Silence is silence.
Apr. 7th, 2011 12:29 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
avevale_intelligencerThere is a discussion going on on FB about this article, and the phrase "silence is compliance" has come up in comments more than once.
So I posted this.
"Silence is silence. I refuse to give extremists of any kind control over my life. I will speak when I have something to say that I consider worth saying, and anyone who presumes to guess my opinion based on what I do not say will probably be wrong more often than s/he is right. And as for "the delegitimisation of religion in public opinion," I am completely, utterly and totally opposed to that, and I will say so as often and as lengthily as I please, or not. Freedom of speech includes the freedom not to be forced (or guilted) into speaking.
But then, I'm neither a Christian nor a Muslim nor an atheist nor a pagan, so as far as I know there aren't any extremists of me. Join me in my wishy-washiness."
And, as usual when I say anything that comes within a mile of being definite, I'm now having doubts. Is this a fair position? Should I be obliged to raise a bleat of protest every time some religious or irreligious lunatic does something horrendous, or be automatically enrolled in said lunatic's fan club by default? Am I classed as a terrorist sympathiser because I have never excoriated the Splavonian Anarchist Front for their unconscionable actions in the War Of Throckmorton's Left Leg? Does Emmett Ploob, the Anti-Abortion Avenger of Chunkit, Missouri, sleep more easily at night because he has never faced the righteous wrath of my keyboard?
I don't think so. I don't think what I say, or do not say, has that much effect on the world at large. Were I a bishop, or a Minister of the Crown, or a leading proprietor of a globe-spanning media empire, I probably would feel some responsibility to speak out when ghastliness is perpetrated (more than many of the current lot do, anyway). As it is, I am a semi-private citizen and my words are my own, to give or to withhold as I choose. Aren't they?
So I posted this.
"Silence is silence. I refuse to give extremists of any kind control over my life. I will speak when I have something to say that I consider worth saying, and anyone who presumes to guess my opinion based on what I do not say will probably be wrong more often than s/he is right. And as for "the delegitimisation of religion in public opinion," I am completely, utterly and totally opposed to that, and I will say so as often and as lengthily as I please, or not. Freedom of speech includes the freedom not to be forced (or guilted) into speaking.
But then, I'm neither a Christian nor a Muslim nor an atheist nor a pagan, so as far as I know there aren't any extremists of me. Join me in my wishy-washiness."
And, as usual when I say anything that comes within a mile of being definite, I'm now having doubts. Is this a fair position? Should I be obliged to raise a bleat of protest every time some religious or irreligious lunatic does something horrendous, or be automatically enrolled in said lunatic's fan club by default? Am I classed as a terrorist sympathiser because I have never excoriated the Splavonian Anarchist Front for their unconscionable actions in the War Of Throckmorton's Left Leg? Does Emmett Ploob, the Anti-Abortion Avenger of Chunkit, Missouri, sleep more easily at night because he has never faced the righteous wrath of my keyboard?
I don't think so. I don't think what I say, or do not say, has that much effect on the world at large. Were I a bishop, or a Minister of the Crown, or a leading proprietor of a globe-spanning media empire, I probably would feel some responsibility to speak out when ghastliness is perpetrated (more than many of the current lot do, anyway). As it is, I am a semi-private citizen and my words are my own, to give or to withhold as I choose. Aren't they?