One year ago, French Muslim activists booked Charlie Hebdo at the court of Alsace-Moselle over a headline that insulted the sacred Koran. The court was known of a past set of laws forbidding religious blasphemy against Christianity and Judaism, but not Islam. Before the verdict, the editor, Stephane Charbonnier, illustrated that he was confident of the suit's outcome, saying at the time, "We know in advance that the trial will not go through because Islam is not in the code." Accordingly, the editor was exonerated by the court.
But the editor, the editor was lately indicted and killed together with his colleagues by the brothers Saà ¯d and Cherif Kouachi, in the January 7 shooting at his office.
Currently there is no law, in France, banning
blasphemy. However, "the incitement to commit crimes and offences" is still a
violation (Art. 23), as is the vindication of crime against humanity, the
incitement of hate or violence based on religion, nationality, ethnic group,
race, sexual orientation or handicap (Art. 24), and slander or libel against
any religious group, nationality, ethnic group, race, sexual orientation or
handicap (Art. 32).
But for the five million French Muslims, the law bans public wearing of female's traditional dress (burqa and niqab) in covering their body. Women who wear these in public can be arrested, fined the equivalent of about $200 and forced to carry out community service.
This follows years of controversy over such caricatures. The question residues, what freedom of thought encourages offending some around 2 billion Muslims? Is that Moral? Is it civilization? Or is it rather a deliberate exasperation to create a conflict between two civilizations?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
