Alma 23

(April 4, 2014)
In the law, there is a presumption that the solution to bad speech is more speech (not so much the suppression of bad speech).  That is not an absolute rule (there are exceptions, and good ones) but one defining trait of untruth is that it cannot abide truth being spoken.  Truth may, from time to time, have reasons to suppress untruth.  But truth will also allow untruth because it is in the contrast when it become apparent which is which.  But untruth must stifle and suppress truth.

We see that currently in the attempts by some to suppress the rights of people to speak on certain moral or political issues.  If you are against gay marriage, there is a concerted attempt to drive you out of the public square.  If you do not believe in anthropogenic global warming, you are likened to a Holocaust denier.  In both cases, the “debate is closed.”  But why is the debate closed?  It seems that the debate is closed because continued debate would show the dishonesty and error – and that cannot be allowed.

It is fine and good to say that on the areas where we are being suppressed, but we need to remember that when discussing issues for which we are temporarily ascendant.  We of all people should not fear speech – because the truth is always the solution to error.