Nous Sommes Charlie

This is difficult to know where to begin.
Really difficult!
The second I try to think about what happened in Paris and to the Charlie Hebdo team a hundred associated thoughts swim into mind and block what ever it was I started to think about.

If I can isolate one thought out of all the others, it is the much perpetuated media statement that this is a Muslim Extremist attack on the democratic right of free speech, it strikes against the core of democracy, how can they! Charlie Hebdo satirised Catholics, Jews, Protestants, Conservatives, and Socialists, they had no agenda against any singular religion or politic, their satirical targets were anyone in the media who felt themselves important. In this sense Muslim leaders were fair game.

To understand this let us put this into perspective, it was not so long ago in Europe that Blasphemy and Heresy against established Catholic or Protestant faiths as appropriate, were punishable offenses, it is only in the light of modern liberal developments that these thing are condoned and tolerated. Because these modern developments are already a few generations old, perhaps we as a tolerant society have forgotten the concepts of Blasphemy and Heresy. Perhaps liberalism has gone too far, these ideas are still significant for many people. On a Personal basis if someone libels or slanders us we can take recourse in the courts for the offense against our reputation. Should we not, in like manner, respect other peoples religious sensibilities. Christians, Jews, and Muslims, share the same Old Testament, this should be a common ground for understanding and empathy.

This is far from condoning or in any way defending the actions of the extremist's concerned, many high Muslim Religious leaders have condemned them, but why offend your neighbour when the New Testament transcends this and preaches 'Love Thy neighbour.'

Without doubt the terrorist attack in Paris this January 2015 is an attack upon freedom of the press, in declaring that the Western World cannot publish what is in Muslim eyes blasphemy. How can we reconcile this with Muslims living in democratic societies. Here the guiding rule is that one has to abide by the prevailing laws in the country wherein one lives. I may be treading on thin water, but it seems that the Muslim faith fits well with those countries it is the predominant religion, religion and state are not separate, they are one. There are no grey zones, if something is wrong, it is wrong, black and white. Extremists only see the black and white. For those countries the prevailing attitude depends on the liberalisation and toleration of the rulers. However Muslims in democratic societies are expected to blend in, as are westerners located in Muslim countries. In liberal societies we tend to look for mitigating circumstances. So far all well and good. The difficulty comes with cross-boarder internationalisation. Where religious or political leaders seek to influence the activities, thoughts excepted, of those resident in other countries, we have to look twice thereupon.

But this is a difficult topic for a confirmed agonistic such as myself. Considering the recent Papal decision not to meet the Dali Lama, in case it might prejudice the interests of Catholics in China. In my simple naïve way of thinking should not a major religious leader seek to do what is right and moral, rather than what is popular or political, was not that partly the basis of the new Testament. I see myself already getting into hot water regarding philosophic discussions about what is moral. But to not even meet the Dali Lama because of possible repercussions from the Chinese government! Are not religious matters supposed to be above political considerations? But in cases like this who is to decide what is moral, I would not dare to! One thing I do know, and that is what is considered moral, has little to do with politics, which even in China, one presumes, changes over time.

To those who believe
God be with you