Tolerate everything but the intolerable…

A month after the attack against satirical newspaper “Charlie Hebdo” in Paris, our thought system is still experiencing turmoil. Some are even now wondering if tolerance does not end when intolerance starts. And by the way, when does blasphemy begin and when does tolerance come to an end? The idea that a certain form of censorship might be necessary in order not to offend the susceptibilities, is gradually making its way. Let’s put it this way. Tackling this possibility is like compelling a bird to stop its flight over borders.
Can we tolerate everything, putting aside all that is intolerable?
If freedom of expression has to be kept on leash when it comes to religion, why not strap down more freedoms? Freedom of expression might be tricky and therefore restrained in thorny subjects as politics (after all, the authorities must be respected), marketing (many jobs are covoltaire-quotes-sayings-wisdom-deep-men-freedomncerned and economic growth is involved), etc. There are many sensitive topics prone to offending different people. So if religion is sacred to some, freedom of expression is sacred to others.
However if my freedom can not tolerate limitations, it can quickly become invasive and ironically restrict that of others. As common sense goes, your freedom ends where my nose begins. Should we then avoid laughing or even hinting at religion, just because we may be infringing on the freedom of our neighbor? Is faith rooted in the individual, to such an extent that we can not talk about it without wounding man?
Since the mists of time, spirituality has been linked to humanity. The monolithic thinking from ancient times has gradually given way to a proliferation of ideologies. Today, man has forged his own personal religion. Or not. Religion has become the mirror of society: individual, chosen, adapted, mixed. But for some, spirituality is anchored to their identity. Without values and benchmarks, some are clinging to spirituality as to a life buoy. Meanwhile, sharks are prowling
Removing “spiritual” from spirituality (or removing “religious” from religion), is barking up at the wrong tree. Believing that one speaks on behalf of God and holds the truth, is not freedom of expression. It’s obscurantism. Hatred is not a form of expression. It is a form of extinction. If freedom of expression is endangered, man is the only species in the world to saw off the branch on which he is sitting. And speaking of nature… Recent US researches have proven that nature, art and spirituality are natural anti-inflammatory remedies. Now isn’t this foolish to cut off that branch

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s