"The modern concept of freedom of speech on political and religious matters arises from the European Enlightenment of the 1700s and was alien to religions such as Christianity and Judaism in their pre-modern forms. Similarly, Sharia law in its most vigorous interpretations does not allow freedom of speech on such matters as criticism of the prophet Muhammad.
The Qur'an says that Allah curses the one who harms the Prophet in this world and He connected harm of Himself to harm of the Prophet. There is no dispute that anyone who curses Allah is killed and that his curse demands that he be categorized as an unbeliever. The judgement of the unbeliever is that he is killed. [...] There is a difference between ... harming Allah and His Messenger and harming the believers. Injuring the believers, short of murder, incurs beating and exemplary punishment. The judgement against those who harm Allah and His Prophet is more severe -- the death penalty. ("The proof of the necessity of killing anyone who curses the Prophet or finds fault with him" [9])
On the other hand, the denial of freedom of speech by Muslims is not only restricted to those Muslims supporting the most vigorous interpretations. In Egypt, public authorities went so far as to try to annul, without his consent, the marriage of Prof. Nasr Abu Zayd when he got in conflict with an orthodox Islamic cleric from the Al-Azhar University in Cairo. The cleric had condemned Abu Zayd's reading of the Qur'an as being against the orthodox interpretation and labelled him an apostate (seen as a non-believer and consequently not permitted to marry or stay married to a Muslim woman). Abu Zayd fled to the Netherlands, where he is now a professor at the university of Leiden. Nevertheless, the case illustrates how far more common or average interpretations can go."
So rude cartoons are punishable by death.
P.S. combatcamera you are the one posturing without content.