The freedom of expression has to be untramelled. The moment you circumscribe the freedom, you open the doors to every form of offence-taking. Most people commenting on the freedom of expression seem to begin with the premise that religions are entitled to special dispensation or protection. But what if I and a few million others take offence to religions? Will they be banned? More importantly, should they be banned? No. Not because they can be shown to be illogical or hateful or any other argument, but simply because in liberal, secular democracy, we need to entitle every belief, including the belief in fairies, elves and Batman, with tolerance. Not respect, tolerance. I may not believe in your belief system, I may not respect it, I may actually abhor it, but I have to entitle it with tolerance. But everyones rights end where my nose begins is the dictum which should invariably govern the freedom of expression. Your freedom of expression does not allow you to violate my freedom to solitude by pumping aarti and azaan into my ears with the help of loudspeakers. But a writer or a cartoonist does not violate anyones nose by publishing anything. The writer cannot assail any of my senses to force me to read his stuff. Therefore, as much as aarti and azaan can continue apace as long as they do not assail my senses, a writers craft should continue apace. Everyone is free to not read a writers work. A writer or artist would violate my senses though, if his work was displayed in a public space, on a hoarding, for example, where it would infringe upon my right to ignore an artistic work and upon my right to enjoy public spaces in peace.
Posted on: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 11:35:34 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015