If there was still any doubt about our collective lack of freedom, it was dispelled with this week’s unanimous decision of our once esteemed Supreme Court.
Simply stated, we no longer have Freedom of Speech in this Land and indeed, it has been missing in action for some time now.
And surprising, given the recent proliferation of Human Rights Tribunals which have ambitiously pronounced on what we can / cannot say and can / cannot hear.
Freedom of Speech is, as I have mentioned in previous Blogs, the fundamental freedom upon which all are other supposed freedoms rest. Without Freedom of Speech, all other freedoms are mere shells. Can you just imagine Freedom of Religion without Freedom of Speech; ‘practice any religion you wish but just don’t write or say anything about it for fear of offending someone’.
In the case at hand, the SCC determined that one William Whatcott was guilty of hate speech for disparaging gays. As an aside, much of his source material came from the Bible but it could have come from any source, including his own vivid imagination.
Thankfully the vast majority of us do not for one moment share his belief but again that is not the issue. The fact is, he believes it and in other times would have had the right to voice his opinion without censure.
This brings to mind the late British writer Evelyn Beatrice Hall’s proclamation: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”.
We do not need the quasi judicial bodies or even our courts filtering out what we can say or hear.
Another very recent example of what Freedom of Speech is all about is the comment made a day or so ago by Harper’s long time Mentor, Thomas Flanagan. He said that for freedom’s sake, individuals should be able to view child pornography without fear of criminal sanction since it was a ‘victimless crime’. In fairness, he coupled his statement by saying the producers of such filth were clearly breaking the law and were deserving of severe punishment. But that said, it was still a dumb statement for him to make and I believe has caused his career to come to a crashing close.
But that is not to say, Flanagan did not have the right to say what he did. After all, isn’t that what a free and open society is all about?
That is not to say there should be no limits on what a person has to say. For instance, if they incite death or violence against a person or group of persons, clearing that crosses the line. But the exceptions to the absolute right to say what you want should be kept to an absolute minimum. This principle though has been jettisoned at the feet of these self-serving non elected and hence undemocratic courts and boards.
More and more I despair with the speed society seems to be going toward autocracy and do not see any indication that this is likely to change and I feel sorry for the next generations.
As I see it…
‘K.D. Galagher’
