We’ve been hearing a lot about “hate speech” in recent days. The United Nations defines hate speech “any kind of communication in
speech, writing or behavior that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language
with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are,
in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour,
descent, gender or other identity factor.” * They go on to say
that unfortunately there is no internationally accepted definition of “hate
speech”.
We
do hear a lot of arguments pejoratively using words that fit the UN definition.
We also hear discussions about controversial issues, many disagreeing with one
stance or another on said issue, that are in no way pejorative, merely
argumentative. For example, saying someone doesn’t support Israel is not “hate
speech”. It’s simply a statement of a person’s opinion. On the other hand,
saying one wished all people of one group exterminated, that certainly fits the
definition. But many would label the former as being equally hateful as the
latter.
I don’t believe disagreeing with someone verbally equals
hate speech. Jesus disagreed with the Pharisees all the time, but I’m pretty
sure he wasn’t hating them as he spoke. In fact, the Bible speaks of his grief
over their obstinate ways. He was, however, calling them on their behavior.
Name calling is another area sometimes labeled hate speech.
We’ve heard labels like “fascist”, “bigot”, even “idiot” placed on people by
those who disagree with them. Some labels are indeed harsher than others, some
are certainly pejorative and hateful, but do they all indicate hatred of the
person being labeled or dislike of what they stand for or have themselves said?
It’s often difficult to tell what’s being attacked, an idea or a person or
both. Jesus referred to the Pharisees as
hypocrites and white washed tombs, but again, were those labels hatred? I
believe Jesus was just naming what He saw before Him.
I think most times when harsh words are spoken, it isn’t in
hate but in frustration, anger, disgust at what the speaker is seeing or
hearing. In which case, most of those words are aimed at ideas. Sometimes the
name calling goes at a person rather than an idea or behavior. There is a
difference between saying something is a “stupid idea” and the person saying it
is “stupid”. But either way, is that
“hate speech”?
Jesus did not like the behavior of the Pharisees, especially
their religious pride believing themselves to be above everyone else. Their
behavior drove people from God. Their behavior hurt other people. That isn’t
the same as hating the individuals. Jesus spent a lot of time trying to get the
Pharisees to see that their behavior and beliefs were keeping them from truly
seeing God standing right in front of them .
He wasn’t trying to “erase” the Pharisees.
Particularly in the Christian community, people have been
turned from Christ because of Christian opinions of who they are. Many people
find it hard to be welcomed or feel welcome in many Christian churches. They would only be
welcome if, in the minds of the church members, they got their head’s straight
and stopped trying to be something other than how God created them. The sad
thing is, we are all something other than how God created us. We are all
sinners. And Jesus welcomed everyone, and only called out the religious leaders
of His day who were barring people from coming to God. I think today Jesus
would have some harsh words about the Christian community and their actions particularly towards the LGBTQ community. Their
treatment of that community has kept many of those people from meeting Christ.
When someone expresses their opinion about something, and
you disagree with it, is that “hate” speech? Can we label everything we
disagree with as hate speech? What happened to being able to express our
opinions and agree to disagree? What happened to that freedom of expression we
have come to depend upon in our country?
Years ago a psychiatrist friend of mine responded to my
comment that another person made me angry. My friend said, “he didn’t make you
angry, you chose to be angry because of what he said.” Well, at the time, that made me angry. I didn’t want to hear the reason for my anger
being put back on me. But when I calmed down I had to admit, I had chosen to
react to what was said with anger. And my reaction was to what had been
said/done, not as much to the person who
said it. They were expressing their
opinion. I disagreed with it. I didn’t like where their opinion would lead. But
my anger, well, that was indeed my choice.
I’m sure I’ve mentioned this before. When we get defensive
it usually means we are not on as steady of ground as we’d like to think. If I
am arguing for something I believe in, and the person with whom I am arguing
gets in some pretty good points about the other side, how do I respond? If I accept their opinion, realizing that is
what it is, an opinion, I can still keep my opinion and agree to disagree. But
if I get anxious or angry – defensive- it probably means I am not as confident
in my belief as I thought I was. It means the other person got in some good
points that make my opinion a bit weaker, and that I have no answer to.
Let’s say I’m talking with someone who feels Transgender is
a choice, and I believe it usually has more to do with the person actually
feeling born in the wrong body, both of us will probably try to convince the
other of our belief. If I truly believe choice has very little to do with this
issue, then I have no reason to get angry, or treat like an idiot the person
with whom I disagree. His beliefs won’t change mine. And if I am ever going to
make a difference in their belief, it certainly won’t come with me getting
angry or calling them some name. But, if I suddenly get angry and defensive, I
am very apt to say something I won’t be able to get back, and will lose all
possibility of their hearing what I was actually trying to say.
It makes me wonder when we hear of people losing their jobs
for disagreeing with people in power; in those cases who is defensive and
why? Why is it any skin off their nose
if someone disagrees with them? If they believe they are in the right, then who
cares what anyone else thinks? We can’t
expect everyone to agree with us or even like us. Can’t we give people the
space to disagree with us? Certainly all the name calling is quite childish and
very hurtful (words like stupid, idiot, fascist, bigot) but even that, let the
name caller look like the child without responding back in kind. Words do hurt,
and we should measure how we use them, but unless the words are actually
calling for violence or are pejorative and discriminatory (e,g,, racist and bigoted), are they
really “hate” speech? And do we really
need to erase and cancel everyone who speaks out against us? If I truly believe what I profess, what does it matter?
Allowing others to disagree with us shows a lot of emotional intelligence. How can we stop viewing every disagreement as war? The world would be a lot less interesting if we were all the same. And even when we feel we are in the right, it should never come at the cost of our respecting the other person's right to disagree. Putting the label "hate speech" on everything we disagree with, or canceling everyone who doesn't stand with us won't solve anything. Only by accepting every person as valid, with a right to their own beliefs and opinions will we begin to find our way back to one another.
*https://www.un.org/en/hate-speech/understanding-hate-speech
No comments:
Post a Comment