Charlie Hebdo may be bigoted, but it has a right to be

So who is to say that the French newspaper Charlie Hebdo is not guilty for being intentionally anti-Islam and provoking towards the Muslim community?

Although they satirise all major religions, it seems the one that they give utmost focus to is Islam, knowing full well that Muslims are the strictest when it comes to depicting the prophets.

When is the line crossed when humorous satire becomes hate-speech? Is humour and satire really meant to be offensive and hurtful and not laughed off?

So if Charlie Hebdo had been making fun of Islam all this while as evidenced from all the cartoons they have published, then I guess they are racist, bigots and xenophobes.

As much as I can’t say I deny all of this and that I agree with whatever message they are trying to get across, I also can’t say that I am against how they are transmitting that message.

The reason is that I use the same method of transmitting my messages to the public as well: the freedom of speech and the right of expression.

Sometimes I make jokes, use sarcasm, satire and even full-on anger in my writing and videos to get my thoughts and ideas across and I feel I have a full right to do so.

It’s exactly how that famous and cliched saying by Voltaire goes: “I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

Yes, even in my writing I tend to disagree with a lot of people whom I feel are bigots, racists and xenophobes too. But I do exactly that, I write. I don’t shoot them to death.

I respect the right of all these racists, bigots and xenophobes to say what they say. And I fight back by using my point of view to counter theirs. And that is how it should go.

If someone writes something you don’t like, then write back. If someone says something you don’t like, then say something back.

And yes, if someone draws an offensive cartoon you don’t like, then go right ahead and draw a more offensive cartoon to offend them even more than they offended you.

But picking up guns and killing human beings because you don’t agree with what they say is not the way to do things in this day and age. It is pathetic.

It is pathetic because these people who resort to violence as a response are people who have nothing else of substance and significance to offer.

They have no rationale, no intellect, no intelligence, no reasoning, no tolerance, no humanity and no compassion. So violence is the only way they know how to react.

I am someone who does not agree with any form of censorship because I think that society should be mature enough to handle discussions and debates of any kind (or at least strive to be).

As much as I don’t want to absolve whatever racist and bigoted intentions Charlie Hebdo have through their publication just because they have become victims, they really have a right to it.

They have a right to it just as much as people who disagree with them have a right to express their counter-opinions in another publication, or even through a demonstration.

What I do know is that violence is not the answer. By resorting to that, I believe they are not protecting the sanctity of Islam. Instead, they are doing Islam and all Muslims a huge disservice. – January 9, 2015.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider.