports the printing of the caricatures and same for those growing up in multi-religious society. Indeed growing up in either of these environment don’t necessarily predispose one to support or not support this issue, but it can be a factor.

Don’t get me wrong, I support the freedom of express and indeed the freedom for the Danish media to print even those caricatures. What I am suggesting is that having the freedom to express shouldn’t meant that we must exercise that right to express. What is this freedom of expression, anyway, when one cannot express their opinions about the holoclaust, for example, to down play its significant. This by no means insite violence to Jews, only an opined suggestion that its less than what people say it is, unlike some of the caricatures that could indeed incite violence against Muslims. I am not here suggesting anything less about the holocaust, just a comparative views about this so-called freedom of expression so treasured in some European countries.

I think it all boils down to respect or ability to respect. For people who has respect for Muslims or their Prophet Mohammed, would they even consider such caricatures that attacks their religion instead of the individual groups or persons? To begin with, do they have close and respected Muslim colleagues or friends? If they did, would they still have considered this option? Its always easier to make fun of or to ridicule people who we don’t like, don’t know or don’t respect, isn’t it? Don’t get me wrong that I am implying that the Europeans are all at faults here, I also feel that the general reactions (silence and inaction) of the greater Muslim population towards the rise of terrrorism in the name of their religion have led to this great rift, suspicion and anger in the West.

I wonder if we were to be back in medieval Europe or during the colonisation of Americas/Australia by Europeans, if we will think of Roman Catholic church and the Christians as terrorists.

Growing in little Singapore, with a looming Muslim neighbour in the north, we are often reminded of how sensitive race and religious issue is. Of course, there are times when I do feel the frustration that we are overly concerned about such issues that we don’t discuss them, even though racism or misunderstanding is still real in Singapore or we try to please the Muslims too much or appease them for that matter. Still I grew up understanding and accepting the prohibitions of the Muslims, Hindus and vegetarian and although I may not agree to every prohibition, I know to respect their view that, for example, we should not use the Muslim utensils on non-halal food or eat meat using utensils provided by a vegetarian store. Muslims friends, on the other hand, have not been insistent that we must following their prohibitions strict when we mix with them. Some people call this self-censorship leading to bigotry. I wonder how being harmonous could be so.

I grew up many times encountering the kindness of Muslims, and especially, ma-chiks (Malay aunties) and enjoying their hospitality, especially in traditionals Malay villages or kampungs. Thus, for me, being disrespectful to a fundamental law in Islam is not just another exercise of human rights and democracy. Its being disrespectful to the people whom I have enjoyed my friendship with and also their hospitality.