Violence as proof of pain

Trudeau says “Yes but.”

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau defended free speech on Friday, but added that it was “not without limits” and should not “arbitrarily and needlessly hurt” certain communities.

“We will always defend freedom of expression,” Trudeau said in response to a question about the right to show a caricature of the Prophet Mohammed, as France’s Charlie Hebdo magazine did.

But. But but but but but.

“But freedom of expression is not without limits,” he added. “We owe it to ourselves to act with respect for others and to seek not to arbitrarily or unnecessarily injure those with whom we are sharing a society and a planet.”

And what does “respect for others” mean? Does it require respecting all their beliefs and taboos and dogmas and fantasies? I ask because if it does, we really don’t have free speech at all.

We do not have the right for example to shout fire in a movie theatre crowded with people, there are always limits,” he argued.

Gee, did he think of that all by himself? I’ve never heard it before.

Distancing himself from the position of French President Emmanuel Macron, Trudeau pleaded for a careful use of free speech. “In a pluralist, diverse and respectful society like ours, we owe it to ourselves to be aware of the impact of our words, of our actions on others, particularly these communities and populations who still experience a great deal of discrimination,” he said.

Like girls married off at 12? Like women murdered for talking to a man or not wearing hijab? Like people slaughtered for “apostasy” and “blasphemy”? Or like the people who murder them. You can’t do both, and I’d rather respect the victims.

Glosswitch had a shrewd observation on this.

7 Responses to “Violence as proof of pain”