Reason, Tolerance & Free Speech
Posted by Mitch Mitchell on Oct 18, 2012
Below is a video on the above topic, but I wanted to talk about the genesis of the topic.
What happened is that someone on Facebook put up a video with the disclaimer that she wanted to see what people thought about it. I knew what was coming but decided to watch it with my wife.
 |
In the video this man named Pat Condell, a British commentator of some sort, was ranting about the riots that occurred in the Middle East over a video that almost none of us had ever heard of, let alone seen. Some points he made were accurate, but many others were over the top and bigoted. It was also hate speech; it was that because it was meant to incite, and that it did based on the comments and language people used after watching the video.
Of course, as soon as one person agreed with the video she then agreed with the video, which led me to call it and the man out as racist. They didn't like that and the debate ensued, until at one point the lady who put the video up asked to move the conversation off the page. I said I'd quit the conversation, but in social media if you put something up you need to expect that not everyone will agree with you, and that's what true freedom of speech is all about.
That's why I decided to create the video below. After all, I talk about leadership and diversity, and if this wasn't one of those times when something needed to be said then I don't know what is.
Definitely tolerance and freedom of speech is very important and have to be base for a modern society. Honestly, I think nowadays many people have problem with tolerance and there are topics that even the facts can’t be accepted – politics, religion and even sport. About these topics I suppose that there wont be a complete understanding conflicts will arise.
Carl, I’d agree that many people have problems with tolerance, but I say that we can’t just let it go without at least addressing it and trying to find ways to get people to communicate better with each other. True, there are going to be some topics that are deal breakers, but not all of them, and not all of them necessarily mean that one person or the other is bad.
You are right, Mitch. There will be always topics that may cause trouble. You know that I am living abroad for many years in different countries. I can say that every culture is very different and many things are difficult to deal with, but I think the best is to accept those differences and live with it
I watched his video and I have to admit, I was rather offended. The problem is that his video has gained traction, because it has truth in it. One of the problems in the UK right now is that there are areas where Muslim citizens were able to gain a sufficient majority to vote in favor of implementing Sharia Law.
Pat Condell isn’t only opposed to Islam either, his intolerance extends to religion in general, but not religion in terms of people who want to practice it, rather to the kinds of religion that are opposed to secularism.
I find that I’m ambivalent on this topic. My grandfather was uber Catholic and he treated my mom horribly after she married my step-dad in a non-christian church, Unitarian Universalist, and then joined that church. He was an incredibly intelligent and thoughtful person. He gave to charity and volunteered his time, he was a good person, but not to my mom and it was all based on religion and a religious tendency to assume its self absolutely right.
When he died, he hadn’t spoken with my mom for more than ten years. I was one of the few people in this world, who would still visit him and speak with him, due to his arrogant intolerance based in his religious certitude.
I cried at his funeral, partly because I missed him, and partly because I remembered a letter he had sent me where he said my mom reminded him of a line from the Bible, where Jesus said, “The sinner ought to be cast into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck.”
I agree with you that Pat Condell’s comments went too far, but I can also understand and feel somewhat sympathetic to his motivation. His concern is for our governance to continue on it’s secular path, which allows people to have freedom of religion. His points are valid about how women and girls are treated in many Muslim countries, which practice Sharia Law. This is not to say that Islam is the only religion having serious issues with how it treats women, one need not look beyond the borders of our country, the USA to see problems in that arena.
This topic requires abstract thought and a nuanced approach. Pat presents it as simple black and white topic, which is a disservice. But in the end, while he’s definitely not right, he isn’t really wrong either.
Great comment Mike; thanks for this.
You know, the problem with things like this is that they’re sort of right and that’s the part that gets others inflamed and riled enough to want to do something about it. This is how mobs across the world and throughout history get started, and once it starts it seems that reason is hard to achieve later on. That’s why one has to call these people out here and there. What seems logical isn’t reasoned all that well. There are more than 1.3 billion people who supposedly consider themselves Muslim, and the percentage who are overtly radical is so miniscule that it doesn’t even deserve a number. Yes, some ideals might be antiquated, but are they that drastically different than some of the ideals some Christian denominations have, especially when it comes to women?
I have no ambivalence whatsoever. I know who I hate and who I don’t hate, and I’ll keep my hate for terrorists and those of any denomination or any religion who do terrible things in the name of their religion. Phooey!
Hey Mitch, absolutely, about other religions particularly if you extend the scope of our examination to include that past several hundred years. Then you get the genocide of Native Americans, Slavery, etc…
This topic reminded me of another UU sermon I wrote and delivered, which I thought you might find interesting:
I Don’t Like Your Motives …Well, not the ones I’ve Decided You have!
Hi Mitch,
You make great points in your video (also Mike with his comments) and I’m with you both. So called ‘free speech’ doesn’t really exist any more than ‘free behaviour’ does; it’s always moderated by the feelings, prejudices, thoughts, preferences of the group who are exercising their right to ‘freely’ moderate you!
We live in a society with agreements on what constitutes social behaviour (quite aside from religion, or even along side religion, it doesn’t matter) and all of us have a vested interest in how sane those agreements are and what stepping over the line looks like.
There’s no place for bigots and idiots in a sane society and yet they exist and have rights – and so they should; but when their behaviour or actions does more harm than good I want to see our society reigning them in.
One final thought: it’s depressing how tabloid journalism (or TV), that seeks to stir the emotions rather than the intellect gets much more attention than it should in our world. We need to fix that!
All the best Mitch and thank you for your post.
Roz
Hey Roz, Very thoughtful comments, thanks for adding to the discussion!
I’ve often thought similar things about tabloid journalism and even political coverage, which could generally be tossed in with tabloid journalism now (except Candy Crowley has a two thumbs up from me based on how she moderated that debate!)
Thanks Roz. You know, all I look for is some accountability. People say things and then find themselves on the defensive when someone else disagrees with them. If they’d found a better way of saying what they said, or didn’t say it at all, there would be more peace.
Hi Mitch,
I think all too often we get tied up with the fringe elements on many topics, and end up in a debate with somebody that’s impossible to debate or even logically discuss a topic with.
There are many people who’s opinions I totally disagree with, but I can have a civilized discussion with them so long as they remain civilized about my viewpoints. Often, in those situations I come away more intelligent because I can grant the other person some points and usually learn a little bit from a different perspective. That doesn’t necessarily change my opinion, but I’ve broadened my horizons so to speak.
I’ve found it useless to try and hold a discussion with fringe people, though. They tend to be so fanatical on a topic than any differing opinion or viewpoint is outright wrong and they don’t want to hear anything of it. It’s easier to tell them they’re an idiot and move on.
Unfortunately, those of us who are civilized will have to continue to deal with those who aren’t. It’s a shame because a lot of energy is wasted in the meantime.
Thanks for sharing, Mitch! I hope you have a great weekend.
~Barry
Good stuff once again Barry. It’s a shame that there isn’t more discussion but in this day and age it seems that most people can’t figure out how to say anything in a moderate way so that conversation can occur. I work on that when I write my posts here and on my other blogs. Sometimes I don’t get quite the reciprocation that I’m hoping for, but there are those times when it truly becomes a dialogue for awhile. Of course I can be quite as bad when I have a particular position that I’m going to stick by and yet I think the words I use, as well as examples, are a much better way to go than just calling someone a jerk because of their beliefs and going home. lol
I just want to clarify one thing. What I meant when telling somebody they’re an idiot, I meant their presentation and lack of ability to reasonably discuss an issue, not their individual beliefs. I strongly feel everybody has a right to their beliefs and opinions. But, there are some people who are so close-minded that it’s impossible to have a legitimate debate with them.
I promise I don’t generally tell people they’re an idiot and then take my ball and go home. 🙂
I make no promises that I won’t call them an idiot based on their beliefs. For instance, if someone tried to tell me one race was intellectually inferior to another race, I’m going to call them an idiot because there is no reasonable debate on something like that, and I could care less how many books they tell me they’ve read or what studies they’re quoting. As a matter of fact, my sarcasm mode will probably kick in and I’ll work hard on proving how stupid that person is, and the more people that are around the harder I’ll be; kind of a natural reaction on my part. lol
But in general I’m with you, but “stupid” sometimes has to be called out.
Mitch, some people have already decided not to like you. The video or any other symbol is an excuse to let that hate out.
There are no secrets about some parts of the World not liking Americans.
I am finding myself sympathetic to the plight of others.
We all know the President would have done all he could to protect the Ambassador in Libya, but it was a targeted hit.
The perpetrators were not going to stop until they accomplished their goal.
They moved fast for a reason. They knew as soon as we found out we would respond.
As far as people on facebook, I do not give much credit to what some ill informed coward says in an open forum like social media.
The sad part is people will do anything to become popular and if that means stirring up controversy through a comment they will do it.
Michael, the problem is that if no one says anything to counter the stupidity that someone puts out on social media, then the weak minded start to think it has to be true because no one objects. I pay attention because history has shown this very thing, and when not enough voices stand up against it, well, that’s how Hitler came to power.