Stephany Rubio

Rhetoric & Composition 2 / Tuesday

February 5, 2015
Response #1

Mocking a Religion
Since the Paris attack to Charlie Hebdo and Kosher Supermarket controversy has arisen
over the Muslim community. As seen in the video of BBC News, the Muslim community is
oppose to use violence as an outlet to express opposition against the offensive cartoons of
Charlie Hebdo, and to be categorize as terrorist. In the video of BBC News, they show the
different point of views of Muslim Mohammed Shafiq, from the Ramadhan Foundation and
Martin George Edmund Rowson, a British editorial cartoonist, whose opinions come from
different views but similarities in that they opposed to act in violence and agree on the freedom
of speech. The French attack has not only had an effect on Paris but also to the Muslim
community who now are in charge of protecting their religion and their freedom.
The speaker for the Muslim community Mohammed Shafiq opens up about the beliefs of
his religion, and opposes to the use of violence against any opposition to his religion. Shafiq
explains the opinions of what Muslims around the world think, and concludes that most agree on
the political process and peaceful methods. And anybody who engages in violence is an enemy
of Muslims around the world. Richard L. Larson writes an imperfection (felt by the author) in
the readers factual knowledge or interpretation of the world around him. Larson gives and idea
of what Shafiq is giving the audience, which is a view inside the Muslim community and their
opinions. It is important to understand that the Muslim community has the right to speak out for

themselves, and give their point of view after the Paris attack because the Muslim community is
greatly involved, by their religion practices, in the aftermath of the attack that killed 12 people.
In the view point of Martin George Edmund Rowson, a British editorial cartoonist and
novelist, as a cartoonist it is his job to offend because he is in a free society. He says what he
does as a cartoonist is assassination without the blood. He keeps on explaining that the
greatest bad is killing someone which he does not do and he adds that he has being offended
many times but he does not go around killing people. Rowson debate gives insight to what a
Paris citizen must have felt when the Paris attack took place. Rowson opinion can be substituted
with the words of Larson, through the encouragement of readers to better focused research that
will further reduce the number of gaps in knowledge. Which is similar to what Rowson
concludes, that the attackers ideology is foolish because they believe that everyone has to believe
in what they believe.
Rowson and Shafiq ideas are similar in that they believe that the Paris attack was
some kind of harm against free speech. Given by the two points of views terrorism is condemned
by a democratic community and by the Muslim community, the problem is that everyone has
different opinions and ideas cant always concede. BCC News gives a clear statement comparing
two different ideologies whose opinions are similar, and giving them to the public for them to
have the last words of who is right or wrong. It will always be wrong to harm someone because
our ideas dont coincide, everyone has their own beliefs and we all have to respect that without
getting out of line in trying to convince someone that they are wrong. The harm done in Charlie
Hebdo and Cosher Supermarket are examples that offending someones ideologies can have an
effect on not only to others but also to their own community.
616 words