Mary Kenny‘be aware of the contemporary contradictions which surround this whole subject of ‘liberty of speech’, writes Mary Kenny
In the wake of the Charlie Hebdo atrocities, there are, and there will be, increasing demands to abrogate the blasphemy laws in the Republic of Ireland – and in Northern Ireland too.
Because, when the British annulled their own traditional laws against blasphemy – which were, historically, about offending against Christianity – Northern Ireland was omitted from the rest of United Kingdom legislation in this regard.
And while many modern Christians in Ireland today would not object to removing the blasphemy laws from the statute books – on the grounds that they are now outdated and ‘unequal’ – perhaps the Westminster legislators showed a certain prudence in not extending this change to the North, where faith issues can be, to say the least, extremely sensitive.
Catholics, in the past, have not infrequently had to endure and accept very ugly references to their faith, and even desecration of churches and chapels. I daresay there have been offences against the Protestant faith as well, although ‘Taigs’, as the disparaging phrase has it, are more likely to turn violently political in their offensive activities than violently religious.
So, while it is perfectly rational to reconsider archaic blasphemy laws, it is also wise to have a care for the context, and perhaps the consequences – and to take the whole picture into consideration.
Logic
Those who advocate nullifying laws against blasphemy might also extend the logic of their argument to other laws restraining freedom of speech.
I thought Enda Kenny was right to join the other world leaders in the ‘Je suis Charlie’ solidarity march in Paris last Sunday, and I’m sure we were all proud to see him there, but there is a certain level of cant involved with this universal cry for ‘freedom of speech’.
We have many laws and regulations against freedom of speech and they are, in many European legislatures, increasing by the year.
‘Free speech’ is only permitted where it is not threatening, abusive, racist, sexist, homophobic, paedophile, likely to cause a breach of the peace, gross, indecent or defamatory. There are prohibitions against libel, infringements of copyright (increasingly enforced with draconian penalties by a growing breed of intellectual copyright lawyers), against false advertising and against anything likely to be interpreted as ‘hate speech’.
Some of these laws and prohibitions are appropriate. But it is cant and hypocrisy to pretend they do not exist and to carry a placard saying ‘Je suis Charlie’ if you do not favour a wider liberty of expression.
The problem, at base, is philosophical. It is almost impossible to reconcile the concept of ‘liberty’ with ‘equality’, since they cancel out each other. When people are free, they are not equal; when they are equal, they are not free.
Annul the law on blasphemy, by all means, but be aware of the contemporary contradictions which surround this whole subject of ‘liberty of speech’.
Accentuate the positive
One of the most inspiring aspects of Pope Francis’s teaching and leadership is that he has led us to recall the Gospel tenet of not judging people as individuals. We all do wrong things and we often do silly things, but it’s the action, or the choice, and not the person which is to be weighed.
In the past, the Vatican has made the error, sometimes, of condemning individuals, which looks unkind and in the light of history, turns out to be ill-judged.
Anita Ekberg, the Swedish actress who starred in La Dolce Vita, has died aged 83. Alone and in a certain degree of poverty, Miss Ekberg was knocked over and put in a wheelchair by one of her own much-loved – perhaps spoilt and undisciplined – Great Dane dogs.
Back in 1960, when she appeared in the Fellini movie which catalogued the decadent doings of the Roman smart set, she was denounced by the Holy See for appearing in a state of undress – and she was a young woman of a certain voluptuousness. They might have said they didn’t care for such scenes of semi-nudity, but she shouldn’t have been personally anathemised.
As it happens, the film-maker, Frederico Fellini, turned out to be one of the most ardent supporters of the pro-life movement in Italy, and spoke out repeatedly against abortion during his lifetime. Accentuate the positive, guys.
The lighter side
A joke told by my six-year-old granddaughter, Kitty: “Why can’t a man’s head be 12 inches wide?”
“I don’t know – why can’t a man’s head be 12 inches wide?”
“Because it would then be a foot!”
Peals of laughter all round.
I love the simplicity of children’s jokes, but this one is instructive as well – children are learning the old ‘imperial’ measures (still used in America and elsewhere) – that there are 12 inches in a foot. (I know what a metre is, but I still measure in inches and feet…)