Months of intense debate culminated in Denmark's recent enactment of a law that prohibits "the disrespectful treatment of writings of great religious significance to a recognized religious community." Consequently, public desecration of texts such as the Holy Quran by tearing or burning now carries penalties of fines or imprisonment of up to two years.
Alan Gabon, Professor of French Studies at Virginia Wesleyan University in the United States, highlighted that the discourse around the new law has transcended Denmark's borders and gained international traction, influencing countries like Sweden. He reminds us that while the law is often presented as opposing the traditional liberal values of Europe, such as free speech, it's neither a novelty nor an exception.
In his article on "Middle East Eye," Gabon noted that Denmark is the latest in a group of 10 European Union countries, including Austria, Poland, Belgium, Greece, Finland, Germany, Italy, Estonia, and Romania, to implement various bans on the desecration of religious texts.
Severe Condemnations
The article adds that due to the severe condemnation from Islamic countries and their governments over repeated incidents of Quran burning in European nations, Denmark found it necessary to take action as agitators sowed seeds of strife and endangered the nation both domestically and abroad.
The Danish government was thus compelled to strike a delicate balance between its genuine commitment to free speech and the need to protect its national security and international interests, which appear to have been the primary catalyst for the law, rather than considerations related to Muslim religious sensitivities.
However, Gabon asserts that the ban, nevertheless, does not indicate a strong stance in defense of Islam and Muslims, nor does it signify respect for this community. It is not an anti-Muslim hate policy. Instead, the government simply fears retaliation and the reaction amidst concerns about internal security and foreign policy.
Our Western Civilization
The article posits that by restricting freedom of expression, which includes expressing hatred or discontent for religions—distinct from hatred against people, which laws are supposed to protect against but not religions, ideologies, or texts—this could fuel the discourse of right-wing extremists. They consistently argue that Islam is inherently incompatible with their democratic, pluralistic societies' values and that Muslims do not recognize these principles, thus not belonging to "our Western civilization."
Instead of confronting these extremists, the law could inadvertently serve them by reinforcing their narrative of an "incompatibility between Islam and the West."
Moreover, the law might have unintended consequences for Muslim freedoms of expression and religion, considering a large extent of their religious expression has been restricted under various pretexts, including maintaining public order, which was cited in this ban.
Such measures often turn out to be double-edged swords. Finally, some Muslims believe that the Quran itself does not call for blasphemy to be prohibited but instead calls for dignity, patience, and resilience in the face of adversity, humiliation, and insults.
The article concludes by noting that with the law now enacted, its impacts will be monitored in Denmark and across the Western world to see if it ultimately helps or hinders the improvement of relations between Muslims and those who oppose Islam.
