No Such Thing As Free Speech

I'm beginning to think there is no such thing as "free" speech. Every word we write or utter has a consequence of being censored or punished.  When someone in America makes the statement that they disagree with pundits and movements, they are immediately challenged by a barrage of angry opposition, and, or, boycotted.

Personally, I've done my share of boycotting places and products for the things they sell or the contributions they make to specific causes which oppose my values, or my beliefs. There are many movies and television programs I refuse to watch because of actors who are outspoken against Christianity.  There are many products I refuse to purchase because the companies support organizations which I find totally objectionable.  There are places I do not shop because of corporate statements which support agendas contrary to what I believe are Biblical.  For example, I do not buy Cover Girl products, shop at J C Penney (anymore), or frequent Home Depot. Does it matter to these companies?

Very doubtful.

There are thousands of blogs and websites I will not read or frequent because of their content or the positions held by specific authors.  There are people I won't "friend" on Facebook, and people who want to follow me on Twitter who I would never follow or care to see what they have to say about any issue.  Do they care?

Extremely doubtful.

In America, we are sometimes forced to listen to, or abide by another person's beliefs and opinions, like it or not (e.g. "I Have Two Mommies" and similar books in school libraries).  Children are force-fed sexual information which only parents should be issuing.  A "new" tolerance is rampant across America and we as Christians face a predetermined, yet uneven consequence for our stand against it.  We are, also, sometimes prohibited from offering our opinions and expressing our beliefs.

Recently, Dan Cathy, owner of Chick-fil-A, discovered the persecution one receives when he takes a stand and expresses his belief in traditional marriage.  But what about bloggers who write about these subjects?  Are they to keep their opinions to themselves for fear of some consequence?  Is this why our society has gone as crazy as it has?  because people are afraid to stand up and say what they believe?  Will they get a cross burned on their lawn?  Graffiti painted on their walls?  Have their name taken off one list and placed on another?

For instance, if I should write something here, on my own blog, that some others find objectionable, they may decide to argue their opposition with me.  Unless a person's comment is filled with personal insults, innuendo or objectional words, I post the comment. The same person could actually go back to their own blog and write a counter-point post to speak to mine. Last time I checked, it is still a free country.

However,

if my post which is linked to an aggregator (that provides the reading world with a link back to my site), and the owner of said aggregator decides they do not like what I write for whatever reason (maybe they are tired of seeing my avatar or don't like the titles I write, or the subjects I address), then the aggregator is totally and completely able to cut off my link and stop sending traffic to my site.  I realize this.  Therefore, for the most part, I do not express my complete, unedited, unfiltered, disdain or opposition on some topics and some volatile positions that others hold.  In a sense, I suppose that is cowardly on my part.  I am a victim of my own thinking.

It does amaze me that some people have written ad nauseum about personalities who allegedly lied about themselves and they beat said personalities into a pulp in the streams by professing Christians as a type of admonishment.  Yet, when another person addresses a person's deceit amid the brethren, it becomes a taboo subject.  It is a subject for which a writer is ripped off the streams of similar writers...without even a verbal warning.  Without a how-de-do or a pink slip in the mail.  It is okay for one person to ride the backs of notoriety and make a name for oneself by admonishing the group of which he or she is a part and all the while deceive the world of a personal bias to the subject matter.  Because said person is a member of a club of elite leadership, by birth or by controversial writings, some are given a pass.  Some are afforded an opportunity to explain away deceit and guile as if their behavior is  an exception to the rules.  Yet, let a person address the deceitful behavior with a question and his/her blog is wiped off the face of the earth so none can see what /she has to say on the matter ever again.  The "voice" is arbitrarily silenced.  President Obama tried to do this with Fox News.

It makes me wonder what free speech is all about. It makes me wonder who is allowed to be a critic and who is not.  In Christian circles, it makes me wonder what admonishment, reproof, and exhortation means.  It makes me question the agenda of some within the sphere of influence they wield.  If some can be reproved, and others cannot, it seems to me that none should be reproved at all.  If sin is sin, it is sin.  If that sin affects the course of others, then is it not important that it be exposed and brought into the light?  If not, then there is no measure by which one can cast judgment on another.  NO Measure.  No judge.  All fruit is fruit--premature, blighted, rotted or ripe and ready.  It is all the same.  For no one is righteous.  And everything is permissible. If one sinful behavior is acceptable, then all sinful behavior is acceptable. Everything must be tolerated and condoned and forgiven.  One man can rape another.  Shove it under the rug.  One man can hide his identity.  Shove it under the rug.  One man can speak his mind while another cannot. One man can question another's sin, another can expose sin and it is acceptable.  One man can wield the sword, another cannot.  One man can ban a book, another can plant any book they want.  One man can have a club in a University, another man cannot. One man can speak against God, while another cannot speak for God. One man can challenge another man's words, another cannot.  How do we dare?

I truly believe there are limits to consider when one speaks.  When one writes.  When one addresses others.  As Christians we have a personal responsibility to the body of Christ and the Savior we serve to be as responsible as we can be when we write or speak.  If we challenge others, we need to judge our own motives that fuel our words. The content we produce must be delivered with measured responses.  In the world of blogging, both are very often ignored or suppressed as self-control is lost in a sea of emotion and abandoned etiquette.  This carries its own consequence. Credibility is in the eye of the beholder and perception is the reality by which we each judge a person's words and attitude. Duplicity is evident to some and sadly unrecognized by others.

But speech is never free. It pays its own way into the minds and hearts of others.  And sometimes free speech is costly.  It cost Jesus His life. And it continues to cost others their lives as they profess His name. Just ask "Pastor Youcef Nadakhani, who has spent 1022 days in prison for his faith under the threat of execution.  He is only one of many Christians persecuted in Iran for their faith." (see story here/link).  Is our country headed in the same direction?

I don't know about you, but each time I see a person's words censored, I do wonder how far we will someday go to stop their words.  Or how far someone will go to stop mine.  So...

No, there is no such thing as free speech in some venues, in some countries, in some arenas.  Free speech is an illusion we each think we have until we see we do not have it at all. The only "free" speech is that which Believers have to approach the Throne of Grace.  And even that speech was paid for by our Savior's blood.  Given what He gave, how much do we exercise our freedom in comparison for those who need Him today?  selahV

Comments

[Jeremy Crowder]

How you treat a minority view point says a great deal about a person's values. The Mayor of Chicago said that Chik-Fil-A doesn't represent Chicago's values, the local franchise owner has asked to meet with that mayor. The owner doesn't understand, being innocent of any statement how the restaurant is in violation of Chicago Values. That owner actually works, it turns out, for the City of Chicago and has long called Chicago home.

I find the same crazy thinking on blogs. I'll go on a blog and correct someone about a statement regarding calvinism and I'm labled anti-calvinist. This despite the fact that what I said is obviously and unquestionably true. You are not allowed to post true statements if they don't fit some mold. I visit a blog where the blogger recently posted the true allegations about a paid columnist in both Christian and secular media. This person is taking heat but what they posted was the truth. This is the crazy world we live in you can't state an opinion without everyone barely connected to you being blasted and can't post the truth without being condemned. We live in a world that likes nice pleasant unoffending lies.

[concejal tierra del fuego]

What's up to every one, the contents existing at this web site are truly awesome for people experience, well, keep up the nice work fellows.