Freedom of Speech and Expression: Its History, Its Value, Its Good Use, and Its Misuse by Richard Sorabji

Freedom of Speech and Expression: Its History, Its Value, Its Good Use, and Its Misuse by Richard Sorabji

Author:Richard Sorabji [Sorabji, Richard]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: philosophy, Political, social, political science, Civil Rights
ISBN: 9780197532157
Google: ZeAeEAAAQBAJ
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Published: 2021-03-31T00:29:19.017552+00:00


2.11. Understanding the Opponent’s Case: St Paul and How to Oppose Blasphemy Charges in One’s Opponent’s Terms

One of Mill’s most important contributions was his conclusion, extrapolated from Cicero, that you do not know your own case until you know your opponent’s. For example, in opposing blasphemy laws, it would be desirable to understand the position of those who bring charges of blasphemy. This can be understood by those who do not themselves believe in the God of the Abrahamic religions. What is needed is not belief, but imaginative understanding. One reason why blasphemy is significant may be that to denigrate or belittle the one on whom your very being and that of the whole universe is believed to depend is incomparably heinous. In fact, one reason why I am very much against anti-blasphemy laws is that, from the point of view of believers, the crime is so heinous as to demand punishment in excess of any that should be entrusted to humans. But if this is what makes blasphemy heinous, it is important to understand, and not to ignore, the reason for its significance in jurisdictions (unlike the UK) where blasphemy law is enforced. Understanding the reason, I suggested earlier, need not in any way put an end to discussion. In fact, the Christian Paul, though understanding the significance of blasphemy, had a canny answer, when he said, ‘It is written: “Vengeance is mine; I will repay,” saith the Lord’ (Romans 12:19). He was here citing the Old Testament (Deuteronomy 32:35), in which the writer presents a jealous and vengeful God, forbidding the worship of false gods: ‘Vengeance is mine, and recompense, for the time when their foot shall slip; for the day of their calamity is at hand, and their doom comes swiftly.’ But Paul is using the quotation for his own very different purpose of saying, ‘avenge not yourselves’. His use of the quotation provides a reply that could be understood by anyone calling for human vengeance for blasphemy. Thereby he met the requirement extrapolated from Cicero by Mill, that in order to know your own case, you must know your opponent’s opposite case. Paul shows that refraining from abusive vengeance does not stop one producing a non-abusive argument that the other side can appreciate. The case against human vengeance need not depend on sharing belief in a vengeful God. It can be taken instead as putting to believers the question, ‘Who are we to assess the right response to such a thing? Are we not usurping God’s role?’ This recognition of the opposing opinion could open ears.

An alternative approach that has, incorrectly I think, been ascribed to Robert Post, could not succeed. By this approach, a rationale for blasphemy law that no thinking believer would accept has been imputed to them, in the claim that ‘The original idea of blasphemy law was to protect God, or at least the respect due to God’. The first of these attributions is then easily ridiculed: an almighty God needs no protection from humans.



Download



Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.