Freedom from Offense is Offensive to Human Rights

In the forum held by the CCP over the controversial artworks of Mideo Cruz the Catholic fundamentalists of the CBCP, via their proxy of Pro-Life Philippines, reiterated their demands that their faith be respected over fundamental human rights. With much bellicose shouting, they essentially demanded that freedom of expression must be squashed so that their delicate feelings about their religion won’t be offended.

Their demand, that their religious sensibilities be not offended by anyone else’ words or actions simply cannot be acquiesced to by any democratic society that values the freedom of expression. Sure, people have a right to take offense  but an expectation that no one can ever say anything which will offend you is unreasonable and has grave consequences for society.

It would mean a society crippled, unable to spread and criticize ideas for fear of offending other people. Without the spread and criticism of ideas, progress would essentially be dead. Society would not be able to move forward scientifically. Society would not be able to move forward ethically. Society would not be able to move forward artistically.

Perhaps one can see the appeal of such a society to religious fundamentalists.

So we stand against people who devalue the freedom of expression, for this freedom of expression gives us the ability to move toward a society that values reason and science. This is why representatives from the Filipino Freethinkers stood up in that forum and spoke out against the loud angry voices of the Catholic fundamentalists.

Interestingly, the Catholics of Pro-Life Philippines seemed to take offense at Red saying CBCP. It’s not a derogatory word folks!

It makes me wonder how all-powerful the fundamentalists really think their God is. I mean, if their God can be offended by a mere artwork, how all powerful can their deity really be?

10 comments

  1. //And why does the supreme omnibenevolent deity ALWAYS needs uneducated vandalizing thugs to destroy all "offending" objects and silence all "offending" speech ?? // Isn't that the point of having sons and daughters? So God can sit back and watch My Little Pony, and have the young 'uns do the smiting for him?

  2. I have to wonder about the rationale for the CBCP using Pro-Life as their mouthpiece in this issue. Why can't they represent themselves and their organizations without having to use their little toy soldiers? What does the scope of Pro-Life have on art issues? Just because condoms and a phallic carving was one display, does that automatically make it fall into the scope of family planning issues?

    Maybe Mideo was right to inculcate these objects into his display, all the Philippine Catholic Church seems to talk about these days is sex-sex-sex… when to do it, when not to, how to do it, with whom, what to use, what not to use… Every time a priest makes it to the news, its either he was involved in a pedophilia case, a sex scandal, or is ranting about sexual issues…. a curious case of art imitating real life… or the other way around.

  3. Indeed : why can allegedly all powerful deity who created the entire universe cannot resolve the problem of a piece of art offending him himself ??
    Lighting strikes, transubstantiation, magical disappearing …etc… all child’s play for an omnipotent deity. So why did the creator and ruler of everything we see need some bearded Mullah’s or evil old men in red women dresses and pointy hats to interpret what might offend the omnipotent creator ??
    And why does the supreme omnibenevolent deity ALWAYS needs uneducated vandalizing thugs to destroy all "offending" objects and silence all "offending" speech ??

    • My two cents:

      I believe this is related to the Padrino system.

      If you’re going to scratch someone’s back, why not scratch the biggest back in the universe, that of the Big Guy in the Sky, Him/Herself? (I also refer to females as guys)

      These guys are attempting to attach themselves to God the same way politicians attach themselves to Manny Pacquiao, in hopes of getting something big on their birthday (or after-life-birthday).

      Honestly, that piece or art (or crap, depending on the person) is literally a speck in God’s big picture.

      My God isn’t so petty to be annoyed by something so small. Personally, I think He/She even likes it, a reminder of the things that make religion ugly.

      Faith is beautiful but religion corrupts it with cruelty, apathy, and injustice, creating a bloody mess on an otherwise pure white canvass.

    • Faith is beautiful but religion corrupts it with cruelty, apathy, and injustice, creating a bloody mess on a pure white canvas.

  4. The law as defined by saint Thomas Aquinas is "an ordinance of reason directed towards the common good and promulgated by the one who has the care of the community". Therefore, if they wish that the freedom of expression be removed so that no one can offend them of their religious feelings then it cannot simply be done for the fact that it it is not reasonable and it will not be for the common good.

    Also, according to Article III, Section 4 of the Philippine 1987 Constitution "No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, expression, or of the press…" Therefore, whatever it is that they want with the freedom of speech and expression cannot be given to them. They cannot enjoy a freedom only for themselves.

    In by some twist of fate that the freedom of expression be abolished, then they too will not be able to express their religious feelings.

    If they insist in abolishing the freedom of expression from the law, perhaps it will be best for them to leave the country, and probably live in the Vatican. There, hopefully, no one will offend them and their faith.

    • While this freedom of expression is a right guaranteed by the constitution, this right is not absolute. As the saying goes, your right ends when my right begins. That is why anybody whose speech or expression is deemed offensive to another can be hailed in court and found guilty.

  5. If Catholicism is really the ‘right’religion and God really was offended by such a piece of art, he would send the artist, defenders, and appreciators of the piece to hell due to the sin of blasphemy.

    Can’t they just let us burn in hell after judgment day rather than giving us hell on earth?

    If they keep doing this, they’ll probably be our welcome party in hell.

    And maybe that is the hell waiting for us, spending eternity with hypocrites and bigots who keep feeding us rules and morals that they only live by when convenient to themselves.

Leave a reply

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here