FreThink

Writing to Islam Online, Sadia Ali Aden complains that the freedom of speech is a cover for hate speech directed toward Muslims.

The heartrending reality of bigotry and Islamophobia in today’s American environment is overwhelming.

The Islamophobes use the media as a propaganda tool to poison the minds of the American people under the disguise of “freedom of speech.” This was evident when Mr. Glen Sheller, editor of The Columbus Dispatch newspaper’s editorial page, defended the Dispatch’s distribution of the fear mongering DVD “Obsession,” which was intended to instill fear in the hearts and minds of the unsuspecting American people.

While we should relish and strive to benefit from our freedom of expression without fear or favor, we should also be mindful that the way we use our “freedom of speech” speaks volumes about us.

The gate keepers of public forums should remain neutral moderators and not compromise their ability to objectively protect the principles of this American value. Once reason is overshadowed, and objectivity diluted with hate, positive public discourse becomes more elusive.

There is a fine line between the healthy use of freedom of speech, and employing such “freedom” to advance bigotry and Islamophobia. The Media has become an effective tool for prolonging the psychological terrorization of the American people. American citizens must be vigilant in not allowing hate mongering interest groups, such as the producers of this DVD, to subvert such values as liberty, peace, and justice for all.

I am strongly opposed to newspaper editors, like Mr. Sheller, allowing themselves to be used to advance the agenda of hate mongering Islamophobes. As a mother who must carefully shelter her child from dangers lurking in the dark, I also feel the need to protect our cherished Constitutional principles, and the hard earned image of the better of the “two Americas.”

I fully understand the pain and anxiety caused by these hate mongering, Islamophobic groups who try to cloak their agendas under the umbrella of “freedom of speech”. They are far more detrimental to the health and welfare of America than meets the eye.

The promulgation of hatred and bigotry does not lead to positive public discourse.

In such an atmosphere that fosters so much pain and fear, a more healthy journalism – one that is balanced and fair – must be exerted. I support freedom of speech, but not at the expense of truth and justice!

Truth and justice. Foreign concepts to a discussion of religion. Truth is actually opinion and belief unsubstantiated by any form of evidence, as a proper proof would be. Justice is the new codeword for not allowing criticism and skepticism of anyone’s particular faith.

Islam is perhaps the least tolerant, next to Scientology, of any public challenge to its beliefs. They are seeking to have blasphemy made illegal in international courts. This is nothing less than an attempt to undermine the very essence of free speech. Religious belief must be very fragile if it cannot stand up against skepticism and doubt.

Harold Stone, in his reply to the Columbus Dispatch editorial mentioned by Aden, says exactly what I think when I read comments like Aden’s.

I respond to the Sept. 19 Faith & Values article “Distribution of DVD disturbs many Muslims.” I and everyone with whom I have discussed it applaud The Dispatch and other media outlets for the invaluable public service done by distributing the DVD Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West.

The defensive comments of Asma Mobin-Uddin, president of the Ohio Chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, offer no reasons for viewers to question the film’s validity or grave concerns and fears it generates.

I submit that her “anger and disappointment” at the disparagement of radical Islam are misdirected. As I understood the film, it attacked an estimated 15 percent of Muslims, not all, as Mobin-Uddin stated.

Where is the outrage, shame and guilt that righteous Islamists should espouse toward the abhorrent deeds and preachings of Islamic extremists (whatever their percentage of the faith) who are demanding death for all non-believers and are training a new generation to perpetuate their objectives? Are the other estimated 85 percent of Muslims simply turning a blind eye to the radical movement with hope that it will go away? Or does their seeming acquiescence reflect a degree of unspoken support?

If Mobin-Uddin is aware of falsehoods or misrepresentations presented by Obsession, she is obligated to address them specifically, clearly and objectively, not in an aura of self-indulgence or self-pity. To do otherwise is, I believe, a disservice and self-inflicted humiliation to all Muslims.

If Muslims do not themselves squelch the pervading evil and consuming hatred within the Islamic faith, who then must? And at what cost to civilization?