Two years ago I wrote a letter to the Irish Times in response to comments made by Senator Ivana Bacik in her letter to the same newspaper.  In her letter, entitled ‘Creeping Fundamentalism’, Bacik set out what she described as fears of a growing ‘religious fundamentalism’ creeping into Irish Society. 

She based her observations on a Pro-Life rally that had just taken place in Dublin.  She complained that we were in danger of sliding back into the Pro-life era of the 80’s.  As a further example she cited the new Blasphemy Law as a potential tool to stifle freedom of speech. 

In my letter I pointed out her double-standard and told her that she couldn’t have it both ways.  She opposes the Blasphemy Law on the grounds of free speech. If she really is for free speech for everyone, then she must include the Pro-Life movement no matter how unsavoury the views of that movement are to her. 

After all, freedom of speech is not just for those who agree with you.

The ‘freedom of speech’ issue is looming again now that the highly controversial and blasphemous musical ‘Jerry Springer, the Opera’ is due to open in the Grand Canal Theatre in Dublin at the end of this month.  We can expect some protests and calls to boycott the show as clearly this play is offensive to Christians.  

Some will say that if Christians don’t wish to be offended then they shouldn’t go see the show.  There is some merit in that argument but we shouldn’t be too surprised either if there is a certain level of protest outside the theatre during its run here.

We can be certain that many secularist will complain about any protests. They will see them as an attack on the right to freedom of speech.  The irony will be lost to them that so long as it is peaceful, the protesters will just be expressing their views about the blasphemies in the show.

If freedom of speech includes the freedom to make fun of what others hold as sacred, then it should also be about the freedom of others to protest against such mockery. 

If secularists are really and truly for freedom of expression then they should not object any peaceful protests outside the Grand Canal Theatre. 

They should see it as sign of a healthy democracy and recognise that so long as it is done peacefully and responsibly we are all entitled to express our views, whether those views are religious or not.

I wish they could be more honest with themselves, for all their talk of freedom, many secularists don’t really want the religious viewpoint heard,  least of all expressed.  At the same time they want to retain their ‘right’ to offend religious sensibilities whenever they feel like it.