I think perhaps Americans need a refresher course in what free speech means. I say this after spending a couple of days in Lefty Land trying to point out actual instances of government interference with expression. For our friends on the left, any repercussions--however mild--to their speech is intolerable. But it's ok to threaten to take away one's broadcast license if you don't like certain programming.
Now comes the tolerance police to a Chicago suburb, where a Halloween parade and Santa's gift shop have to go because it offends Muslims. Oh, and we have to ban Jell-O.
The holiday traditions are facing elimination in some Oak Lawn schools this year after complaints that the activities are offensive, particularly to Muslim students...
Parents expect that the announcement is going to add to the tension that has been building since officials agreed earlier this month to change the lunch menu to exclude items containing pork to accommodate Muslim students. News that Jell-O was struck from the menu caused such a stir that officials have agreed to bring it back. Gelatin is often made with tissue or bones of pigs or other animals.
That controversy now appears to have been been dwarfed by the holiday debate, which became so acrimonious Wednesday that police were called to Columbus Manor School to intervene in a shouting match among parents...
Elizabeth Zahdan, a mother of three District 122 students, says she took her concerns to the school board this month, not because she wanted to do away with the traditions, but rather to make them more inclusive. "I only wanted them modified to represent everyone," she said.
Nixing them isn't the response she was looking for. "Now the kids are not being educated about other people," she said.
There's just not time in the six-hour school day to celebrate every holiday, said (Superintendent Tom) Smyth, who sent the message to principals that they need to "tone down" the activities that he sees as eating too much into instructional time. "We have to think about our purpose," Smyth said. "Are we about teaching reading, writing and math or for parties or fund-raising during the day?"
Robertson is hoping to strike compromises that will keep traditions alive and be culturally acceptable to all students -- nearly half of whom are of Arab descent at Columbus Manor, she says. Fewer than a third of students districtwide are of Arab descent, according to Smyth.
It's amazing that minority students have survived the last 100 years in public schools which used to serve only fish on Fridays and called the spring break "Easter break." If you don't want your kids to eat Jell-O for religious reasons then pack your child's lunch. Don't sing Christmas carols or visit Santa's gift shop if Christmas offends you. Don't participate in the Halloween parade if you think you're celebrating Satan.
I've watched groups learn to adapt to the American landscape for over 40 years now, and, unsurprisingly, Jewish students have had to tolerate Christmas trees, bacon, and Christmas programs. And when parents didn't want their children to do those things, they started private schools and did what they wanted.
This is the point when the liberals pour in (or, in more cowardly typical fashion, at their own sites) to tell me how intolerant I am. But the fact is, at some point, some practice is going to offend somebody. In my church, for example, the session had to vote on which version of the Doxology we can use: the one saying "God" or the one saying "He/His." Why? Because someone was offended because the congregation says,
Praise God, from Whom all blessings flow;
Praise Him, all creatures here below;
Praise Him above, ye Heavenly Host;
Praise Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Amen.
Someone will always be offended. That's one of those corollaries to Murphy's Law. In a pluralistic society, you won't have an offense-free existence. What happens if some group is offended by chicken? Do the schools have to stop serving chicken?
I thought about these things while reading Muzzling in the Name of Islam, a column by Paul Marshall in the WaPo. Marshall discusses the recent flap over Swedish cartoon which depicted the head of Mohammed on the body of a dog. Al Qaeda in Iraq has put a $100,000 bounty on the artist's head (with a $50,000 bonus if his throat is slit). But the barbarous reaction didn't end there.
The Iranian foreign ministry protested to Sweden, while Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad asserted that "Zionists," "an organized minority who have infiltrated the world," were behind the affair. Pakistan complained and said that "the right to freedom of expression" is inconsistent with "defamation of religions and prophets." The Turkish Ministry of Religious Affairs called for rules specifying new limits of press freedom.
These calls were renewed in September when a U.N. report said that Articles 18, 19 and 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights should be reinterpreted by "adopting complementary standards on the interrelations between freedom of expression, freedom of religion and non-discrimination." Speaking for the OIC, Pakistani diplomat Marghoob Saleem Butt then criticized "unrestricted and disrespectful enjoyment of freedom of expression."
The issues here go beyond the right of cartoonists to offend people. They go to the heart of repression in much of the Muslim world. Islamists and authoritarian governments now routinely use accusations of blasphemy to repress writers, journalists, political dissidents and, perhaps politically most important, religious reformers.
Granted, killing people over cartoons is a far cry from banning Jell-O, but as Marshall points out, if free people do not resist these attempts at control, we abet them. Free speech means you get to be insulted.
MoveOn.org is also trying to stifle free speech.
|