Free Speech/Hate Speech

After reading Paul Sham’s post on the internet’s role in shaping democracy, and after writing/ranting about Holocaust deniers and woman-haters, I’m now left wondering about “freedom of speech.”

For one, is there a difference between “free speech” and “hate speech”? In his post Paul questions the ability of the web to democratize since it usually turns into an I’m-right-and-you’re-wrong competition, complete with insults and threats.

At this point, I would have to say that the right to “Freedom of Speech” is an illusion. Sure, we can all say what we want to say; it’s not like we’re all walking around with duct tape over our mouths…well, not literally. But if we say things that will offend or hurt another person/group of people, we’re suddenly not free anymore, and the metaphorical duct tape is firmly put in place.

The internet is making this freedom more real, yes, but the speaker is always susceptible to responses/threats/name-calling from their angry critics.

Take, for example, Bishop Richard Williamson, who claims that Jews made up the Holocaust. Obviously his comments upset a lot of people, but could we really believe we’re living in a democracy is he couldn’t express himself?

And in the same respect, should the people who think he’s an anti-Semite who needs to do some research not be allowed to say he’s an anti-Semite who needs to do some research?

It’s a very sticky issue, and no matter what is said it seems someone will always be hurt, offended, or disgusted by it. For example, I am pro-choice. Oops, I just pissed off a bunch of people!

I'm not trying to be rude, but here’s why I don’t care:

"Maintenance of a system of free expression is necessary:

1. as assuring individual self-fulfillment
2. as a means of attaining the truth
3. as a method of securing participation by the members of the society in social, including political, decision-making
4. as maintaining the balance between stability and change in society”
   (from U of Ottawa)

Without disparate voices speaking out, women might not be “legal persons,” a black man might not be the President of the United States, this freedom to speak out might not even exist. Then where would we be?

Holy Crap! (Bishop denies Holocaust)

Apparently a bishop – you know, someone who, by definition and requirement, believes in God – denies the Holocaust and ignores the murder of 11,000,000 people because there’s “no proof” that it occurred.


Um, is that what you call hypocrisy, or just plain nuts?

A letter written to the Belfast Telegraph caught my attention because it asked those questions (but not in those words, exactly), and it got me searching for more.

I found another article, this one from BBC News, which reported that Bishop Richard Williamson claims the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” is authentic. This anti-Semitic piece of garbage supposedly reveals a secret plot for Jewish world domination, and has been proven a hoax numerous times since the early 20th century – hence the garbage comment.

To attempt to be fair, I should refer to this video in which Williamson explains that people were never killed in gas chambers. He doesn’t specifically deny that Jews were killed in Nazi concentration camps, but he says it was more likely 200,000 to 300,000.



Even more ridiculous is Williamson’s attempt to exonerate himself from his clearly anti-Semitic beliefs: "My definition of anti-Semitism is to be against every single Jew purely because he's a Jew. That's not at all my case. I once had a Jewish rabbi come and speak to seminarians. Does that sound to you like anti-Semitism?"

Well, no, but the part about the Holocaust never happening, and supporting the authenticity of a piece of hate literature that’s been used to justify the oppression and genocide of Jews, is.

Plus, it kind of reminds me of that part in movies when a white person is accused of being racist and all they can come up with is, “My grandma’s black. How can I be racist?”

But doing one semi-tolerant thing doesn’t make up for saying, "Jews made up the Holocaust, Protestants get their orders from the devil and the Vatican has sold its soul to liberalism,” or, “A woman can do a good imitation of handling ideas, but then she will not be thinking properly as a woman.”

So if denying the Holocaust isn’t anti-Semitic, does that mean calling Protestants devil-worshipers isn’t hateful? Or that claiming women are inherently stupid isn’t sexist?

Is this guy Rush Limbaugh’s best friend or something?

For the sake of being rhetorical, even IF (IF) the Holocaust didn't happen the way we're told it happened, according to Williamson at least 200,000 people were imprisoned and killed in Nazi concentration camps. Whether gas chambers were used or not, it doesn't make what happened any less awful.