Freedom of expression must be justified
Freedom of expression is under attack. Authoritarian politicians clamp down on opposing parties and muzzle the press. Religious leaders silence dissenting voices. Even in the so-called free world, people, both on the left and the right, are calling for opposing voices to be denied a platform.
This is all a threat to our democratic societies. But the real threat does not come from these forces. It comes from not being able to justify freedom of speech and human rights.
Freedom of expression is linked to human dignity. Why are humans worth more than animals? The philosopher Peter Singer at Princeton University believes that humans just constitute one among numerous other species on earth.
He admits that man is different from animals, but no more different than that killing newborn children is acceptable because they are not aware of their own existence, and especially if they suffer from a serious disability.
In his book Practical Ethics, he says that animals are aware of their own existence. Therefore, the life of a newborn human is less valuable than the life of a pig, a dog or a chimpanzee.
In the Biblical account of creation, man is given value above the animals because man was created by God in His image. This argument underlies fundamental declarations in Western civilization, such as the American Declaration of Independence:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”
The American theologian and human rights lawyer Warwick Montgomery says in the book Human Rights & Human Dignity that " If people’s rights were of their own making, they could as easily unmake them. Since rights come as a divine gift from above, their inalienability is sure.”
Freedom of expression is an essential part of democracy. This form of society has its roots in ancient Greece, but only free men, who had completed their military service, had the right to vote. Between 10 and 20 percent of the population participated in elections.
Christianity came with a revolutionary message: We all have the same value before God. Therefore, the votes count equally, whether the voters are poor or rich members of society.
I am concerned about the many attacks on democracy that we see in the world around us. The authoritarian voices from Russia and China are not new, nor are their arguments, but the digital technology spreading hate and intolerance is new, and it is a threat to democracy.
What is also new is that the threats to democracy now also come from the United States. For me, as a Christian in Norway, it is almost incomprehensible that Donald Trump could, in the worst case, win another presidential term, helped by evangelical Christians in the US. We are right in criticizing them.
Nevertheless, they have the right to vote for their candidate and then live with the consequences of their choice.
Here in Europe, a cancellation culture has dominated the exchange of words in recent years. Voices that go against the prevailing opinion are sought to be silenced and canceled. Diversity means that everyone should think the same, it seems.
In any case, the voices must be silenced if they offend anyone, the demand goes. Especially those who defend classic Christian ethics.
The solution to this problem is not to exclude anyone, not even those who call for censorship, or who criticize religion and Christianity.
The British sociologist Os Guinness argues in his book The Global Public Square for an open public debate where everyone can have a say. In a historical perspective, he compares three public squares: The Sacred Public Square, the Naked Public Square and the Civil Public Square.
He calls the Middle Ages, with a totally dominant church, the Holy Public Square. Democracy and freedom of expression did not thrive here. The opposite of this, which he calls the Naked Public Square, is no better. He mentions the French principle of banning religious expression in public space, (laïcité) as an example of silencing voices and a curtailment of freedom of expression.
Guinness believes that the best is an open-minded society where all voices are heard, and where the best argument wins. He calls this the Civil Public Square. A living democracy means that everyone is heard and that everyone must accept criticism. It must be allowed to point out the connection between religious dogma and violence, deprivation of liberty and discrimination.
One cannot demand that some voices be silenced in an attempt to preserve freedom of expression. It can be difficult to defend freedom of expression when unpleasant and offensive statements are made. At times like these, it is important to be clear about what the rationale is for both freedom of expression and democracy.
