Once a few years ago I walked into a bookstore in plain daylight and purchased a novel written by Henry Miller. I even read aloud passages from that novel at a volume where others could hear. I’ve laughed openly at police officers. I’ve attended political rallies and speeches in which the key note speaker was opposed to the ideology of a sitting president. I’ve written articles criticizing Islam and articles praising Judaism. I’ve written songs about love and hate and sex and drugs, and I even sang them aloud. I’ve done these things not because I’m courageous or a radical or an anarchist but because I had the desire and the freedom to do them. And all these things I’ve done I did without fear, because the idea of being afraid to read, voice an opposing opinion, write,
or sing is incomprehensible, just as the idea that not having the freedom to do them is incomprehensible.
I can call our president an incompetent leader. I can rename the Prophet Muhammad the Pedophile Muhammad. I can make these statements in Missouri, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Nevada, West Virginia, and all the other states. Sure I might make some people angry. But I’m also free to call those people assholes. In this county people have the freedom to mock the institutions I respect and to belittle my religious ideology. That’s because the freedom of speech doesn’t come with the right to not be offended. Nobody has that right.
That’s because tolerance is the cornerstone to a civilized society. Isn’t this universal? Doesn’t everyone enjoy the freedom of speech without fear? We live in a free country, right?
Where does this supposed fear come from? Fear comes from the threat of retaliation of the intolerant. Intolerance originates from two sources; politics and religion. Politics and religion both have devout adherents to the tenants of both establishments, and therefore, are easily offended by any opposition to their beliefs. State repression of free speech
is much more systematic and government sanctioned. Cultural intolerance of speech is bit less predictable and erratic. A violation of a law is usually followed by arrest and
then imprisonment or death. A violation of a cultural more could be met with a slew of reactions ranging from indifference to violence.
Levels of intolerance also defer from region to region. In western industrialized countries where the tenants of classical liberalism has taken a stronghold most believe that the
freedom of speech is not only protected but promoted. Whereas in third-world theocratic and oligarchic countries both government and religious institutions take an active role in suppressing speech. For example Iran has “Blasphemy laws.” Pursuant to these laws people have been arrested, imprisoned, and killed for ridiculing Muhammad, the Koran, and religious leaders. In Syria where prisons are full of political dissidents you can be thrown in jail for merely “affecting the morale of the country.” But that’s to be expected from backwards third-world countries. Unfortunately this intolerance is being exported to the West, primarily in the form of violence in the name of Allah.
continued on next page...
ANIMUS & INTELLECT
Free of Fear and Intolerance by Jake Raines