Skip to main content

Reply to "Freedom vs. Responsibility"

Very good piece.

Thanks, HB!

I thought these things were significant:
quote:
There seems to be almost universal agreement that these cartoons are offensive. There should also be universal agreement that the paper has a right to publish them without fear of violent reprisal. When it comes to freedom of speech, the liberal/left should not sacrifice its values one inch to those who seek censorship on religious grounds. But the right to freedom of speech equates to neither an obligation to offend nor a duty to be insensitive. If our commitment to free speech is important, our belief in antiracism [our commitment to antiracism] should be no less so. Neither the cartoons nor the violence has emerged from a vacuum.
quote:
Even as this debate rages, David Irving sits in jail in Austria charged with Holocaust denial over a speech he made seventeen years ago, Islamist cleric Abu Hamza has been convicted in London for incitement to murder and racial hatred and Louis Farrakhan remains banned from Britain because his arrival "would not be conducive to the public good." Even here in America school boards routinely ban the works of authors like Alice Walker and J.K. Rowling. Such actions should be opposed; but no one claims Protestant, Catholic or Jewish values are incompatible with democracy.
Like I said: STRANGE DEMOCRACY

quote:
The question has never been whether you draw a line under what is or isn't acceptable to publish, but where you draw it. There is nothing courageous [or virtuous] about using your freedom of speech to ridicule the beliefs of one of the weakest sections of your society.
I don't know about that "weakest section" stuff but I think I get the "Not only are whites kicking us/them; they are telling us/them how to react to being kicked" point.
×
×
×
×