Subscription Lists
Point of Reference
by Fred Price
A recent article appearing in U.S.A. Today’s Forum section declared, “This country should never sacrifice freedom of expression on the altar of religion.”1An intriguing statement that caught my attention while simultaneously setting off an inner alarm. Upon further investigation however, I began to better understand the author’s point and agree – at least in principle – with much of what he said.
In his article, Professor Turley warned that part of President Obama’s – and much of Western Europe’s – effort to rehabilitate their image in the Muslim world was being realized in a joint U.N. resolution restricting religious or rather anti-religious expression. Further stating that, “Whether defined as hate speech, discrimination or simply blasphemy, governments are declaring unlimited free speech as the enemy of freedom of religion.” Egypt’s U.N. Ambassador, Hishan Badr, whom the U.S. delegation aligned themselves with, declaring that “…freedom of expression…has been sometimes misused” – which I can’t argue with – further stating that the “true nature of this right” should and must yield to government limitations. That I do! His U.S. counterpart, Douglas Griffith’s concurring; saying he led the U.S. support of the resolution hoping to achieve “tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.”
The resolution garnered little media attention, in part because on the surface it presumed to support free speech – with one glaring exception – anything, in any way seen as contributing to “racial and religious stereotyping.” Instigated primarily by Muslim nations on the Human Rights Council, the thinly disguised “blasphemy” laws that are part and parcel of any such resolution have been extended to protect religions (particularly theirs) from criticism of any kind. The defense for such laws being the promotion of the ideals of tolerance and pluralism; even in the face of rioting Muslims who have killed Christians, desecrated their churches and called for the execution of anyone who questions, disagrees with or parodies their leaders and their ideals.
But it’s not just Muslims, although they are exerting as much influence, sometimes through outright intimidation, as they can. Many others in the West, through a misguided sense of political correctness, are attempting to establish laws masquerading as “guidelines” that stipulate what can and cannot be said as well. Professor Turley correctly noting that, “They ignore the fact that (these) laws achieve tolerance through the ultimate act of intolerance. Criminalizing the ability of some individuals to denounce (or even question) sacred or sensitive values.” Insisting that, “We do not need free speech to protect popular thoughts or popular people. It is designed to protect those who challenge the majority and its institutions.” In his opinion, “Criticism of religion is the very measure of the guarantee of free speech – the literal sacred institution of society.”
I must say that as a Christian, I have at times been deeply offended by the grossly exaggerated, abusive and misleading comments of some who disagree with the Christian community’s beliefs and lifestyle. But the ability to question and doubt – even to make stupid comments about others – has always been perceived as a “sacred” right in this country. If nothing else, allowing those being blasted to know who is propagating such nonsense and allowing them to then offer a reasoned response. The true definition of tolerance being a recognition that we won’t always agree – and making allowances for that possibility – without resorting to abusive and insulting replies and actions; in other words, agreeing to disagree in an agreeable manner.
To prosecute people who write or utter views that are viewed as “grossly abusive or insulting” – which I do find deplorable – “in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of its adherents” (which is included in a new blasphemy law enacted recently in Ireland) is nearly impossible to enforce evenhandedly. If for no other reason than the difficulty of defining what really constitutes abusive, insulting, “hate” speech. Is it merely disagreeing with someone and openly saying so – or actually calling on people to lash out at others? For some, it’s both.
I can hardly disagree with the Egyptian-U.S. call for greater responsibility in exercising our precious and guaranteed right of free speech. But I do, likewise, agree with Prof. Turley when he says that, “The public and private curtailment on religious criticism threatens religious and secular speakers alike.” His fear and mine being that, “…when (some) speech becomes sacrilegious (and therefore banned) only the (radically) religious will have true free speech.”
As in most other things, I believe Jesus addressed this issue in part when he assured us that, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” John 8:32 And even though he may have been referring to a freedom whose depths are even greater than that being discussed by Prof. Turley, I still believe it applies. But knowing the truth and being set free by it doesn’t license us to be insensitive to others. As Paul’s declaration of, “…where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.” 2 Corinthians 3:17, is often quoted but misapplied. For Paul further advises us, “…not (to) use your freedom to indulge the sinful (or selfish) nature; rather, serve one another in love.” Galatians 5:13 Peter concurring, cautioning us to, “Live as free men but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil… show proper respect for everyone…” 1 Peter 2:16,17 Paul’s follow-up advice to the Colossian church being specific to, “…God’s chosen people… clothing themselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.” Colossians 3:12 Certainly no room allowed there for a self-indulgent, demeaning, insensitive spirit.
The proverbial Book of Wisdom notes how, “…a patient man calms a quarrel.” Proverbs 15:18 Further stating where that patience is derived, “A man’s wisdom gives him patience; it is his glory to overlook an offense.” Proverbs 19:11 “The fear of the Lord (being) the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One (instilling in us) understanding.” Proverbs 9:10 It is indeed our responsibility to, “Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do (so) with gentleness and respect, (thereby) keeping a clear conscience…”; even if and when you are maliciously slandered in response. 1 Peter 3:15,16
1Oct. 19,2009 – by Jonathan Turley, Professor of Public Interest Law – George Washington University.
Rate it:
Fred Price - married (50 years), father of two grown children, grandfather of six.
Fred retired earlier this year after 42 years as a factory worker. He has always had a heart for young people and the challenges they face today. Over the years Fred has taught Discipleship Groups for High School and college students.
Receive the newest devotional each week in your inbox by joining the "Point of Reference" subscription list. Enter your email address below, click "Go!" and we will send you a confirmation email. Follow the instructions in the email to confirm your addition to this list.