Free speech must always
be used responsibly

Speaking of Religion
The Rev. Dr. Tim Griffin

"You have heard it said to those of ancient times, ‘You shall not murder,’ and ‘whoever murders shall be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that if you are angry with a brother or sister, you will be liable to judgment; and if you insult a brother or sister, you will be liable to the council; and if you say ‘You fool,’ you will be liable to the hell of fire." (Matthew 5:21-2).

Many of us grew up hearing from our parents that "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never harm me." The passage from Matthew cited above shows that Jesus thought otherwise — and so do all other religious traditions that I am aware of. All religious traditions contain instructions about the use of language, and all are clear that both speaker and hearer are harmed by negative speech.
For the past few weeks, the issue of speech has been a hot topic. The issue has erupted as a consequence of a remark made by Don Imus about the players on the Rutgers University women’s basketball team. Last week, Imus was fired by both MSNBC and CBS for these remarks. The remark in question was, without a doubt, both misogynist and racist, and Imus apologized for it. And yet many have urged that he is being unfairly singled out. I am not convinced by these arguments.
Whenever speech becomes an issue, one is likely to hear the distinction between speech and action being drawn. The present case is no exception. I heard a media pundit — of all people — who regularly appeared on the Imus program making this very point in arguing that Imus was being unfairly treated.
"These were only words and should not be allowed to overshadow all of the good things he has done," said the pundit.
This argument is flawed because the implication is that unlike actions, speech has no consequences — or at least not serious consequences. But that is not true.
As our religious traditions tell us, words and speech are quite important. And they are particularly important when they are used by someone who has as much media attention and influence as Imus has. In fact, that is what Imus does for a living — he speaks. And his speech is influential.
It is striking how many people who make the above argument go on to talk of the importance of free speech. However, we should note that free speech is not important because it is innocuous.
On the contrary, freedom of speech is important because speech is so powerful and influential. The free exchange of ideas and information is vitally important for a democratic government because it ensures that the populace can make informed decisions about policies and political officeholders. So, in contrast to those who say speech is less important than acts, we should note that that is absolutely not the position of our Constitution.
So yes, free speech is important. But does freedom of speech mean that all speech must be protected?
Far from it. It is a sad state of affairs if we feel that our speech is free because we can spew racist epithets or other forms of hatred towards others. We need to have a free flow of ideas and information, but we do not need to protect racist, misogynist and inflammatory speech.
Such speech does not further the dialogue of a democratic nation. Instead it serves to silence dialogue by refusing to value ideas for their merit.
That is, racist, misogynist and other forms of hate speech say, in effect, that there is a segment of the population whose ideas are not important because of the characteristics of race, gender and so on. It says, in effect, that the dialogue is closed to these groups because of characteristics irrelevant to the quality and character of the ideas and information expressed by their speech.
So I do not believe that Imus was treated unfairly. Speech does have consequences, and as Jesus knew, hate speech harms all of us. I hope that the present debate may make us more aware of this point. ••
Father Tim Griffin is priest-in-charge at the St. Luke’s Episcopal Church, at 1946 Welsh Road in Bustleton.