Free Speech Is Good, Blaming the Victim Is Not

I continue to be dismayed by the attempts of some people to blame the Charlie Hebdo staff for the terrorist attack that killed several members of the staff and a number of other people besides. If you go over to reason.com, you can check out Anthony Fisher’s article highlighting some of these comments. Most of them seem to be along the lines of, “Well, the murders should not have happened, but they wouldn’t have if those awful people at Charlie Hebdo had not been so mean and hateful.” It makes me wonder if these people are really thinking about the things they are saying.

Yes, Free Speech Means Offensive Speech Too

Some people seem to believe that if someone finds the expression of another offensive, that expression should not and cannot be considered free speech. Which is an emotional argument, not a rational one. By which I mean, it is an intellectually shallow, illogical and immature argument. It is an argument that cannot be defended by reason. If you doubt me on this, try to find such an argument that is supported by reason and not by emotional language. I am quite certain you cannot.

Free Speech Is More Important Than the Feelings of Terrorists

If you have not paid attention to the news today, a French satirical magazine, Charlie Hebdo, was attacked by Muslim terrorists and twelve people were killed. The attack was carried out by cowards who could not bear to see Islam’s prophet Mohammed mocked in cartoons published by Charlie Hebdo. Some people have suggested that the staff of Charlie Hebdo should have been less irresponsible. Which makes me angry. So yes, I am going to rant about it.