Table of Contents
ACLU of Massachusetts Statement on the ‘Mohammed Cartoons’
The ACLU of Massachusetts has issued a clear and principled on the regarding the printing and reprinting of cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammed. Stay tuned for ¹û¶³´«Ã½app¹Ù·½â€™s upcoming update on how this controversy is playing out on America’s college campuses.
Statement of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts Concerning the ‘Mohammed Cartoon’ Controversy
The ACLUM, the oldest civil liberties organization in the United States, by its charter, history, and policies, concerns itself primarily with governmental threats to civil liberties. However, on extraordinary occasions, a non-governmental event proves so threatening to liberty that the organization sees fit to speak out. The current world-wide controversy concerning radical Islamic opposition to the publication and republication of cartoon images involving the Prophet Mohammed is such an event.The ACLUM views with the gravest concern the severe threats lodged against journalists, newspapers, and others in the news media, throughout Europe and other parts of the world with a free press. It is with equal concern that we acknowledge the realistic fear expressed by so many media outlets in this country that have, due to that fear, refrained from reproducing the offending cartoons in their news reporting. While it is the undoubted right of any news organ to voluntarily refrain from publishing anything—including for reasons of self-imposed taste or sensitivity to the deeply held beliefs of individuals or groups—it is not truly a voluntary act when a newspaper decides not to publish in the face of realistically perceived threats of violence.ACLUM believes it is unconstitutional for the government to penalize the publication of so-called “hate speech†or other speech deemed offensive by segments of the population. Yet ACLUM also recognizes there is a constitutional right to refrain from using such speech as a result of voluntary adherence to notions of civility. Not only must government refrain from pressuring the news media to abstain from publishing such material as the cartoons at issue, but government must also take affirmative steps to protect individuals and organizations that decide to publish such materials. It is further incumbent upon local, state, and national governments, as well as political leaders, to reaffirm the nation’s resolute opposition to the use of threats of violence as a weapon of censorship. The very basis of freedom depends on government to protect civil society from such assaults. This is not a time for any and all who love freedom to remain silent.
Recent Articles
FIRE’s award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.
Five scary threats to free speech
Election season and Halloween conjure up frightening threats to free expression. Here are five that FIREis monitoring this year.
The First Amendment protects your right to trick or treat
Don’t be a free speech ogre on Halloween. Dressing up in costumes and asking for candy are constitutionally protected forms of free expression.
Minnesota state agency must drop investigation of employee’s Facebook post
Political pressure is mounting on the Minnesota Department of Resources to fire Tyler Janke for his post about the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump in July.
In baffling decision, Harvard excuses violence against student briefly disrupting Chinese diplomat’s speech
Documents released by House Select Committee shed light on Harvard’s troubling decision making.