Written by Don Byrd
Watching the violent, religion-based protests develop around American embassies in Egypt and Libya the last few days has been almost as frustrating as it is heart-breaking.
One one hand, it’s clear many people around the world don’t really comprehend why the freedom of religion is so closely bound with the freedom of speech here in the United States. We saw this recently during UN debates over blasphemy laws, which many countries support. As Secretary Clinton explained then, true religious freedom requires the robust protection of free speech. Indeed, religious freedom includes the freedom to speak out against the faith of another, if it is to protect liberty for all.
Rachel Maddow last night expressed well what I have been thinking and feeling about these angry protestors: they seem to believe that the anti-Muslim film sparking their rage is endorsed by America and/or the U.S. government precisely because it has not been banned. That is, of course, not in any way true. It has not been banned because freedom of speech works best when it applies evenly to all expressions of conscience, even hateful speech.The best remedy for ugly speech is more free speech, not an oppressive, fearful, government ban. So, what is the best way to explain that this film should not be viewed as a representative American expression? That it is likely nothing more than the work of a few morons with a camera, and not worth taking seriously? That it is more effectively ignored than protested?
On the other hand, watching this moment unfold politically leads me to suspect that we may not know exactly how those freedoms work here at home either. Some prominent political leaders have suggested that condemning this hateful film amounts to “sympathizing” with those violent extremists the film offended. That is an outrageous charge. We can, and should, reject the sentiments of a film that demeans religious beliefs, while at the same time strongly condemning the violence it sparked. To say otherwise is to turn the freedom of speech on its head.
Rebuking a film that denigrates Muslims is not an expression of sympathy with the violent extremists the film offended. It is a clear expression of the sensible alternative to that violence preferred by a free and peaceful people.
