Let’s be clear: The great freak-out over Pamela Geller’s “draw Muhammad” contest isn’t about love for Islam or for robust and respectful religious pluralism. Indeed, many of those expressing anguish over blasphemy against Islam show no such concern over even the most vile attacks on the Christian faith. Beyond that, they’re among the leaders in movements designed to banish religious liberty — including Muslim religious liberty — to the margins of American life.
A good article against appeasement.
Pamela Geller’s draw Mohammad contest may have been crude and provocative but isn’t that what the 1st Amendment is all about?
If we can never provoke thought and ideas what’s does freedom really mean? This does not mean we don’t promote civil conversation and look down upon rude and boorish behavior but we can not also look away from real dangers and ideas that threaten civilization.
Censor the critic and lose freedom. Who decides what is offending speech? Those in power? Well what if the power shifts?
Note my Banner –
If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.
From the London Journal ~ somewhere in the early 1700s re-printed by Benjamin Franklin in 1722 I believe.
Without Freedom of Thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such Thing as publick Liberty, without Freedom of Speech; which is the Right of every Man, as far as by it, he does not hurt or controul the Right of another: And this is the only Check it ought to suffer, and the only Bounds it ought to know.
This sacred Privilege is so essential to free Governments, that the Security of Property, and the Freedom of Speech always go together; and in those wretched Countries where a Man cannot call his Tongue his own, he can scarce call any Thing else his own. Whoever would overthrow the Liberty of a Nation, must begin by subduing the Freeness of Speech; a Thing terrible to Publick Traytors.