‘Freedom of Speech’ is the narrative that is vastly and quite pretentiously used by certain quarters, to not only validate, but justify and vindicate the sacrileges, profanities and religious blasphemies.
The notion of an ‘absolute free speech’ serves as the basic ‘construct of interpretation’ for the motives ahead of certain sentiments-injuring acts and the nefarious designs behind any hatred inflaming.
Now-a-days’ radical debate, as well as a serious communal-issue of the day is, “…XYZ holds an ‘absolute right’ to free speech”,or “…No compromises can be made on …ABC’s ‘freedom of expression’…” etc. These narratives are being narrated and re-narrated by many people so senselessly and inconsiderately, that it appears as if one has never paused for a moment and thought of the stark implications for what he or she is stating or asserting of.
So thoughtlessly, not only to the extents of public spheres, but also many of the so-called communal ‘opinion-builders’ are onto the ‘dogma’, that they aren’t even aware of. More or less, completely side-tracking or ignoring the far-reaching corollary repercussions, the consequential upshots and the socio-moral reverberations associated therewith.
Does the ‘free speech’ notion hold an absolute value anywhere…? Even in the western culture…? Can ‘freedom of expression’ be meant for; over-riding the humane and ethical deeds—sabotaging the entire ethico-moral codes—bulldozing the whole cross-communal or inter-ethnic human values system…? These are some thorny questions posed over to the mind that holds some rationality, any sense of right and wrong, or at least, a more or less conscience or some scruples of righteousness within one’s self.
Exercising ‘free speech’, that may ardently injure or sensitively indignant a certain ethnicity, is criminalized, in almost all western countries. Henceforth, the sacrileges and profanities crossing all the limits of ethical or moral codes, and even in most of the cases abolishing all humanity-based values, cannot be rationalized, by any means or on any account, to be permissible or tolerable to mutilate, harm and detriment the inter-ethnic peace of global communities by planting the seeds of hatred abhorrence or blasphemies.
There exists nowhere in the world where licenses are granted that one can flagrantly say and blatantly express whatever he or she likes to; but reasonably, there are certain limits that one is supposed to be within.
However, pretty conversely, the kind of the ‘moral trait-outlook’ manifested by certain vagrant quarters, on the face of ‘free speech’, is neither justifiable, nor explicable on the least of any of the moral, ethical, judicial or humanitarian accounts!
Advocating for an ‘open license’ to the ‘free speech’ and spreading the dogma-notion behind this, is nothing, but a clumsily and maladroitly ‘disgraceful-enough’ modality of ridiculous manifestations by deflated societies, having no acclimatization of moral perspectives.
While advocating the tarnished-hatred, apparently, the ‘tender-keepers’ of free speech, along with their biased and discriminatory partisan means, present certain devious and deceitful arguments in wrapped misconceptions and logical-fallacies. However, when it reaches to the end of the tether or the commonsense truss-leash, one can easily comprehend and realize the rationality-based questions that arise from such naive argumentative fallacies.
Now, for instance, lets examine that: are these reason-indexes actually so, as they are dogmatized to appear or opinionated to spread out? Do these jargons and verbiages certainly provide some justifiable grounds for a ‘free speech’ without any limits? With an absolute built-in value capable to bulldoze all other values..?..Especially when it comes to the sensitivities-based sentiments…?
These are not, but just some of the simplest questions out of an entire cluster of rationality – demanding enigma-paradoxes, that are serious-enough in their nature. Not only are questions enigmas, but, in a literal sense, these are the ‘essential morality-probes’ for a considerate mind that can hold to the state of affairs, when it comes to moral convictions. Henceforth, these ‘probes’ are to be dealt with great trepidations.
Today’s talk of the town, “Pamela Geller has an ‘absolute right’ to free speech”, is being repetitively narrated everywhere as senselessly as it could be and as thoughtlessly as it should be!
Not needed to be mentioned, Pamela Geller has an evident track-record for stoking up the ‘flames of racial hate’ and promoting cross-ethnic hatred content and abhorrence that is progressively proceeding towards austere hatred revulsions and animosity conflicts.
She has got notorious escalations in promoting ethnic hate through heavily funded networks of racial activism throughout the globe. No need to mention, Geller has long continued to push hatred, revulsive and rhetoric pomposity through her writings, magniloquence and a series of transit ads.
After having due considerations of Anders Behring Breivik’s case (the Norwegian drastic radical, who in 2011, became responsible for murdering 76 persons during a shooting rampage, and cited Pamela Geller in his manifesto), the AFDI was labelled as a ‘hate group’ by the UK authorities.
The rational argumentative confrontation of an ‘absolute free speech’ by the NPA’s anthropological analyst from SAARC region, Dr. Bareera N. B. has staunchly deplored, denounced and debunked, the shameful appalling behind the reprehensible defiance by AFDI’s Pamela Geller, that she used to manifest in the name of free speech so far. All of this is nothing but Geller’s cravings and fervidly eager desperateness, that is once again on board to gain ‘cheap publicity’ and attention of those who prefer to fill their heads and hearts with hatred contents.
Dr. Bareera N. B. is a post-doc anthropological researcher and an academic analyst on the subject. She currently serves as the UPC’s chair in SAARC Post-Doc Academia. She is presently engaged in peace-conflict studies, as an external assessor of peace and counter-terrorism studies at National Post-doctoral Association USA.
aIn her conclusive remarks on free-speech dogma, says Dr. B.N.,”….These are the mind-sets, that are planting the seeds of terrorism by committing such acts that are not only disgraceful but essentially of an ‘omni-injuring’ nature in their own right and an ‘omni-inflaming’ potential within!”
Company Name: SAARC Academia’s Anti-Blasphemy Action Commission
Contact Person: Dr. F. M. Bhatti