The Freedom to Offend

    Back in 1988, a movie called "The Last Temptation of Christ" was released.  The movie, directed by Martin Scorsese, was scandalous and showed Jesus:

  1) Having doubts about his divinity and his purpose
  2) Not dying on the cross or resurrecting from the dead
  3) Having a sexual relationship with Mary Magdalene .

     When the Christian community protested the making of the movie, Hollywood screamed that it was protected by the Freedom of Speech and we obliged.  Though it was a clearly made to take down our faith and mock us:

    No one died.
    No theater was blown up. 
    No one was arrested and thrown into jail.
    No flags were burned.
     
     And yet, when a ridiculous 4th rate movie (you can barely call it a movie) is shown on YouTube saying scandalous things about the "prophet" Mohammad, you see the Islamic world "enraged" and people being killed in the streets.  I personally do not agree with the movie, but I also DO NOT believe Mohammad was a prophet. Instead, to me, he was a very intelligent military leader who saw that people who would not fight to protect a city, would fight to the death to protect a religious temple or holy sight.    As a US citizen I have the RIGHT to say that no matter what others believe and I cannot be held responsible for how any one person of the 6 billion that inhabit this small world reacts to that belief. 

    We as Americans must understand there is a reason why the Freedom of Speech and the Freedom of Religion are put together under the same 1st Amendment and not as separate amendments (1 & 2 or 1a and 1b).  You cannot have one without the other.  You cannot have the freedom to say what you want without also having the freedom to believe what you want.  The two are linked at the hip like a pair of Siamese Twins, never to be split apart no matter how hard they pull away from each other and dislike each other.   The Freedom of Speech is there to protect INFLAMMATORY SPEECH rather than NICE speech.  For there is no need for the 1st Amendment to say things like:

  - The sky is blue
  - I like puppies
  - I like to draw butterflies

No one looks at any of those statements and then says "WOW! We have to stop that!".  For speech that invokes no heated disagreement does not need protection.  Instead speech that DOES need protection is speech that stirs up our emotions and our desire to stifle it or limit it in some way.

Instead the 1st Amendment is there to protect things like:

   - Atheists are evil
   - Christians are hypocrites.
   - Jews are dishonest.
   - Muslims are terrorists

   Do any of those statements offend you?      They should!!! 

While I don't agree with ANY of those statements, if someone does make statements like those above, that is their right as citizens and they should be protected under our 1st Amendment.

   Maybe we should relabel the 1st Amendment as:
         The Freedom to Offend and Be Offended Amendment.