Thursday, November 22, 2007

Tasleema Nasreen: Freedom of Expression

The muslims demanding revoking of Taslima's Indian Visa are wrong. Taslima Nasreen wrote something in a book. Unless one reads the book one can not feel offended. There is no way a person can be involuntarily made to read a book. Hence those claiming to feel offended by Taslima are troublemakers and a nuisance. The troublemakers should be ruthlessly dealt with.

2 comments:

shadkam said...

First, I respect your views. But following ones are mine and I am as much entitled to them as u r to urs :).
There is an old saying in english, freedom means, one is free to do whatever one wants, but ones freedom ends where another's nose begins.

Luckily in this case, I have another example to give - I whole-heartedly believed that sentiment-hurting paintings by Hussain should have been avoided. Even if we give him the benefit of doubt - that he did it innocently - without realizing that he could hurt feelings - he should have said so and avoided them in future.
Same with Danish cartoonists - I can give them benefit of doubt - may be they did not realize that it would be so hurting - but once they did, they should have refrained.
Same with Tasleema - criticising and defaming are 2 different things. I had read Lajja, and I did not find anything objectionable (well, to me at least). But now whatever she wrote - is in bad taste. And she should have refrained from it. (I don't support the rioting, and they should be, as u said, dealt ruthlessly).

Freedom of expression is a tricky phrase - even if one of the uncles in the family is a moron - one should avoid talking about it - particularly in front of that uncle's wife / son / daughter. As simple as that.

And leave the prophets/religious icons (Mohammad, Jesus, Moses, Rama, Krishna, Budhdha), u being a married person should realize that spouses (whatever they feel about their mother-in-laws notwithstanding) must refrain from voicing it - in order to not to hurt the sentiments of their partner.

That does not mean that zulm should be silently tolerated - be it from mom-in-laws or from religious laws - and at least I do not have a problem with tasleema if she raises issues like treatment of women (which is bad, trust me, in every religion known to mankind :(, unfortunately). Once she starts defaming religious icons - I start having one.

Sambaran said...

M F Hussain has the liberty to paint whatever he wants, provided he exhibits it within closed doors and warns visitors on entrance with statements like "hindu sensibilities might be offended". People can then chose to enter or skip the exhibition. I believe Hussain did not exhibit the painting in open air. Hence, those who vandalize his exhibitions ought to be punished.