A woman holds a sign reading ‘Coexist’ in front of the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin prior to a vigil organised by Muslim groups for the victims of last week’s Charlie Hebdo shooting. Photo: Fabrizio Bensch/Reuters

Until the recent Charlie Hebdo attack, I had not given its satirical drawings any importance. The perpetrators of this heinous crime have, through their extremist actions, promoted with me and on a worldwide basis this publication.

I was compelled to look further into the content of this publication. I cannot deny that at first glance and on impulse some of the caricatures seemed somewhat out of synch with my sentiments.

I might not have understood the satirist’s motive and message because I could not grasp the particular situation being addressed. I query myself on this endlessly; in my subconscience could I harbour fundamentalist attitudes? But would I premeditate murdering these satirical artists. A definite no.

I correlate this to the parody and film The life of Brian. Can I decide to harm its actors because of how they portrayed Jesus Christ? The answer is an emphirical and definite no, amply so because my faith prohibits actions in revenge or to avenge myself. We are obliged to love our neighbours as ourselves.

Life is sacred and should be respected and preserved.

The drawings: my first impulsive conclusions verged on the incredulous. Why would one want to ridicule people or sacred images that are pivotal to one’s faith? It is satire in the crudest form but with a message that looks hilarious and sometimes shocking. It does display intelligence and artistic prowess, used to produce satire that verges on the vulgar, with almost a pornographic slant.

A fundamentalist can interpret this content as being racist and blasphemous.

But isn’t this all that makes the world of satire? I must admit that I have both admiration for and envy the capabilities of cartoonists. Few are endowed with the artistic prowess and intelligent mind these artists possess.

I did look up the broader meaning of satire under Wikipeadia. While the content of the Charlie Hebdo publication seems to comply with the definitions I read, there are instances where I find it difficult to see how some of it could be classified as constructive social criticism.

Interpretation sometimes requires a level of convergence of thought and understanding between the artist and the reader. Otherwise, constructive social criticism is not achieved. It also depends on the intelligence, emotions, sense of humour and the social situation of the readers.

Satire is basic to freedom of intellect and speech. And in everything intellectual there is a fine line between this right and its effect on the rights of others.

I have asked endlessly: what did the artist want to achieve by ridiculing the Pope in portraying him with a raised host and saying the consecrating phrase ‘This is my body’? Would I contemplate murder? No.

Can anyone publish material in any form that can seriously offend? If I am aware that the content of my publication would offend some people so incessantly to lead to extreme violence than I should not do it because I perceive it as suicide in exercise of my right to freedom to speech. It is my primary duty to preserve myself and those around me.

I am sure the President François Hollande must have been overtly offended by the implicit caricatures on his personal life. But then he led a march of solidarity and peace.

Connotations on faith affect the feelings of those, excluding atheists, who embrace a belief in God.

Jesus Christ, Mohammed or Buddha. Aren’t they all pivotal to the faith of a large proportion of the world? Having a love for and not wanting anyone to ridicule Jesus Christ, does this make me a fundamentalist? The caricature of Christ on the cross bowing on stage to an audience does jar with my palate.

Violence and extremism have not been an issue with fundamentlists in Islam only. The consensus among Muslims to this latest tragedy immediately comes over as a clear sign they do not condone fundamentalist-induced violence. Who will embrace a religion that promotes violence?

Fundamentalism and violence are dangerous and may lead communities to an us and them mentality

We all share common values. Fundamentalism and violence are dangerous and may lead communities to an us and them mentality. There should be among the human race a consistency of values.

A person who was interviewed during the protest manifestations linked satire to secularisation. It seemed that this person considered it his mission to transform society from identifying with religious values to becoming a secular one. It was a senseless and needless statement that provokes a clash of thought. Isn’t that forcing one’s credo on others?

In secularisation, some perceive religion as having a restrictive role in modern society. Others still see it having an important role.

Religious institutions carry a social role in helping society. Can this be construed social power rather than what it is, just assistance to the poor.

I admired cartoonists who have reacted by making all readers awake to the realities of fundamentalist attitudes and their crimes. Their publications depict indignation and disbelief, honour those who died and express disgust at the perpetrators. They portray a message that life will go on even after all that happened.

Their drawings did not once harbour any violent or murderous content or intent.

I liked most a drawing depicting four of the murdered men being received in heaven with God holding his head and exclaiming: “Oh no it’s not them.”

A clean God joke? Does God like us humans making jokes that involve Him? He would not mind. It is He who has endowed us with humour, to be used wisely.

I am sad and angry at the fact that, once again, a large number of innocent people, honest citizens, a catholic, a muslim, a jew, a caretaker, policemen, journalists, columnists, cartoonists, a twin brother, men and women, artists earning a living through the use of their God-given talents, with families, children and friends and intelligent minds, all created in God’s image, have had their lives so viciously terminated on the whims of irresponsible criminals.