I was surprised that the topic was nowhere to be found on the boards, and entertained the idea that it had been here, became toxic, and was removed during my absence. I don't think it is a subject that should be too hot to handle, but if I am wrong I will take the gentle hint of this thread disappearing.
When the post-shooting edition of Charlie Hebdo came out the cover image was in the Washington Post. I commented to my very-liberal journalist neighbor that I thought they had done the right thing by making it clear that they would not be intimidated to act against their beliefs by the violence of some one else's beliefs. She just about blew a gasket telling me how irresponsible she thought they had been and how they had endangered journalists all over the world by continuing to provoke the Muslim community. I was stunned by her response and replied that a person is either for free speech or not, even if the content of the speech is considered abhorrent. I also pointed out that this magazine was not journalism, but satire. What I saw as a group of people taking a stand on principle she saw as a group of people being very stupid and endangering more lives.
I am concerned by her point of view even though it has merit because I think a fundamental liberty is at stake. If speech is only free when it is not provocative to anyone who might become violent then the content of our discourse is proscribed by the most violent in society. To my mind the answer to speech you do not like is to put forth one's own speech advocating a different view. There is no law in France that people must respect the faiths of others, and from what I have heard Hebdo respected nothing. Respect is good manners and, to my mind, a sign of maturity, but it is not legally required. I do not think such laws are a good idea since it sets up some one to judge the appropriateness of something before it even goes to press. Anyone uncomfortable in a society that values free speech should perhaps relocate to a country that does not value free speech, because free speech is not easy. It is necessary for anything resembling democracy to thrive, but it is certainly not easy. I have said for a long time that you know what you truly believe when believing it is not easy.
When the post-shooting edition of Charlie Hebdo came out the cover image was in the Washington Post. I commented to my very-liberal journalist neighbor that I thought they had done the right thing by making it clear that they would not be intimidated to act against their beliefs by the violence of some one else's beliefs. She just about blew a gasket telling me how irresponsible she thought they had been and how they had endangered journalists all over the world by continuing to provoke the Muslim community. I was stunned by her response and replied that a person is either for free speech or not, even if the content of the speech is considered abhorrent. I also pointed out that this magazine was not journalism, but satire. What I saw as a group of people taking a stand on principle she saw as a group of people being very stupid and endangering more lives.
I am concerned by her point of view even though it has merit because I think a fundamental liberty is at stake. If speech is only free when it is not provocative to anyone who might become violent then the content of our discourse is proscribed by the most violent in society. To my mind the answer to speech you do not like is to put forth one's own speech advocating a different view. There is no law in France that people must respect the faiths of others, and from what I have heard Hebdo respected nothing. Respect is good manners and, to my mind, a sign of maturity, but it is not legally required. I do not think such laws are a good idea since it sets up some one to judge the appropriateness of something before it even goes to press. Anyone uncomfortable in a society that values free speech should perhaps relocate to a country that does not value free speech, because free speech is not easy. It is necessary for anything resembling democracy to thrive, but it is certainly not easy. I have said for a long time that you know what you truly believe when believing it is not easy.
Comment